It's been a while since Rand Paul has raised my ire, however, the man doesn't disappoint for long. Likely Presidential candidate and "when it suits him" libertarian Rand Paul issued an opinion column via Breitbart.com a couple days ago, expressing his outrage that the 2015 spending bill would curtail the purchase of Tomahawk missiles, of which we have a boatload already.

I believe in a strong national defense. I believe in Ronald Reagan’s policy of "Peace through Strength." I believe there are many ways to achieve savings in all aspects of our budget, including the Pentagon. But for America to remain strong and at peace, we must cut smartly and from the right places.In the current budget, the Obama Administration called for the elimination of the Tomahawk missile. This missile protects our troops and allows us to avoid much direct person-to-person combat. Our navy has depended heavily on them.

Yes, our nation has depended heavily on the Tomahawk during all of our unconstitutional, immoral wars of aggression (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.), utilizing them to chase specters abroad while costing thousands of American lives and trillions of dollars.

Obama’s fiscal year budget for 2015 would make significant cuts to the Tomahawk program and would eliminate it completely by 2016. There are reportedly no plans to replace it with another comparable weapon, or any weapon, for that matter.

Rand is completely incorrect here. The military industrial complex is big-business and there are always new prototypes of weaponry being developed, many times with the assistance of government dollars in a fantastic example of crony capitalism. There is already a competition in place to select a new next-gen standard US missile for 2017, meaning that the US is selecting to cut costs in an intelligent manner by abandoning purchase of Tomahawk missiles. Hard stats on the US stockpile of missiles is hard to come by, but the Navy has thousands of them waiting to be used and over 3000 new missiles were delivered last year.To put it in context; if you own thousands of serviceable but unused Macbooks, and a new Macbook is coming out in three years time, would you continue to hoard soon-to-be obsolete computers? Of course you wouldn't. Only an insane person would do that...or someone with something to gain.Rand is throwing his hat into the ring with the Military Industrial Complex, which will in turn support him with big campaign dollars in 2016. He's already gotten into bed with the Neocons, and this is the next logical step in his pursuit of the White House. Rand is also practicing crony capitalism, as Kentucky is one of the states that happens to host a large Raytheon facility, which does in fact employ and work in the manufacture of missiles.Towards the end of his letter, Rand tosses a few crumbs to the libertarians in the audience.

I’ve also sponsored an Audit the Pentagon bill. Not just to cut needless spending, but because dollars allocated for defense purposes should actually be used to defend our country.We can have a better military and a better defense, including all the weaponry our armed forces need, if we learn how to cut waste, fraud, and abuse, and end our nation building overseas.Our priority should be defending our country, not policing others.

Yes, completely correct, Rand! However, should the U.S. actually embody that policy, it still wouldn't need to buy any more Tomahawk missiles. If the U.S. wasn't already throwing its weight around the world, empire building and getting involved in foreign wars and the internal politics of other nations, it wouldn't need to use any of the thousands of missiles we already have. Also, Rand contradicts his own earlier statements, where he actually advocated that the US throw its military might around more. From an earlier article of mine:

Peace through strength. It’s a philosophy that guided the United States to victory in the Cold War and a policy that protected us from the calamity of nuclear war. But in the heated debate over Syria, our commitment to this approach has wavered — and it’s time we reasserted its prominence.Some say that America’s credibility was threatened when President Barack Obama drew a red line on the use of chemical weapons and then allowed the Syrians to cross it without repercussions. We couldn’t disagree more — that would be a profound misreading of Obama’s response to the Syrian civil war. Our nation’s democratic principles give priority to the voice of individual liberties and freedoms. We will defend them with all of our nation’s might. We will not allow any nation or group to terrorize the free world — now or ever.

Did you see that? Yes, that’s Rand Paul giving his assent and kind recommendation that the US continue to enhance its role as the “World’s Police,” or as the US Navy puts it “A Global Force For Good.”The U.S. will stick its nose in if anyone’s democratic principles, or liberties are threatened (all the while eroding them at home), even if they are across the world from us. You have to be a terror to the free world. And we all know the US definition of terror is exceptionally broad.And now back to today's piece by Rand...

America should be a country that is always reluctant to go to war and that only goes to war constitutionally through a declaration by Congress. But if the time comes when our security or interests are threatened, the United States must always be ready to fight and win, decisively and quickly.

Again, Rand is right here, but betrays himself as a hypocrite, as he has stated quite loudly whilst cuddling up to Mitch McConnell and the Neocons that "any attack on Israel will be treated as an attack on the United States." So should Israel be attacked, off we go! No declaration, just an immediate response.Rand has made his bed with the Military Industrial Complex. He has delved deep into the comforting crush of crony capitalism. He still remains the best of the worst when it comes to politicians, but he continues to erode his own platform when it comes to liberty, and erode my opinion of him.Check out our editor-in-chief Marc Clair's interview with Ron Paul Institute's Daniel McAdams on U.S. foreign policy:And his interview with Hunter Lewis on crony capitalism.Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!