topic. Take it back or you will likely risk probation/expulsion.
I answered your question earlier:
"more of the same and worse".
You simply deny the answer, and the logic.
-Mark
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of wgilbert02
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 3:46 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Yet more progress in Iraq;
Libertarians silent
All i've asked is for your opinion as to what would happen if we
pulled out. You either can't answer or won't, I really don't
know.
No one here has answered this qustion. All I get is a bunch of
theoretical BS about the illegitemacy of the war. OK. What is
the
solution. Everyone here says PULL OUT. OK, what happens then.
How
do you think it will affect us, our perception worldwide, our
military preparedness in the region, etc. You don't have to
become
a condescending wiseass and look up the libertarian 'rule book'
to
answer a practical situational question with a theoretical
argument,
just because someone has a disagreement with you.
--- In [email protected], "mark robert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> If you agree with "everything I said", why are you asking?
>
> How can the consequences of continuing abuse/aggression be
> anything but continued abuse/aggression - AND MORE HARM? If you
> mess up and cause a problem, you don't solve it by continuing
the
> mistake. A solution does not usually consist of continuing the
> problem. A solution usually consists of something quite
> different. A solution usually consists of solving the problem.
> Solving the problem usually consists of stopping the problem.
> Stopping the problem is not usually accomplished by not
stopping
> the problem. (Redundant, yes; but apparently necessary.)
>
> Your questioning of such obvious fundamentals implies you don't
> agree. So the more efficient conversation would center around
> this: What do YOU think would happen after a pull-out and why
> would (any of) it be a reason to stay?
>
> If you are expecting to find some excuse for staying, asking
> others to describe/predict all the specific kinds of harm that
> will likely continue after a pull out is an exercise in
futility;
> you won't find one. Whatever the list of specific harms may be,
> it would likely only consist of "more of the same and worse"
and
> would only serve as a basis for pulling out. Any "basis" for
> staying that I have heard consists of circular reasoning: "we
> should stay because we are there".
>
> -Mark
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
