> If a person lives in a country that threatens the peace of other > countries, then that person either should leave that country or live > with the consequences of staying there. > > There must be a healthy and dynamic balance between general protection > of the population (restrictive laws) and individual rights (lack of > restrictive laws). Neither extreme is good. ;)
That's relative. Libyans think it is the US that is threatening *their* peace. Palestinians believe they have been living in peace until the US-Israel teamup stole their land and killed their fathers. This may be a simplistic explanation, but the point is in every disagreement, seldom is one side completely right and the other completely wrong. Often, both sides are at fault. > If a person lives in a country that threatens the peace of other > countries, then that person either should leave that country or live > with the consequences of staying there. I guess this refers to Americans as well.
