Why Are So Many 'Libertarians' Pro-War?

[mpg]

Certainly there are varying degrees. But I don't see how supporting neo-imperialist policies is the least bit libertarian.

I've never met anyone who supported neo-imperialist policies. Your threads rest on a foundation of hyperbole.

 

[Geoist]

Aside from WW II/Pearl Harbor, you've just described every war the US was ever involved in.

Yes, I pretty much have. Although some would argue the American Revolution was defensive.

 

[Geoist]

I've never met anyone who supported neo-imperialist policies. Your threads rest on a foundation of hyperbole.

They would not call themselves neo-imperialist, silly.

 

[ecofarm]

A true libertarian would then say spend your own money to support a militia/mercenary group to go into those countries. But do not expect the rest of us who do not support these wars to spend our money on it.

I volunteered airborne infantry during war. I've spent years in Africa working with agricultural development. I've put my money where my mouth is, I've walked the talk. You cannot expect me to do everything in the world at the same time. I have my own skills and my own priorities.

This notion that you have about a person needing to do EVERYTHING they advocate is nonsense.

Spare us the personal attacks and challenges and debate the philosophy and issues.

 

[ecofarm]

Not near enough to influence our foreign policy.

You're obviously wrong.

 

[ecofarm]

Do you understand that has nothing to do with the topic?

Sure it does. A global perspective is important in every debate, especially war. You can't be like "no talking globally!" when the subject is war.

 

[Geoist]

I volunteered airborne infantry during war. I've spent years in Africa working with agricultural development. I've put my money where my mouth is, I've walked the talk. You cannot expect me to do everything in the world at the same time. I have my own skills and priorities and my own priorities.

Fine and dandy. You are welcome to help others in other countries. Just don't expect citizens who do not support certain foreign policies to want their money spent on more interventionism.

This notion that you have about a person needing to do EVERYTHING they advocate is nonsense.

Never made such a notion.

Spare us the personal attacks and challenges and debate the philosophy and issues.

Please tell me where I personally attacked you.

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Not to support libertarians(cuz that ain't gunna happen), but...supporting a war is a far different thing than being pro-war. Most people realize that sometimes war is the best way to bring about a desired result.

Then explain why you support Obama's incompetent surge in Afghanistan and wars in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and now Syria.

 

[Geoist]

Sure it does. A global perspective is important in every debate, especially war. You can't be like "no talking globally!" when the subject is war.

If you are going to explain how your global perspective is related to libertarianism then explain away.

 

[ecofarm]

Fine and dandy. You are welcome to help others in other countries. Just don't expect citizens who do not support certain foreign policies to want their money spent on more interventionism.

This is just as stupid as a fringe right telling a left that they need to pay all the taxes.

Never made such a notion.

Of course you do. If someone advocates the NFL, they must play in it. If someone advocated a police force, they must join it. If someone advocates firefighters, they must become a firefighter. It's BS.

Please tell me where I personally attacked you.

You try to use the fact that I am not currently in the army to disparage my political position. You are making a personal attack on my philosophical credibility based on my personal life. It's a scumbag tactic, and you should be ashamed of it.

 

[ecofarm]

If you are going to explain how your global perspective is related to libertarianism then explain away.

I've already explained it. It either went over your head or you've chosen to ignore it. At any rate, I feel no obligation to hold your hand through it once again within the same thread.

 

[ttwtt78640]

You're obviously wrong.

Using the two examples that I gave earlier, Saudi Arabia and China, both at the bottom end of human rights/freedom ratings, we surely have great trade and international relations with them. Sure we got suckered into Afghanistan and Iraq, meddled with Lybia and will likely dabble in a few more nation's business (aggressively) but for the most part we simply make diplomatic noises and accept that many things are simply beyond our direct control.

 

[ecofarm]

Using the two examples that I gave earlier, Saudi Arabia and China, both at the bottom end of human rights/freedom ratings, we surely have great trade and international relations with them. Sure we got suckered into Afghanistan and Iraq, meddled with Lybia and will likely dabble in a few more nation's business (aggressively) but for the most part we simply make diplomatic noises and accept that many things are simply beyond our direct control.

China is obviously a nation with which we should use the 'economic engagement' tool of the diplomatic tool box. Invasion and nation building are obviously out of the question. Do you know so little about the world that you cannot differentiate between different countries, their individual context and appropriate actions?

