Eric,
If the interventionism you describe only intervened in
aggression, it would all be good. It doesn't. That's the point.
It also intervenes in peace and initiates aggression. It unjustly
kills, maims, ruins, and steals from others.
Your two sons are often squabbling. Do you intervene by killing
one to effect peace? Or maybe you force ("hire") a neighbor to
kill him for you, and steal the money from another neighbor to
pay him? You started with two misbehaving children. Now what do
you have?
-Mark
++++++++++++++++++
I couldn't agree more. You're absolutely correct. This is
something non-interventionist Libertarians overlook. They seem
just "peachy" with 200,000 non-Muslim Sudanese being slaughtered
in North Africa. They have no problem with the genocide of
800,000 Ruwandans at the hands of a corrupt Hootu government.
And the 2 million who were brutally murdered under Pol Pot, "none
of
our business say the non-interventionist Libertarians... feed 'em
to the wolves, I could care less."
And forget about the hundreds of thousands of Kurds who were
gassed
by Saddam.
To the non-interventionist Libertarian, humanitarianism doesn't
matter a bit.
