|David Elmore wrote:|
>Does it matter what the rest of the world thinks of us if we annihilate (yes,
>there's that dastardly macho bravado word again) despots, their regimes
>and terrorist cells? No. It is altogether fitting and proper for a moral nation.
"We" as in a group of people including neither yourself, nor your audience. Choose a different pronoun. There are specific individuals doing the annihilation. Or are you a collectivist? You are using sloppy language to disguise sloppy thinking. Let's translate your thought into a coherent expression: "I wish to require all you persons in the military to wage total, unlimited war against despotism in my behalf. Regretfully, I will be unable to attend the event, though I will probably be able to occasionally view it on my television. Also, to various random individuals around the world: I wish to kill you. Everyone, please accept my condolences."
There, now that I've cleaned it up a little, I hope your point is more clear. Actually, the last sentence is putting words in your mouth as you seem rather more fond of presenting an image of complete callousness and disregard for non-american life. However, I could be misunderstanding you and would not want to accuse you of impoliteness. Anything but that. To summarize your position: you like to agitate for other people's sons to do your dirty work for you.
Michael Stuart Kelly wrote:
>Many civilians will be innocent, many will not be. That is why using nukes
>on them needs responsible case-by-case analysis by the leaders and
>advisors of our armed forces and all pertinent advisors to the President.
In other words: "Various wise and responsible residents of a swamp in Maryland ought to decide at their discretion when to aggress against and violate the rights of various residents of other localities. They are, in fact, morally at liberty to slaughter them wholesale."
Oh, what a statesman you are. Michael of the Moderate Middle. "Hi, I'm a hawk, but I civilian value life, but don't get me wrong, I'm all for nuking them, but only when necessary." Caution must be our watchword. Perhaps institute a sensible waiting period. Proper committee procedure must be followed, because if it is, the Grande Ruler and His Trusted Counsellours will surely never lead anyone astray.
All of your posts are grounded in delusions totally divorced from reality. You want a grand model army to remake the world in your own proscribed way. Historical facts pose no barrier, logical absurdity no impediment, philosophical inconsistency gets not even a consideration, in your relentless drive to support war and the modern nation state. Practical problems to the Great Vision? Those are matters to be solved by our angels in the form of men. Plato's Republic at last! Rah rah rah for total dicatatorial power!
If you believe in the absolute unequivocal rights of the individual,...well, I don't even have the will to go into it. Did anyone here ever actually read Atlas Shrugged? Because I did. Does anyone here actually care about true freedom? (Freedom means doing whatever non-aggressive activity one pleases unimpeded. Isn't it sad I must explain the definition?) Because I do. I do care. It boggles my mind why in the world any of you consider yourselves objectivists. It makes no sense. You would have all made out great back in the day writing speeches for Woodrow Wilson. This entire thread has presupposed an enormous, parasitic, unconstitutional standing army. You all have various ideas about the manner in which the members of this army ought to scurry about accomplishing your various objectives. But where in the Objectivist Gospel does it say there should be a huge, coercive, ruling class with millions of soldiers to do their bidding? And by what set of premises do we decide that nationalist socialist military bureaucracies are well suited to spread "freedom" to the world, by conquering them. Or, in the case of those more strident, by obliterating them. Apply a little skepticism please. Apply a little logic. The D.C. swamplords are not acting out of love and compassion for the downtrodden masses. Wake up!
I am quite aware I am the only one on this board who feels this way. Anyone against aggressive mass-murder is a Sadaamite, right Perigo? Just wanted to inject the Sadaamite point of view.