Ron Paul's chop-govt plan savings normalized vs military spend

I don't know where this is coming from. Everyone who's been following Ron Paul knows that he's very much anti-war and probably the only one, too. I've noticed some candidates are even starting to suggest that USA should "do something about Iran" (read: war) while others like Hermain Cain are more like "we leave all options on the table" (read: easy puppet -> war).

http://ronpaulflix.com/2011/10/ron-paul-cnn-interview-before...

Is this a joke? Harping on Ron Paul on military spending? Seriously? The FIRST line item on his "plan" is a 15% cut of the DOD, including "all war funding ended":

http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-resto...

He wants to cut them on principle, not strictly because of the monetary savings. National defense wouldn't be eliminated (however, he has said many times it needs to be cut drastically) because it is one of the few services that libertarians believe the federal gov't should actually provide citizens, i.e. protection from outside threats. (Likewise, the judicial system would need to be kept in order to arbitrate disputes among citizens internally.)

For more on the subject, here's an interview with Milton Friedman in his twilight years, where he talks about cutting most federal agencies (I actually enjoy the earlier parts, 1-3, better): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64mr-cjxZfU

Edit: If you're a Ron Paul fan, you would probably enjoy a lot of the Milton Friedman videos on YouTube, especially the Donahue ones

Why are we reading a link to a very short slashdot comment about politics unrelated to tech?

Show me an anti-war republican and I'll show you a failed republican presidential candidate.

Republicans have been the war-party for at least all of the 20th century and the 21st so far.

Seriously. If Ron Paul had an ounce of integrity, he'd be against the wars.

Oh wait.