Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2  Send TopicPrint
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com (Read 124 times)
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4175
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Sep 29th, 2017 at 6:47pm
Print Post  
http://news.antiwar.com/2017/09/28/haley-declares-iran-deal-empty-blames-russia/

Are we all agreed that this evil bitch has blood dripping from her mouth?

If this site can serve no libertarian purpose, at least it can be unanimously antiwar!

Can't it stevea and burnsred?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
burnsred
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 326
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #1 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 8:01pm
Print Post  
Before I look at your link, I have some questions and some predictions and an explanation.  Then I'll read it thoroughly and tell you my thoughts on it.

First of all, I predict that the article will begin or end or likely both begin and end with a denunciation of Donald Trump.  Not a very difficult prediction these days, since almost all liberal writing begins and ends that way.

Second, I'll predict that your article isn't "antiwar" in the sense of espousing a philosophy that war is never justified, but will talk about specific wars that its author finds unacceptable.  It might even use past wars such as WWII as examples of the kind of wars that should war fighting should be saved for.

Having typed all that, I forgot what questions I was going to ask you.  I'm sure they'll occur to me as I'm reading it.

Here is my pre-read explanation:  I doubt that I am anti-war in the sense that you mean it which I believe to be just more America-bashing.  My evidence is your statement about how bad it was that America has bombed so many people since the 1950's or however you put it.  So you tacitly approve of all the bombings done by the U.S. before the 1950s which were to rescue you and your beloved Britain and Soviet Union.

I am anti-war in the sense that I don't want the United States intervening in the wars of other nations.  Obviously, I oppose any invasions of other countries.  But if a crazy dictator explodes an above ground hydrogen bomb in a way that endangers the U.S., I would expect our president to take swift and strong action to prevent further action of that type.  Of course, I am anti-war in that I am sure glad our current president told the crazy dictator that indeed swift and strong action would be taken which seems to have cooled the crazy dictators jets so the swift and strong action will not likely be needed.

Ok, now I remember my questions:

First, are you sure this link is not a mistake that you will backpedal from later?

Second, are you antiwar in the sense that you don't even want Canada to have a military and you never again want the U.S. to use its military to protect you?  If that is not your stance, what exactly do you mean by "antiwar?"

Ok, I'm off to read your link . . .
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
burnsred
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 326
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #2 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 9:17pm
Print Post  
Ok, well . . . mixed review of your link. 

As far as the website antiwar.com, I have to say I found several good articles that made libertarian points.

These two about the absurd lengths Trump bashers are going in their attempt to politically assassinate a duly elected president:

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-i...

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/09/26/the-rise-of-the-new-mccarthyism/

One about the slavery of conscription:

https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2017/09/28/lessons-from-stop-the-draft-week-50-year...

One of several about the real cost of the U.S.' attempt to "help" other countries in their conflicts:
http://news.antiwar.com/2017/09/28/us-kills-several-in-central-libya-airstrikes/

So, I would say I agree with the subject line though I would change "must" to "may want to" since I'm a libertarian.

As to the specific article you linked to, ok, it had somewhat of a point.  I guess it was sorta kinda libertarian since it denounced U.S. intervention with another nation.  Taken in context with the rest of the site I have to admit, it was more libertarian than I expected.  But not especially anti-war, unless I missed something specific you can explain to me.

However, as I predicted, it did start off with the exactly type of Trump-bashing my first two links above talk about.  I'm not sure about your blood-dripping fangs comment.  It seems very similar to what I learned about in a class about German anti-Jewish films in the thirties and forties. 

Out of all the good articles on that site, why did that one catch your attention?  Is there something about Nikke Haley that sets you off?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4175
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #3 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 9:50pm
Print Post  
Yeah, nicky Haley makes me cringe. the same way that Condo Rice, Hillary, Albright, the mad bomber of Belgrade, and a few other women did. And a whole list of bloodthirsty US warriors who are men too. I think the US is on a war rampage to outdo Germany. But I'm glad you liked the article. I think you asked me about Canada having a military and if we wanted the US to save us again.

The answers are no and no. Oh, and the wars I talk about are since WW2 which would be 1945. It was a 6 year war in which Russia saved the world from Nazism.

Were there any questions I didn't answer?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
stevea
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 991
Location: Ohio
Joined: Jul 24th, 2011
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #4 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 9:59pm
Print Post  
This is a silly little anti-US biased website, not a news organization, coupled w/ Don_G's  silly biased comments.   The article+Din_G_Don_G comment amount to "wah wah wah - isn't it awful that Nicky Haley doesn't bend-over like Chamberlain wrt treaties.   No - it's actually very useful & responsible.  Imagining that say Russia is going to press Iran to comply is ridiculous; the imaginings of a chimp.

Of course Don_G fails to look for any "blood in the mouth's of Putin military take-over of Crimea, or Iran's funding, arms & ppl (Iran's Revolutionary Guard) on the ground for a Yemeni insurrection & Qatar insurrection attempts.

