Re: Skinnywater, Libertarian, D-Day question . . .
Hello QC, I'm not so sure that I am a Libertarian as I really prefer a society with law to a greater degree then a Libertarian.
And like JB said it's really a matter of degree.
I think with me it is more principal to the letter of the law.
Specifically, a declaration of war. It's spelled out in The Constitution for the purpose of a thourough debate of the facts, accountability and checks and balance.
Today we see the very problems of passing the buck, unaccountabilty and political weasling when the Constitutional concept of declaring war is abondoned.
WW2 definately put us in the cross hairs in Pearl Harbour and the subsequent German declaration against us. I don't think we had any choice but to act when we did. The political debates for declaration were very complete and deliberate.
I'm glad we went to war and I like the way we fought it. I agree with the h-bombs on Japan to end the war. War in this instance was the first step to peace.
I'm hugely hawkish when it comes to wars that are directly in our national interests and well being.
My biggest problem is undeclared wars. I don't like that we've become the world's police or the UN.
I think that it's time someone or something else be used for these situations rather then our men, our money and our hardware.
I think we should hand most of the G8 a huge bill for services rendered for the past 60 years.
In the last 100 years this country has been at war or preparing for war more than not. And the undeclared wars are more often and closer together now.
I'm eager for something different then what has been the norm since WW2.
I understand the black or white way of looking at things and do it often.
However, it really is a matter of degree with me. Rather then being seen as an isolationist, I'd rather prefer it be put objectively on the table for debate. And so I appreciate your question.
During that debate it's likely that instead of me being understood as an isolationist period, in reality it would be to one degree or another an isolationist.
For example, countrys that aren't consistent with or morals or values, you know the ones, they are the ones that would be without the benefit of our business. The ones that are within that scope and play fair have the benefit of our business.
But again, business is one thing, alliances are another.
Funny it was today I was thinking how nice it would be for this community to drop the Dem/Lib/Rep/Con FIGHTING and move further by putting different things like isolationism on the table for debate. Surely not adversarial debate, but objective debate.
Even to this day there is a lot of questions I would like to objectively ask a liberal and get an answer from the heart rather then get a regurgitated political bombardment from all corners.
I'm not sure I've answered your questions or if it's even possible to do in one sitting.
Maybe this might expedite part of the process.
I know a difference you and I have in principal and I understand and compliment you on that opinion (assuming I understand correctly).
You have stated that you believe it is our moral duty to use force to stamp out evil throughout the world.
I differ in that statement not that I want evil to thrive but that out of the hardships that the oppressed endure, dynamics will harden them to the point of revolt equal to their desire for freedom. Our involvement in that dynamic will cheapen freedom or prolong thier struggle. Iraq can be that example since they no longer have Saddam to oppress them and freedom being the magic fruit, technically we could have left the day after he hung and they'd be merry in the cazbah.
Take Vietnam, days after we left S. Vietnam fell to an oppressive brutal government, but in our absense their dynamic has evolved to be something quite different.
Your second post brought more into it.
Afganistan/Taliban/ Bin Laudin was a good move without a congressional declaration since we've already been absent of that formality for decades and we were blatantly attacked.
With the case that Colin Powell presented to the UN Iraq was a good move also.
However, the plan was poorly executed, sluggish and PC.
Myself I would like to make a deal with my government. Use overwhelming force to fix the problem in Iraq and then back out of the world police position.
Dump Iran squarely in Europes lap, hot potata.
I think we need to work on a energy independent infrastructure here at home and quit chasing monsters for a while.
We certainly will be hard pressed to pay for the practice of being everyones babysitter in the relatively near future.
