Skip to comments.
In Defense of Libertarians (being libertarian and being Republican are not mutually exclusive)
American Thinker ^
| 01/12/2012
| Rachael Williams
Posted on 01/12/2012 4:55:31 AM PST by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 next last
To: jacknhoo
There are higher callings in the world than simply defending oneself. We can thank God for that.Just askin', not challenging... Is nation building one of those higher causes?
21
posted on
01/12/2012 6:30:19 AM PST
by
rhombus
To: rhombus
Wasn't the U.S. Navy created in order to keep trade routes open and protect U.S. private sector commerce? Did the "survival of our nation absolutely depend on it"? Some would say absolutely yes and some might say not necessasrily. Well, interesting that you chose the USN for your example, because basically the mission of the Navy is to be a blue water one: to be deployed not just overseas, but on the high seas.
I'm talking Air Forces bases overseas. Army bases overseas. Engaging in "limited" armed conflicts or "peace keeping missions." Etc.
To: rhombus
Too many definitions of nation building to answer that question without more clarity on what you are referring to.
23
posted on
01/12/2012 6:34:20 AM PST
by
jacknhoo
(Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
To: jacknhoo
There are higher callings in the world than simply defending oneself. We can thank God for that. There may be, but is one of them sending people overseas to die, or killing people overseas because we don't like what they're doing?
To: SeekAndFind
"Under Libertarianism, a 12 year old girl can leave her parents, move in with her pimp, sell her body, and use the proceeds from that -- after splitting it with her pimp -- to buy drugs."Don Feder
25
posted on
01/12/2012 6:40:52 AM PST
by
Stepan12
To: Hemingway's Ghost
"There may be, but is one of them sending people overseas to die, or killing people overseas because we don't like what they're doing? "
Of course, it is.
Hopefully, you don't deceive yourself that if we didn't we would a moral nation.
26
posted on
01/12/2012 6:41:16 AM PST
by
jacknhoo
(Luke 12:51. Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation.)
To: Hemingway's Ghost
Well, interesting that you chose the USN for your example, because basically the mission of the Navy is to be a blue water one: to be deployed not just overseas, but on the high seas. I'm talking Air Forces bases overseas. Army bases overseas. Engaging in "limited" armed conflicts or "peace keeping missions." Etc. OK if the Navy is only "blue water" - what are they supposed to be doing out there? Does the survival of the nation depend on them? Hard to say. I don't expect China will defend our commerce - but is that the survival of the nation?
As for bases overseas, I guess I have to look at history. Did the survival of our nation absolutely depend on securing Europe and Japan after WWII? Maybe not except any logical person would have assumed the Soviets would have just taken the entire continent. A threat to us? Maybe not but I'm not sure I'd want to find out. I think each one of the "limited" or "peace-keeping" missions has to be evaluated independently. I'm just not ready to say NO to any of them or Yes to all of them. Too many grays.
27
posted on
01/12/2012 6:42:09 AM PST
by
rhombus
To: jacknhoo
Too many definitions of nation building to answer that question without more clarity on what you are referring to. Indeed. Protecting self-determination, freedom of religion, speech... all those things WE value. Or like Washington DC, do we just let the thugs take over and say, it's none of our business.
28
posted on
01/12/2012 6:52:27 AM PST
by
rhombus
To: SeekAndFind
I watched Herman Cain on Hannity last night. Mr. Cain was speaking about how many of his fellow church members secretly admire him, and his conservative positions. But they fear to be outed as a conservative, for fear of being villainized, and then perhaps ostracized, by their majority liberal fellow church goers.
29
posted on
01/12/2012 7:01:12 AM PST
by
takenoprisoner
(Constitutional Conservatism is Americanism.)
Click the Pic
Don't Let the FReepathon DragOn!
Donate Monthly
Sponsors will fire up $10 for each New Monthly Donor
Many thanks to JoeProBono for the Cyclops dragon graphic
30
posted on
01/12/2012 7:07:59 AM PST
by
TheOldLady
(FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
To: jacknhoo
Well, we're going to have to agree to disagree, then. I don't think it's particularly a moral duty of this nation to send our men and women into harm's way to help improve the quality of life for people in other nations, nor do I believe it's particularly moral for our nation to rob its citizens of their property to better the quality of life for people in other nations.
It might be laudable to do so, but I don't think its our duty or our obligation.
To: rhombus
I think each one of the "limited" or "peace-keeping" missions has to be evaluated independently. I'm just not ready to say NO to any of them or Yes to all of them. Too many grays. I think that's a reasonable framework. My thing is let's make sure this is a vital interest and it's absolutely worth our time and treasure to ask our servicemen to stretch their necks for it.
To: Hemingway's Ghost
I think that's a reasonable framework. My thing is let's make sure this is a vital interest and it's absolutely worth our time and treasure to ask our servicemen to stretch their necks for it.Hard to disagree with any of that. All to often, when $heit hits the fan, too many say, if we'd only acted sooner. Where's that crystal ball whne you need one?
33
posted on
01/12/2012 7:50:46 AM PST
by
rhombus
To: rhombus
when $heit hits the fan, too many say, if we'd only acted sooner. Where's that crystal ball whne you need one? Agreed. Hindsight is always 20/20. It's easy for us now to kick back and think about what we could've done to stop Hitler, say, in the 1920s/1930s, but who knew?
To: rhombus
Unfortunately, the modern definition of defense is closer to "projected defense" or what was previously termed offense.
Libertarians are very strong on the Second Amendment type of defense but not so enamored with the "Let's invade Libya because Kadaffy Duck is evil." or the "Let's invade Uganda 'cuz' it's like totally our business." types of defense.
Personally, I wish we would practice "Rattlesnake diplomacy" or, as it says on the Gadsden flag "Don't Tread On Me."
35
posted on
01/12/2012 8:38:01 AM PST
by
Aevery_Freeman
(Rights begin where power ends!)
To: Daveinyork
While it is true that the Libertarian Party has a great number of crackpots (I made the mistake of attending a convention ONCE) the DemonRats and Repugnicans have a great number of megalomaniacs. One need look no further than the Presidential candidates for confirmation - one nut and the rest megalomaniacs.
36
posted on
01/12/2012 8:44:29 AM PST
by
Aevery_Freeman
(Rights begin where power ends!)
To: joe fonebone
Hear! Hear!
Many disagreements stem from a failure to recognize scope. The FEDERAL Constitution is a limiting document barely granting more power than the Articles of Confederation. Many of the arguments we have are actually concerns of each state.
We have become too much a nation at the expense of united states. I blame the Sixteenth Amendment, myself - and Global Warming, of course.
37
posted on
01/12/2012 8:54:51 AM PST
by
Aevery_Freeman
(Rights begin where power ends!)
To: Stepan12
No, under libertarian thought, a twelve-year-old is the property of her parents and in no way a citizen. This holds true for fetuses as well - not the business of the federal government but an issue for each states' police power.
I doubt that many states would support your scenario but these issues are unaddressed in the Constitution.
38
posted on
01/12/2012 9:01:16 AM PST
by
Aevery_Freeman
(Rights begin where power ends!)
To: rhombus
Soviets would have just taken the entire continent...How do think that would have worked out for them?
39
posted on
01/12/2012 9:05:01 AM PST
by
Aevery_Freeman
(Rights begin where power ends!)
To: Hemingway's Ghost
It's easy for us now to kick back and think about what we could've done to stop Hitler, say, in the 1920s/1930s, but who knew? Maybe Churchill, but who listened to that fat old warmongering drunkard? ;-)
40
posted on
01/12/2012 9:08:31 AM PST
by
rhombus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-96 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson