Veteran SEAL sniper Chris Kyle was murdered by a troubled veteran in Texas. So many aspects make this a sad story. That Kyle survived tours of combat only to be killed at home. The loss of a devoted family man and father and husband. The demons that surrounded his killer and led him to this insane action. The fact that Kyle was trying to help the shooter through camraderie and some time at the gun range to deal with his demons.
Now lots of people have come to have various views on Iraq. I came to realize it was a mistake, particularly insofar as we didn’t leave nearly immediately after capturing Saddam Hussein. Others thought it not only a mistake but also unjust, though I found this argument a little over-stated. The pre-war Iraq regime always had the air of an “outlaw nation.” Whether a bad idea or not, our men fought on the whole very honorably in Iraq and today in Afghanistan. And our enemies, on the whole, were and remain fanatical, nasty, terroristically-inclined Islamic nut jobs that deserve little sympathy. In other words, the war was a mistake, but not because it was particularly immoral for our men to be killing those whom they killed, but because it did little to advance our national security. Yes, there were many mistakes, tragedies, and cruelties that always surround war. I have been criticized for pointing out some of these cruelties undertaken by those who dishonor the uniform when they occurred. We need not have a childish and completely romantic view of things. But natural affection and sympathy and honor for our fighting men is a natural sentiment. The War in Iraq was undeniably a time of sacrifice, courage, and technical prowess by our men, as exemplified by Chris Kyle.
Only a small minded man like Ron Paul, then, would so habitually and unthinkingly insult Kyle and his memory after his murder. Paul said on his Twitter feed that “Chris Kyle’s death seems to confirm that ‘he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.’ Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn’t make sense.” The last part makes some sense as a matter of prudence, but this was an exceptional situation with an exceptionally troubled young man. Clearly, based on Kyle’s practice, lots of veterans find time among fellow veterans and the familiar feel of firearms to help them regain a sense of power and control over their lives. More important, this nasty comment is typical of Ron Paul who, though he has some good ideas, never seems to be able to help himself from venturing into kooky and nasty territory. Paul’s instincts are unnatural and unpatriotic. He is perhaps the worst standard bearer for a paleconservative outlook in national life.
Subscribe To This Feed
“He is perhaps the worst standard bearer for a paleconservative outlook in national life.”
Absolutely correct. Even if he actually thought that about Kyle, the decent thing to have done was to have kept his damned mouth shut. Ron Paul is like your senile old uncle, blurting out stuff that everyone wishes he would just shut up about. Besides, even if Paul didn’t approve of the war, I have heard of no evidence that Kyle was anything but an honerable soldier, and he should be treated as such. Hell, my Dad didn’t say stuff like that about the guys in the Afrika Corps in WWII, and they were trying to kill him.
What a buffoon. Anyone who wonders why Paleos don’t get much traction among the general public need look no further.
Ron Paul is getting scoured over this, as well he should. He’s personally destroyed whatever sympathy and credibility he and his supporters had.
That said, I do think the idea of bringing someone who had recently returned from battle and suffering from what today is referred to as PTSD (the syndrome has been documented for a long time, though by other names) going to a firing range WAS a monumentally foolish attempt at ‘therapy’.
Those suffering from the aftereffects of being in a combat situation being exposed to nearby and nearly constant gunfire is akin to trying to put out a fire by pouring gasoline on it.
I agree, if Paul had simply said “Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn’t make sense” no one would have thought much about it. It was the implication (intended or not) that Kyle’s death was somehow poetic justice that infuriated people, as it should have.
bit of an aside, but i appreciate Rand Paul’s recent attempt to try and thread the needle between neoconservatism and anti-interventionism. i think that’s a healthy debate to have. personally i am more concerned about the prospect of Iran getting nukes than most paleos (particularly “The American Conservative” magazine) seem to be, but whatever happens i think most across the ideological spectrum would agree that another extended occupation of a Middle Eastern country is not a good idea.
i was disappointed that he seems to believe the “U.S. funded bin Laden” myth though, which is popular on the left. with all their reputation for “nuance” (except when it makes America look bad i guess) you’d think they’d know that the mujahideen coalition, bin Laden/the Afghan Arabs, and the Taliban were not one and the same. i realize Paul’s trying to support his blowback theory with this, which i think has merit in certain instances, but if anything the main issue was that the U.S. didn’t care enough about what happened with the post-Soviet government that the Taliban overthrew.
