You have chosen a portion of my statements that excludes the "life, liberty, and property" qualifier on my definition of "interests of Americans," although that may have been in another response within this threat. Anyway, I would oppose a "war for oil," if that's what I believed were being fought. I do not believe that, however.
Islamist attacks on individual Americans and their property originate outside the US. The country is highly unlikely to be invaded, meaning any military action is likely to require action overseas. The risk of invasion would only occur if the US military disarmed and shut down. Does your disapproval of a collective US military force require that individual Americans affected by foreign-originated Islamist attacks hire their own hit men to retaliate? Does the mafia make house calls to caves in Afghanistan? Or what do you propose? From: kiddleddee Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 8:19 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Libertarian] Re: Stop the War FOR Terror --- In [email protected], "Bob Giramma" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Instead, I said, "The role of the US government / military is to serve the > interests of Americans, not [others]." __________________________________________________________ Wrong answer. The role of the US government/military - to the extent that they exist at all - is to protect the lives, liberty and property of Americans - in America! That means defense against invasion and defense against crime - defined as force or fraud against individuals' lives, liberty and/or property - and the "military" has no proper role even in that part of it. The government has no authority to "serve the interests of Americans", however collectivists may define such interests. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
