|"It is your equating the war time killings committed by the US government and its armed forces with the evils of Hitler and Stalin that I object very much."|
I equate too! I equate too!
Let's see if I understand. Bad, evil, Germans kill civilians. Good, righteous Americans kill civilians. But by all means lets not equate. Anything but that. Because that would be TRUTH.
You anti-Sadaamites(See, I'll sportingly go along with your labels. I'm a Sadammite? Yeehah, Sadaamism forever!) mention "reason" occasionally as a sort of buzzword. I suppose that's how I can tell you're objectivists. Let's use some reason, shall we?
Attacking people, that is, aggressing against their rights, is bad. This is called a basic premise. You must share this basic premise to follow me here. So violating others' rights is bad. Everyone has a right to their life. That is, to own yourself. This is clear. If not, who does? And how could you even be called _your_self? So killing anyone, except defensively, must be considered as one of the most egregious violations of their rights possible. And therefore, given the premise, one of the most bad things possible to do. And therefore, not an action we ought to be apologists for, but rather denunciators against.
It is easily demonstratable that soldiers for Washington D.C. have committed this very crime. They have taken away the lives of those from whom it ought not to have been taken away. They have killed innocent civilians who had committed no aggression. Thousands in fact. These soldiers killed offensively. And continue even now to kill offensively. Killing offensively is called murder. Those who do it are called murderers. Reason requires that we admit this, even when the murderers are wrapt in the flag. So no, I don't support "our" troops. They aren't my troops. I don't murder people. And I try to avoid paying the bills of those who do.
Now, another point against the anti-Sadaamites: you're far too trusting. Can't you try be just a *bit* jaded and cynical? Can't you consider, as a vague distant possibility, that maybe the swamplords in Washington D.C. might *not* have the welfare of random strangers around the world as the top priority in their life?
That maybe they themselves benefit when they launch into wars?
That maybe their justifications for war are lies?
That perhaps they couldn't care less about American security and are mostly interested in improving their own situations, which for these scum means enhancing and consolidating their own ill-gotten power and wealth?
Make it stop! Make it stop!
Yes, Virginia, rulers throughout history have liked going to war. Never was it for the benefit of their subjects. Never was it for the benefit of the invadee. Everyone from Napoleon to the Khan may have wrapped up their wars in glory and honor, and some even invented Great Quests of Liberation.
But, for me, the only great and honorable war is a defensive war. The American Revolution was such a war, for which a sequel may someday be needed and I hope that we will all stand on the side of individualism and liberty. I kindly assume that those of you here who are anti-Sadaamite support the occupation of Iraq because you have bought in wholeheartedly to the advertisement of it as a defensive war, defending freedom and justice against the Vile Black Oppessor Sadaam Hussein who was on the brink of attacking North America and destroy all that is good and dear to our hearts. This is of course false, and in the future I advise you to take your official government pronoucements with a bit more salt. Maybe even, dare I say it?, skepticism!
But, realistically, it is still too fresh and recent for many of you to change your minds. In twenty years perhaps. In the meantime, I hope you can see that there is a case for so-called isolationism. Throughout the first 100 years of the american republic this was not even an issue, so deeply ingrained was isolationism in the american mentality and tradition. Advocating involvement in distant foreign wars would be furiously denounced as anti-american. As well it should be.
Anyway, the only one I'm denouncing is Lindsay, and only because he's a fool. It's only fair. If anyone else here actually beleives the International Society for Individual Liberty is evil, nay, = evil, then consider yourself denounced as well, but I don't see how anyone could. No, for a belief like that, you need someone like Lindsay. Go to their web site http://isil.org . It's great. For instance, see how you like this cool introduction to the philosophy of liberty: http://isil.org/resources/introduction.html