Replies

Annalex,

> That may be too theoretical for this long thread, but this is what I think, in brief:

Yes, this is a very complex issue which requires a far deeper examination than it has received.

> It is generally rightful to come to forceful defence of an innocent party against aggression. Although the rescuer initiates violence nominally, it is rightful. That extends to governments when they have a proper popular mandate.

And this is the rub as far as I am concerned. I am not sure that our government has the "proper popular mandate," which would involve the people voluntarily funding operations about which they have forthright information. Somehow I can't see the American public voluntarily approving and funding the Salvadorean death squads which the government took it upon itself to fund and train.

There is obviously much more to say on the subject. Suffice it to say that I am in agreement with you to a significant degree and there are areas in which we can probably clarify our thinking.

> I realize that these theses can easily fill multiple threads, and I fully intend to present them under Defense of Liberty label at some point.

I noticed in your DoL thread that you are looking for some assistance. I have some ideas which may or may not be of assistance, let me know if you'd like to discuss them.

In my compartmentalizing mind, proper mandate is a separate issue that doesn't need to be mixed up with foreign policy issues. For the purposes of foreign policy discussion we should assume that a government that hasn't usurped its power by force has proper mandate. For the purposes of civic order, that view may be found incorrect when the constitution is not respected even when proper elections were held.

Please discuss your ideas on DoL, I suggest FR mail or regular email.