Follow us on social

google cta
Screen-shot-2021-08-18-at-6.39.55-am

They were right: Marginalized antiwar lawmakers now get due

These members bucked their parties and risked alienation (and primaries), but stood their ground on the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

This week “Ron Paul was right” trended on social media as video compilations of the former Republican congressman’s speeches were shared showing that he had been one of the few in Washington to predict how terribly U.S. intervention in Afghanistan would end.

Paul gained a sizable following during his two Republican presidential primary campaigns a decade ago, receiving one million votes in 2008 and doubling that number with two million in 2012. While the libertarian icon’s antiwar stance was always central to his messaging, that view marginalized him for most of his time in the GOP and particularly during the Bush-Cheney era when Republican identity was almost exclusively tied to war and unquestioning support of it.

Yet today, Paul looks prescient. So do a small handful of antiwar voices in both parties who were also generally kept at arm’s length by their parties for opposing the Washington foreign policy consensus.

Ron Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul, is arguably the most high profile and mainstream antiwar voice in American politics today on the Right (disclosure: I am currently employed by Sen. Paul’s campaign on a part time basis), but before he was elected the GOP establishment went out of its way to stop him. Paul’s Kentucky Republican primary opponent Trey Grayson received major endorsements from Senator Mitch McConnell, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Vice President Dick Cheney. When Paul beat the odds and won, neoconservative David Frum lamented, “How is it that the GOP has lost its antibodies against a candidate like Rand Paul?”

Frequent Ron Paul ally, the late former Republican Congressman Walter Jones became a fierce critic of the Iraq War and Bush administration, even saying in 2013 that Dick Cheney would “rot in hell” for his foreign policy. Neoconservative forces within the GOP would pour money into primary challengers to take out Jones every cycle and a few came close. A former Iraq War supporter, Jones saw the toll the war was taking on his North Carolina military community and told reporters that he sought forgiveness for sending sons and daughters into an unjust war. At one point he was in line to take a seat on the Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness in 2007 and was denied that move. Roll Call reported that former Rep. Duncan L. Hunter told the North Carolina congressman “he couldn’t put him in that position because he knew Jones would vote with the Democrats to get out of Iraq.”

“I said, ‘Duncan, you’re exactly right; I will,” Jones recounted. “So that pretty much told me that by doing what you think is right, no matter what the issue might be, there’s a price to pay.”

There was a price to pay for antiwar Democrats as well.

Democratic Rep. Barbara Lee was the only member of Congress to vote against U.S. intervention in Afghanistan in 2001 and was called a “traitor” and worse by everyone, including members of her own party. She was physically threatened and harassed non-stop.

This week, Lee has been celebrated as the one congressperson who was right about how an American war in Afghanistan might turn out. Lee said on MSNBC Sunday that the Taliban immediately gaining power after U.S. withdrawal proves “that there is no military solution, unfortunately, in Afghanistan." She added, “We’ve been there 20 years; we’ve spent over a trillion dollars and we’ve trained over 300,000 of the Afghan forces.”

Similar to Ron Paul in the GOP, Sen. Bernie Sanders became a populist antiwar voice in the Democratic presidential primaries in 2016 and 2020, particularly in his sparring with fellow candidate and military hawk, Hillary Clinton, in 2016. As Sanders popularity continued to rise, Team Clinton helped tip the primary scales against the Vermont senator, as claimed by former Democratic National Committee head Donna Brazile in 2017. As his popularity grew, Ron Paul had a similar scam pulled on his campaign by the Republican establishment in 2012.

Antiwar political leaders across the ideological spectrum will likely always face daunting challenges no matter how many times the pro-war establishments in both parties are discredited.

The utter chaos and heartbreak that continues to unfold in Afghanistan could become the first test to see how much power and influence the forever war old guard has. 

Or, as we have seen more often, it could not. Even America’s grand mistake in Afghanistan likely won’t convince those who knew they were right.


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

Rep. Ron Paul (R), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I), Rep. Barbara Lee (D). (all photos taken by Gage Skidmore/Flickr)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
USS Defiant trump class
Top photo credit: Design image of future USS Defiant (Naval Sea Systems Command/US military)

Trump's big, bad battleship will fail

Military Industrial Complex

President Trump announced on December 22 that the Navy would build a new Trump-class of “battleships.” The new ships will dwarf existing surface combatant ships. The first of these planned ships, the expected USS Defiant, would be more than three times the size of an existing Arleigh Burke-class destroyer.

Predictably, a major selling point for the new ships is that they will be packed full of all the latest technology. These massive new battleships will be armed with the most sophisticated guns and missiles, to include hypersonics and eventually nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. The ships will also be festooned with lasers and will incorporate the latest AI technology.

keep readingShow less
Does Israel really still need a 'qualitative military edge' ?
An Israeli Air Force F-35I Lightning II “Adir” approaches a U.S. Air Force 908th Expeditionary Refueling Squadron KC-10 Extender to refuel during “Enduring Lightning II” exercise over southern Israel Aug. 2, 2020. While forging a resolute partnership, the allies train to maintain a ready posture to deter against regional aggressors. (U.S. Air Force photo by Master Sgt. Patrick OReilly)

Does Israel really still need a 'qualitative military edge' ?

Middle East

On November 17, 2025, President Donald Trump announced that he would approve the sale to Saudi Arabia of the most advanced US manned strike fighter aircraft, the F-35. The news came one day before the visit to the White House of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has sought to purchase 48 such aircraft in a multibillion-dollar deal that has the potential to shift the military status quo in the Middle East. Currently, Israel is the only other state in the region to possess the F-35.

During the White House meeting, Trump suggested that Saudi Arabia’s F-35s should be equipped with the same technology as those procured by Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly sought assurances from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who sought to walk back Trump’s comment and reiterated a “commitment that the United States will continue to preserve Israel’s qualitative military edge in everything related to supplying weapons and military systems to countries in the Middle East.”

keep readingShow less
Think a $35B gas deal will thaw Egypt toward Israel? Not so fast.
Top image credit: Miss.Cabul via shutterstock.com

Think a $35B gas deal will thaw Egypt toward Israel? Not so fast.

Middle East

The Trump administration’s hopes of convening a summit between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi either in Cairo or Washington as early as the end of this month or early next are unlikely to materialize.

The centerpiece of the proposed summit is the lucrative expansion of natural gas exports worth an estimated $35 billion. This mega-deal will pump an additional 4 billion cubic meters annually into Egypt through 2040.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.