Rand Paul said that the U. S. invasion of Iraq made ISIS possible. He criticizes Democrats and Republicans who supported the invasion. The first sentence about the invasion and ISIS is so obviously true that the hawks in the second sentence have no good response. What was one response? Bobby Jindal, governor of Louisiana, said that Rand Paul is not fit to be commander-in-chief. I guess telling the truth has become a disqualification for high office.
Rand Paul’s foreign policy is based on the principle of live and let live. On that principle, the U. S. would not have invaded Iraq. What-if history is a useful form of thought experiment, but it is only useful if you recognize its limits. We cannot tell what would have happened in the Middle East if we had not invaded Iraq. History is uncertain, especially in that region.
We can, however, tell what would not have happened. We would not have a war that looks like the one we have now. The line from the U. S. invasion in 2003 to the war we have now is not a straight line, but a connecting thread exists. If we had let Saddam Hussein live, if we had not thrown our armed forces into the country, Iraq would have had a different future.
Why do the people who led us into this war not want to admit that is the case? No one likes to admit serious mistakes, especially mistakes that cause incalculable misery. The leaders who started this war are responsible for serious incompetence. Of course they do not want to admit that. When a politician comes along who frankly and publicly points out the consequences of their malfeasance, those leaders will not respond in a friendly way. They will defend themselves, even if the truth about what they did is plain to everyone.