His votes to keep The Patriot Act in place as well as his first vote for the CRE ruffled some feathers in libertarian circles. But, his real sins seem to be his votes and strong support of our military forces:
West is a huge proponent of the warfare state. According to his congressional website, he favors increasing the size of the military and sees threats to the United States all over the world:
Make no mistake, we are a nation at war against a totalitarian theocratic political ideology that glorifies death rather than celebrating life. To defeat it, we must stay on the offensive. From Afghanistan and Iraq to the Greater Middle East and South America, radical Islam is on the march. And while our attention is focused on combating global terrorism, we must not forget other looming threats just on the horizon in China, North Korea, Venezuela, Russia & Iran. These nations and their leaders represent the biggest threat to our great nation. As your Congressman, I will work to reestablish American Exceptionalism by growing and modernizing America’s Armed forces to ensure that we are prepared for the strategic challenges ahead. I believe that peace is best kept through a strong national defense.Increasing the size of the military will naturally entail an increase in defense spending. But how much defense spending is enough? The United States already spends on defense as much as the rest of the world combined. The true amount of U. S. defense spending is already over $1 trillion a year. It should come as no surprise to see that Congressman West recently voted against H.J. Con. Res. 28, “Directing the President, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove the United States Armed Forces from Afghanistan.” Is there any U.S. war he wouldn’t support? Is there any U.S. military intervention he would oppose?
None of this is any surprise to me, as this is the view of the libertarian. They would much rather wait until we are attacked before doing anything when it comes to national defense. But, what I did find very comical were some of the comments on the post.
""West is a huge proponent of the warfare state. According to his congressional website, he favors increasing the size of the military and sees threats to the United States all over the world"Oh, where to begin. We are defending against al Qaeda. We are defending against lunatics leaders from North Korea and Iran. Both of which are crazy enough to use WMD. Also, how does one defend if you don't have an offense to start with? Sometimes the best defense is a strong offense. If you are able to keep people from attacking you because they believe in your offensive abilities, the need to be defensive will not come to pass. We won the cold war without firing a shot at The Soviet Union. One of the reasons that bin Laden has said that he could attack the U.S. was because he believed us to be a "paper tiger" who didn't have the heart to fight. That is the world that the libertarian would have live in.
Uhhhhh....Yeeeahhhh and THANK GOD!! "
Wow, not sure even where to start. How about this. The constitution authorizes national defense. Our military spending is greater than the rest of the world combined. Who exactly are we defending against? Aliens? No, that kind of spending is "national offense" which is unauthorized and which the founders and many presidents warned us against standing armies.
Stop with the kool-aid. read the constitution and think for yourself.
But, what I found most offensive about the article was the obvious disdain the author has for the military. Look how he describes West's service to our country:
Before his election to Congress, West was a lieutenant colonel in the army until his retirement after an investigation into his harsh interrogation techniques while fighting in the Iraq War resulted in a $5,000 fine. After his “service” in the military, West worked for a defense contractor as an advisor to the Afghan National ArmyIt is very shameful how libertarians view not only the military, but the people who serve. Allen West would have given his life to support and protect them men who served under him. He has proven that in spades with the "harsh interrogation techniques". He shot off his weapon to get information from a terrorist. The life of the prisoner was never in danger and West went immediately to his commanding officer and admitted what he did. He took full responsibility for his actions and resigned his position in the military, and he saved the lives of the men in his unit. Once that man gave up the information, the sniper attacks on his unit stopped. You may disagree with a war or the president who requested to send them there, but don't disagree with the men and women who fulfill the oath that they took. Don't disparage the very people who are willing to put their lives on the line to protect your freedoms. Allen West ran on a strong defense. That is who he is, and I wouldn't want him any other way.
Read the whole article here.