Yeah - right - asking for full compliance from a well-known repeated treaty violator is "blood in the mouth' war-mongering, but using troops and arms to violate rights and attempt overthrows for commercial gain is peachy-keen.

Don_G - much does Putin pay you to post this inane troll-pooh ?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
burnsred
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 326
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #5 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 10:05pm
Print Post  
Quote:
Oh, and the wars I talk about are since WW2 which would be 1945. It was a 6 year war in which Russia saved the world from Nazism.
Ok, so you do favor some wars, then.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4175
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #6 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 10:20pm
Print Post  
burnsred wrote on Sep 29th, 2017 at 10:05pm:
Ok, so you do favor some wars, then.



No, I don't favour any wars. You've misunderstood me again but maybe I should have explained. It's since the end of WW2 that the US has run roughshod over the world, not before. Read up on it. And I've often explained it in more detail.

You see, when the Soviet Union fell, the US immediately attempted to consolidate it's power and control over the entire ME. The Gulf War against Iraq was the leadoff. That was because there was no other force to oppose US aggression. And it's no secret because Gen. Wesley Clark told us about the PNAC agenda and what the world could expect.

Russia was supposed to be finished as a super power and a deterrent to US aggression but that's not the way it worked out. The US had a window of opportunity but Russia came back, bigger and bolder than ever and that window of opportunity was slammed shut!

Now both Russia and China are back and both are superpowers that have combined their might in the Brics. That's an economic force as well as a very powerful military force.

The telling end to the US march to world domination ended with Syria. And fwiw, Obama should be labelled a traitor to his country for that outcome. He was responsible for empowering Putin/Russia in Syria. Syria was on the PNAC agenda of course and was also a stepping stone to Iran. Now both are totally screwed up with Russian made peace in one and a threat from the Brics to leave the other alone.

All of this being made possible by the MAD deterrent, which is something the US understands quite well.

Your comments? Did I get it about right?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
burnsred
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 326
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #7 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 10:23pm
Print Post  
You seemed to speak so glowingly of the Soviet Union saving the world from the Nazis that I thought you actually favored what they called "The Great Patriotic War."

So what do you think the Soviet Union's reaction should have been to the Nazi invasion if not to go to war against them?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4175
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #8 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 10:42pm
Print Post  
burnsred wrote on Sep 29th, 2017 at 10:23pm:
You seemed to speak so glowingly of the Soviet Union saving the world from the Nazis that I thought you actually favored what they called "The Great Patriotic War."

So what do you think the Soviet Union's reaction should have been to the Nazi invasion if not to go to war against them?


I think what the Soviets did was well within your qualifications on what makes a good or moral war. We could refer back to those comments that were on behalf of your country to see if I'm right.

Not to suggest that I agreed with your qualifications. I sensed they were hedging the bet with N. Korea because you seemed to be saying war would be jusified if N.K. detonated an H bomb in the air. Yet the US did that many times and the S.U. wasn't deemed justified to wipe out the US!

Go figure!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
burnsred
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Online

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 326
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Reply #9 - Sep 29th, 2017 at 11:06pm
Print Post  
Quote:
I think what the Soviets did was well within your qualifications on what makes a good or moral war. We could refer back to those comments that were on behalf of your country to see if I'm right.
Good or moral war?  No war is good or moral.  That's why your heroic language when discussing the Soviet Union's war with the Nazis seemed so bizarre.

Quote:
Not to suggest that I agreed with your qualifications. I sensed they were hedging the bet with N. Korea because you seemed to be saying war would be jusified if N.K. detonated an H bomb in the air. Yet the US did that many times and the S.U. wasn't deemed justified to wipe out the US!
Ah, I see.  North Korea is a special case.  I understand that "special pleading" is considered a fallacy.  So I'll fall back on the wiki definition:

Special pleading is a form of fallacious argument that involves an attempt to cite something as an exception to a generally accepted rule, principle, etc. without justifying the exception.

I do justify the exception, so it isn't special pleading.  But it is admittedly a close call.  I say that such a war on North Korea in that circumstance is justified, yes.  But certainly not "moral or good."  It would be horrible and evil and it would be the result of an interventionist UN policy that should have never been followed by thinking people.

The justification for the exception is the danger of a nuclear bomb to the environment and the fact that the military actions required to stop it won't harm the North Korean people nearly as much as the are harmed daily by their own government.

But again, I would weep, not cheer, if such an action would have to be taken.  I certainly wouldn't speak of it as a heroic action.   Most importantly, I'm glad we have a president who knew how to convince the North Koreans that such an action would be suicide for them and to not do it.  Thus making the horrible and immoral war no longer necessary.  I'm not a Trump lover by any means.  By I have no problem speaking in glowing terms of that war he just prevented.

BTW, I meant to ask:

Quote:
Yeah, nicky Haley makes me cringe. the same way that Condo Rice, Hillary, Albright, the mad bomber of Belgrade, and a few other women did.
So you are uncomfortable with women in positions of power?  What positions to you prefer them in, skipping the obvious puns if you please?



  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Libertarians Must Pay More Attention to Antiwar.com
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy