It's been more than 30 years since the collapsed, but does not seem to have time to think about how independent nations are, or how hard they fought to build that sovereignty. Which, however, is kind of how he perceives the world around him, too (much of which he believes is Russia's for the taking).
On Tuesday, Paul and Secretary of State Antony Blinken (who also rocks out under the name ) got into a conversation after a Kentucky senator decided to blame Russia's invasion of Ukraine for "agitating" and "beating the drums to take Ukraine to NATO." Blinken wasted no time clarifying that it was not a case of "agitating for Ukraine's admission," but of pledging for the right of independent countries to make "sovereign decisions."
Paul, perhaps resurrecting the reasons Putin himself has given invading Ukraine, made sure to state that "there is no reason for the invasion, I'm not saying that," then added, "But there are reasons for the invasion." Oh, Randnooooo!
Paul said, "It'd be in NATO, we would now deploy troops in Ukraine." Which Paul says he "very much" oppositions. But Blinken wasn't about to let him off that easy.
If you look at the countries Russian has used over the last years, then Blinken explained, pointing to Georgia, Moldova, and, well, Ukraine. These were nations that were not part of NATO. It has not attacked NATO countries for a very good reason.
Paul's harrowing defense, which seems to have forgotten that the last 30 years have happened: "You could also argue that the countries they attacked were part of Russia... or were part of the Soviet Union."
It is the fundamental right of these countries to choose their own destiny and future, Blinken said. Yet, Paul wasn't about to back down, because these nations, dammit, "were part of the Soviet Union, and they were members of the Soviet Union since the 1920s.
Blinken, who feels sorry for his words, reiterated that "that does not give Russia the right to attack them. On the contrary. They were liberated from being part of this empire by force."
