That's as far a I read, since it is you who are being disingenuous. I have seen MANY debates and interviews over the years, many years, that Paul has been running for president. The ONE thing I simply won't do is read Paul's carefully crafted, unable to be questioned in a way that will be answered, propaganda from his personal website. I am, quite reasonably, not the least bit interested in such a one-way monologue. I instead prefer to gain a fuller understanding of Paul's isolationist position from dozens of question--and-answer sessions that include dozens of interviews and several debates.
To imply that my refusal to read one...single...solitary source (that I believe to be propagandized) means that I am either ignorant or disingenuous is, in itself, disingenuous to the max.
If you think that I am wrong on Paul's isolationism, make the case. Show me where I am wrong. Detail what you believe his position to be, somehow reconciling it with what he has said while vulnerable to questioning. Don't arrogantly give me homework assignments. I am an independent adult. I have done quite a bit of "homework." I have arrived at a rational conclusion. Show respect by addressing that conclusion rationally, not with personal invective.
Moving on until you choose to do so. (That does not mean that I will not further discuss Paul's unacceptability. It merely means that even if you take further personal swipes at me, I won't bother to respond to them. There are other avenues to deal with such.)