If you've been watching the livestream of Sen. Rand Paul's day on the campaign trail in Iowa, you know he drove through a lot of cornfields and listened to some Metallica. But perhaps the most noteworthy moment came when he paused the music and attacked his Republican—and Democratic opponents—for being war cheerleaders.

He said:

I think we should talk about politics for a minute. Shouldn't we at least talk about what idiots we have in the Republican Party running for president who want to have a red line and a no-fly zone in Syria. What a recipe for disaster. But you know what the interesting thing is, Hillary Clinton agrees with all of them. All of them beating their chest to see who is the most likely to get us involved in a war that really, these people have been at war for a thousand years. You think somehow we're going to solve their problems?

This is the side of Paul libertarians want to see more of—particularly in the debates. Voters who think it's a good idea to get involved in the Syrian civil war have plenty of candidates on both sides of the aisle to choose from. On the other hand, voters who are skeptical that further military intervention in the Middle East could possibly be the right course of action have few options. Paul must court them.