Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
The invader and the invadee should be judged by different standards. One has a choice, the other does not. The nation being invaded should be given more leeway for desperate measures employed in an effort to prevent their destruction.

Possibly but first you have to prove the point that different standards are appropriate. Otherwise, you've open to accusations of hypocrisy.

You've just made your task more difficult with the phrase "prevent their destruction." Lincoln felt that the union must be preserved. In other words, by the standards you're implying, Lincoln would be okay taking desperate measures because he was trying to prevent the destruction of the union.

217 posted on 02/12/2018 1:51:04 PM PST by CommerceComet (Hillary: A unique blend of arrogance, incompetence, and corruption.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies ]


To: CommerceComet
Possibly but first you have to prove the point that different standards are appropriate.

So far as I can see, it is axiomatic that someone defending their homeland should be given more leeway in making hard decisions to protect themselves and their families.

Why should the invader be given any consideration? No one is threatening their lands and homes, wives and children.

You've just made your task more difficult with the phrase "prevent their destruction."

The most fundamental principle of life is the right to self preservation. It is the foundation from which all other rights must descend. If you have not the right of self preservation, you have no other rights as well.

Lincoln felt that the union must be preserved.

As a domineering Husband would think his wife must not be allowed to leave. Shouldn't it be up to the wife?

In other words, by the standards you're implying, Lincoln would be okay taking desperate measures because he was trying to prevent the destruction of the union.

Someone leaving you is not a condition of "desperation" unless you are some sort of psychotic. Someone raining body blows on you and injuring you grievously is a condition that would be desperate, but someone saying they no longer wish to associate with you is not going to constitute a threat to your life.

This "Preserve the Union" is not a very good justification for killing 750,000 people in direct war, and perhaps as many as 2 million in subsequent starvation, disease, and loss of life from exposure. It is also not a good reason to break the Federalism which was originally established by the founders.

Lincoln birthed the federal behemoth which has been pressing down on us harder with each passing year, and has only increased in power and intrusion since 1861.

221 posted on 02/12/2018 2:11:50 PM PST by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson