Posted on 12/29/2001 9:27:49 AM PST by Demidog
Where do you want us to start? How about supporting international aid agencies which transfer American taxpayers money into the pockets of tinpot dictators in Africa and elsewhere? Would that qualify as a "principle"? We can word it differently, but I believe that there is in fact some insane principle behind it all. This is just for starters.
Huh? First of all Demidog has proclaimed his Libertarianism far and wide on FR. Second why isn't fair to bring up the fact that a vanity post should be labled as such. Third, someone else(Joe Hadenuf) brought up proposition 187 and I just stated the fact that it wasn't the federal govt. that over turned it, but the federal judiciary.
In closing tex-oma, would you like cheese with your whine.
At the risk of sounding a bit pedantic, I feel impressed to point out that this was more likely due to the Duke's habit of chain-smoking three to five packs of cigarettes a day. You're overreaching. Badly.
I've not seen anyone disagree with that point. There is no justification to the 9-11 attack. None. But we also need to look at what factors helped their warped minds decide to do so.
Have you ever seen a dog that bit a child? I don't tolerate a snappy dog, but one must also realize that sometimes the dog has been teased to the point of biting the next person it can get.
If American refuse to look at the contradictions and flaws in our past foreign policy, we will simply be setting ourselves up for more problems in the future.
(Yes, I know that the biting dog analogy is not perfect, and one can find flaws, so don't bother picking it apart, it ain't worth it.)
To some here, any American foreign policy that is not secondary to Israel's foreign policy is automatically to be called insane. I came to that conclusion after Buchanan's book "A Republic, Not an Empire" was smeared as pro-Hitler.
That would bring a smile to OBL, Harry Browne and Willis Carto.
DD's article points out that there is not enough good debate on foreign policy. For my part, what is truly insane is this troops on the boarder argument...that is the type of country I want to live in. One where there are armed soldiers all around the boarder. (paranoia) Why not take it to its logical end and just put armed troops on every street corner. Anyone looking remotely suspicious will be blown away /paranoia :)
Of course, you could be banking your post on the fact that there are libertarians on this thread and libertarians supposedly support "open boarders" and abondonment of isreal and therefore a libertarian critisizing foreign policy always means that the libertarian is arguing for open boarders and abondonment of Isreal.
Pretty hard to get one since America bombed the Yugo factories to rubble a couple of years ago.
Without elaborating, why are we be more concerned with the borders of other nations all over the globe rather than our very own borders?
Part of the problem is that there have been NO PRINICLES in American foreign policy. Only short-term suposed gains.
Permanent preferred status with China is 'principled'?
Allowing the UN to continue to contaminate our soil is 'principled'? Heck, it ain't even in America's interest to participate in the UN!
"Ending ALL foreign aid would fix that." --tex-oma
I concur, We are left with a goverment who can not, or will not protect her own borders.
It is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.