Are you one of those who think that every country should be treated exactly the same, as if they are all the same and history and context does not exist?

 

[Geoist]

This is just as stupid as a fringe right telling a left that they need to pay all the taxes.

It is true that a lot of our taxes go towards things we all disagree with. But it does not mean we have to sit idly and ignore it.

Of course you do. If someone advocates the NFL, they must play in it.

You love your apple and orange analogies don't you ecofarm? Unlike the State the NFL does not force anyone to contribute money to it.

If someone advocated a police force, they must join it. If someone advocates firefighters, they must become a firefighter. It's BS.

I pay for police and firefighters through my taxes, just as I pay of the military. And if I have a problem with police or firefighters in my community I speak out about it. I am not trying to get rid of the military, I just believe it needs to change its policies. I believe individuals who want to do more worldwide than defending this country should do it privately.

You try to use the fact that I am not currently in the army to disparage my political position.

This has nothing to do with your past/present involvement in the military, ecofarm. I stated that those who want to go into other countries outside of direct defense of this country should do it privately.

You are making a personal attack on my philosophical credibility based on my personal life. It's a scumbag tactic, and you should be ashamed of it.

You were talking about getting personal?

 

[ecofarm]

Unlike the State the NFL does not force anyone to contribute money to it.

False. Ever tried to get a stadium built?

Anyway, I'm done with your indictment of my personal actions. Such cannot negate a political position and you have no right whatsoever to indict my life, physical capabilities or personal priorities in attempt to belittle my position. Good day.

 

[Geoist]

I've already explained it. It either went over your head or you've chosen to ignore it. At any rate, I feel no obligation to hold your hand through it once again within the same thread.

You said "world liberty is as important as us liberty." That explains nothing. We all want liberty and peace in this world.

 

[Geoist]

False. Ever tried to get a stadium built?

And I oppose those kinds of actions. But that is an extreme example. The vast majority of NFL's revenue comes from voluntary contributions.

Anyway, I'm done with your indictment of my personal actions.

Lol, so since I disagree with your views on foreign policy it is personal? You are trying to make it personal, my friend.

 

[ecofarm]

I just want to add that such an argument creates a situation where the military decides what wars are fought (civilians cannot advocate) and that's as stupid as the personal indictment is disgusting.

 

[Geoist]

I just want to add that such an argument creates a situation where the military decides what wars are fought (civilians cannot advocate) and that's as stupid as the personal indictment is disgusting.

I thought you were leaving? If you cannot debate without falsely screaming "Personal insult!" then please move on.

 

[Geoist]

Do you know so little about the world that you cannot differentiate between different countries, their individual context and appropriate actions?

Hmm, before you cry foul about 'personal insults' towards you maybe you should take a look at your own writing.

Raven calling the crow black.

 

[ecofarm]

I thought you were leaving? If you cannot debate without falsely screaming "Personal insult!" then please move on.

I didn't claim it was an insult. I claimed it was an attack and indictment of my political position based upon limitations in my personal life. And you have no right to do that. Your underhanded attack on another's position is hardly an insult, except upon yourself.

That your position results in a situation where the military decides what and when wars are fought (civilians cannot advocate) adds comedy to disgust.

 

[Redress]

Then explain why you support Obama's incompetent surge in Afghanistan and wars in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and now Syria.

What reality do you live in?

 

[Geoist]

I didn't claim it was an insult. I claimed it was an attack and indictment of my political position based upon limitations in my personal life.

You said it was a personal attack which is the same thing as an insult.

Please tell me how me saying:

You are welcome to help others in other countries.

Is in any way an attack.

 

[ecofarm]

You said it was a personal attack which is the same thing as an insult.

If attack and insult were the same thing there wouldn't be two different words. Your position is plainly and obviously too pathetic (indicting political position based on personal limitations) and short-sighted (civilians no longer control war) to be an insult to anyone but yourself.

 

[Geoist]

If attack and insult were the same thing there wouldn't be two different words.

Never heard of a synonym? This is silly, ecofarm.

Your position is plainly and obviously too pathetic (indicting political position based on personal limitations) and short-sighted (civilians no longer control war) to be an insult to anyone but yourself.

Please tell me how saying: You are welcome to help others in other countries. is a personal attack.

*Ignoring the irony of your clear personal attack towards me.