You haven't had your morning coffee yet, have you, Mojo?
Posted on 06/24/2009 8:43:36 AM PDT by shove_it
What a reversal. Freedom is breaking out across Iran. We are witnessing one of the most historical events of our lifetimes, comparable no doubt to the fall of the Berlin Wall. Yet, Libertarians, outside of this political news blog, Atlas Shrugs, the Libertarian Defense Caucus, and a few other libertarian Republicans, are for the most part silent.
Virtually no reportage at Reason. In the last week, just two articles on the whole Iranian Revolution at Reason, and one was more of a criticism of how CNN was covering the event, than coverage of the event itself. Cato is similarly unengaged.
The usual suspects on the Libertarian Left, LewRockwell.com, Justin Raimondo and AntiWar.com, and the Ron Paulists, are preaching the same "stay the hell out" line, they've been arguing for years. Some are even cheering on Obama for not making any statements seemingly in support of the protesters.
Incredibly, not a single press release has been sent out by the Libertarian Party on the biggest issue of the day.
So, where are all the freedoms lovers in the United States to be found?
On the Conservative Right.
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com ...
The election was rigged no mattter who “won” in the end. And, what business is it of ours to meddle in a rigged process anyway? There are going to be risks of helping to solidify the regime is we are seen to be taking an active interest in seeing them gone.
To be a generous as I can be, perhaps the Libertarians simply do not care about others being free so long as we in this nation are? Perhaps the rest of the world can go to hell as far as they are concerned so long as they get theirs?
Not that I would defend Repukes either but if one is going to say that they love liberty, it seems that they ought to love it for all.
Those nutballs are all pro-Mullah and want Iran to develop a nuke weapons program. Why? Because it directly threatens Israel. ...a people/nation they despise above all others.
bookmark
Perhaps they realize there is a limit to what the US can do in the world.
While simultaneously promoting open borders. I think it's all the pot smoking that does it.
Did they start off as pot heads, or did the pot heads simply find a natural political home there?
Liberty is defined as “freedom from oppression” you can’t claim to be a libertarian and argue that your right to liberty allows you to engage in the most heinous act of oppression there is, the denial of an innocent child its inalienable right to life. To propose that liberty grants you the right to engage in such a horrific act of oppression is a complete perversion of liberty and is indefensible.
Sorry “Libertarians” but its “live and let live” not “live at let murder”. Until the party stands up and stops being completely disingenuous with itself on this topic you cannot be considered anything but a complete fallacy. Your stand on this is a complete bastardization of the very meaning of liberty.
When did Dondero ever complain about the fact that we currently give 100 million dollars to the repressive regime in Tajikistan which stole the 2008 election? I think I hear the crickets chirping. It is very easy to get on your hind legs and scream about Iran. It is a lot harder to hold a U.S. ally to the same standard.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why Libertarians (and Ron Paul) seem to have a man-crush on Iran.
Nice purple prosse but talk is cheap. Have you used similar purple prose (or action) to condemn Tajikstan, a U.S. ally under Bush and Obama, which stole the 2006 election and CURRENTLY receives 100 million per year in aid. Libertarians, such as Ron Paul, have often called for an end to this aid. Has any of the interventionsts on this thread taken the same position? If not, they are guilty of a "complete peversion of liberty."
The best way to help ALL freedom fighters, whether in U.S. aided Tajikistan or elsewhere, is to abandon this "perveted" double standard and adopt a governmental policy of ending subsidies and minding our own business.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why so many conservative interventionists seem to have a man-crush on U.S. aided repressive regimes like I cannot for the life of me figure out why Libertarians (and Ron Paul) seem to have a man-crush on Tajikistan which steal elections repeatedly even while the beat their chests about non-U.S. aided regimes like Iran.
I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation had a right to inter-meddle in the internal concerns of another; and that, if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace.
-- George Washington: Letter to James Monroe, August 25, 1796
You haven't had your morning coffee yet, have you, Mojo?
No, we found a decent home in the GOP, thank you very much.
Relax chrissyboy, I wasn’t referring to libertartians, just the fruits and nuts at Antiwar.com and LewRockwell.com. Those websites spew anti-Semitic and conspiratorial garbage on a regular basis. ...which is why they’re both banned from FR. But being a newbie, you probably didn’t know that. So I’ll cut you a little slack.
But our government has ZERO legit authority to do so unless we are attacked first. Every time we've tried to meddle in the ME, we muck things up worse.
Make the case that Iran having troops attacking ours in Iraq, and I'll be right there with you. That would clear the "non-initiation of force" moral hurdle for me.
RP and Lew-Rockwell are vehemently anti-war. "Anti-war at any cost" as I've repeatedly called it here over the years. Retaliatory force is mandatory. If not, you just invite your enemies to attack you again. War in a just defensive cause is not a bad thing. RP and his fellow travellers on this issue want even defensive use of force to be mitigated.
This doesn't sit well with me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.