Agreed on both of your last points. Iran probably shouldn’t have nukes, but that doesn’t mean we have to give their kids schoolbooks in an extended occupation. And even if we “funded ‘Bin Laden’” so what? We funded Stalin when Hitler and Tojo were trying to destroy us. Sometimes what makes sense Tuesday is worth it, even if you have new (and truthfully much lower stakes) problems to deal with on Friday. That’s life. Things change. Plus, we’d not have had a 9/11 if we simply shut the front door on the various hostile Third Worlders whom we are constantly letting in. And there are many reasons to stop that besides crime and terrorism, though it makes sense on those grounds alone.
I would still take Ron Paul over George W. Bush, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and a host of others, who have actually implemented policies and are continuing to implement policies that are destroying my nation. Paul is admittedly not a good speaker and is rather tone deaf when it comes his sense of propriety.
So now Paul and other paleos are untouchables because of some stupid comments. What do the ruling elites of this nation have to do to get the same treatment? How many amnesties, free trade agreements, unnecessary wars, third worlders, etc., do they get to dump on us before they are held in the same contempt that people apparently hold Paul and other paleos?
economically Paul would be awful (that’s assuming we operated under a Ron Paul dictatorship — in reality both parties would block his policies, both because of his anti-Fed mania and his “cut tons now and act like it’ll have no effect” approach)
on immigration, didn’t he flip toward the open borders side last go around?
Bush has been pretty endlessly critiqued, even to a certain extent by the people who were almost always defending him in his first six years (though they haven’t all drawn the right lessons.) turning it around on “ruling elites” and acting like Paul gets a pass based on their flaws is silly when people object not just to a handful of dumb comments (that aren’t gaffes, they accurately represent his worldview) but to his overall ideology, which may occasionally have a point against mainstream conservatism but otherwise is worthless.
on immigration, didn’t he flip toward the open borders side last go around?
Paul is not bad on immigration. He will not build a border fence, but he won’t give government services to illegals which is one of the main drivers that lure them here, and keep them from self deporting.
Bush has been pretty endlessly critiqued, even to a certain extent by the people who were almost always defending him in his first six years (though they haven’t all drawn the right lessons.)
I haven’t seen that. The slogan many conservatives use is “Miss me yet” when referring to Bush, as if Obama is is worse than W. I hear this on radio shows and see it on mainstream conservative sites.
turning it around on “ruling elites” and acting like Paul gets a pass based on their flaws is silly when people object not just to a handful of dumb comments (that aren’t gaffes, they accurately represent his worldview) but to his overall ideology, which may occasionally have a point against mainstream conservatism but otherwise is worthless.
I don’t expect Paul to get a pass. Hold his fee to the fire. But I find it odd that the same is not done to those who have actually implemented the policies that have done real damage. If others were held to the same standard, McCain would never have been the GOP standard bearer in 2008. The guy was involved in the S&L crisis, has no problem with demographically transforming the United States into a third world nation, and has never seen a war he doesn’t want us to fight. Yet, he is a well respected member of the establishment.
I’d take Paul over McCain any day of the week.
And BTW, Paul is not my top political figure. I responded on this post because paleos where lumped in with Paul. The guy I wanted for President was Patrick Buchanan.
economically Paul would be awful (that’s assuming we operated under a Ron Paul dictatorship — in reality both parties would block his policies, both because of his anti-Fed mania and his “cut tons now and act like it’ll have no effect” approach)
It’s funny that people say this. After all, the current economic policies we have followed have not exactly been good. We have massive budget deficits, the huge national debt, speculative credit bubbles and massive trade imbalances that were all crafted by the guys who are supposedly sane. We gave no down payment loans to strawberry pickers and manipulated interest rates where the savers of this world are getting robbed. We’ve meddled in the education and medical markets driving the costs of both through the roof.
Honestly, I don’t believe Paul’s policies would be that bad. Except for certain parasitic sectors, I think most Americans would have been better off under his policies. And I can’t imagine them being worse than what we have now.