See below:

ma ni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Vic,
> 
> 1.) Your three sentences are not coherent. Please proof read
> them. But I think I know what you are claiming: to advocate the
> expansion of liberty; yet the details of it indicate
aggression.


so what?? why should you not agress against people that are
antithetical
to liberty??? 


----------------
Yes, you are correct; you would be "aggressing". And therefore
you should not do it for several reasons. Firstly, because you
have not specified the persons you charge; OR even specified the
charges (other than being "antithetical to liberty"); let alone
provided habeas corpus or due process or fair trials or even
evidence of crimes.   
-----------------


what do you owe the tyrants and their followers? nothing.


-----------------
The fallacy of the false dichotomy: if we don't owe them
something, we should kill them. 
-----------------


you are implying that liberty is absolute pacificism. total
nonsense
thats just a recent reinvention of the term.


-----------------
No; YOU implied it as a strawman tactic so you could more easily
argue against it. I specifically explained to you how it was
incorrect, and would agree with you that it is nonsense. 
-----------------
 

according to your claims the war of independence should never
have
happened.


----------------------
Please supply some explanation how you came up with this, and how
this bit of history is generally similar to the Iraq Invasion or
the one you propose for N Korea and all other countries that are
"antithetical to liberty".  
---------------------


> 2.) Surely you can see where my post is "coming from". It is an
> elaboration on the true nature of YOUR advocacy. It explains
"the
> problem with going to their aid". But maybe I didn't use terms
> you can connect with yours. Let me reword. Your "going to their
> aid... to expand liberty" is actually a three-tiered act of
> aggression against: a) troops; b) taxpayers; c) innocent Korean
> victims.  

troops are all voluntary. taxpayers already pay for the troops
and there
is no such thing as innocent korean victims if they are killing
people.


---------------------
Regarding taxpayers: the status quo and aggression are not
mutually exclusive. Regarding innocent Korean victims: if every
country had your philosophy and invaded every other country they
thought were victimizing their people, every single country in
the world (who had a military) would be at war with several
others. Under your method of achieving liberty, the world would
have been destroyed long long ago, and neither you nor I would be
conversing at the moment.
--------------------- 


> 3.) Apparently, you did not comprehend the simply analogy. Do
you
> not understand the difference between: a) you going to Korea on
> your own budget to defend innocents by proving the guilt of
their
> aggressors and preventing it; and b) starting another
> first-strike "war" that is just about as unlibertarian,
> unconstitutional, and multiply aggressive as it gets.

so what?

you are using the cover of pacifism to tacitly consent to a
crime.

to sit idly by and watch a crime takes place is immoral and
inhuman.

as I said the LP seems to have become the party of no give a
shit.

Vic


----------------
No again! I specifically explained how pacifism rules out self
defense, and how libertarianism does not. You seem severely
misinformed on fundamental libertarian terms, concepts and
principles.

I am curious to know which libertarian elements you endorse and
why; I assume you endorse SOME or you would not be here. THAT may
be a much shorter and more efficient discussion.

-Mark




ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to