Parties weigh in on Iraq war. Libertarians, Greens, others take dim view of U.S. action

WorldNetDaily ^ | April 9, 2003 | Jon Dougherty

[FairOpinion]

This is my problem with the Libertarian Party. Note the quotes from Harry Browne: "it's all the fault of the US".

[WOSG]

"There is no doubt that Saddam is a murderous tyrant. But that characteristic does not distinguish him from several dozen other rulers around the world," Carpenter said. "If overthrowing a dictator is sufficient reason for the United States to go to war, one must ask how many other holy crusades are in our future?"

----

How many do you want there to be?

next question.

[RasterMaster]

They show their irrelivancy just as the U.N. Perhaps they need to join the France-German-Russian-UN coalition and see how long they last. All the rats are scurrying around trying to create themselves as newsworthy.

[gcruse]

Yes, Browne is a loon. I identify more with Neal Boortz on this issue. With his antiwar and open borders, Browne is too roll-over and surrender for my taste. Otherwise, libertarians have the best vision for where the country should be heading.

[Jackson Brown]

The Communist Party U.S.A. also believes the war against Iraq is illegal. "With layer upon layer of misrepresentation, exaggeration, and outright lies, George W. Bush and his war cabinet have recklessly flung our nation into an illegitimate, illegal and unnecessary war," says a statement issued by CPUSA. "The costs and consequences of this will be enormous, for our country and the world. Many lives will be lost. Political instability and right-wing religious fundamentalism will grow," the CPUSA statement continued. "The Korean Peninsula will become more inflamed. The spread of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons will gain momentum. The chances of terrorist 'blowback' will increase."

This is not a prediction by the Communist Party, it's a wish list.

JB

[Reagan Man]

So the Libertarians say, "The pro-war camp has utterly failed to make the case that Iraq poses such a threat."

What utter nonsense, but I'm not surprised. That's exactly what the vast majority of liberals have to say about the War with Iraq. Libertarians agreeing with liberals is nothing new.

[gcruse]

So the libertarians are irrelevant. The Republicans didn't think so when the libertarian vote cost them the Washington senate seat.

[MJY1288]

"Libertarians, Greens, others take dim view of U.S. action"

From all that I've seen published from these "parties", their "Dim View" of everything is very consistant. There is a good reason why these groups can't muster even the minimal support neccessary to take part in a "National Debate"

WTF Al-Jazeera has more support than these guys

[gcruse]

Actually, I would expect libertarians to agree with conservatives on about half the issues and liberals on the other half. Social conservatism, no. Fiscal conservatism, yes.

[RasterMaster]

Yes even the dopeheads have shown their true colors. What you speak is BEFORE the war and BEFORE they all made complete A$$e$ of themselves.

[gcruse]

What you speak is BEFORE the war and BEFORE they all made complete A$$e$ of themselves.

What do you mean?  When did libertarians makes asses of themselves?  

[Mo1]

---

	Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD-

[MJY1288]

Just the idea that Libertarians agree with Liberals half of the time tells me all I need to know about them.

[gcruse]

If there weren't any differences, there would be no point in having different names, would there? Jeez.

[Gnarly]

So I guess that makes them WORSE than irrelevant?

[FairOpinion]

But regarding defense and foreign policy, I would expect that Libertarians would agree with conservatives, in the sense of strong defense and no mercy for terrorists. By agreeing with the liberals on this, they really tipped the scale in the wrong direction.

I was getting acquainted with some libertarian philosophy, and I think they do have a number of good ideas, so I was saying "me too", in terms of limited government, fiscal responsibility, but this anti-war stance shows that they are either off on the side of the liberals, or that they lost their common sense and realism.

[RasterMaster]

Anyone who agrees with the commies who are taking a "dim view" of the war has rendered themselves as useful as lint.

[Steve Van Doorn]

what does the Liberatarian Neal Boortz say? I am a Libertarian that knows this war is fought for National security. Harry brown has lost it.

[nopardons]

Only because you agree with some, if not all of their opinions. But, wait a minute, do you REALLY agree with ALL of the LP positions ; do you even KNOW all of them ? LOL

[nopardons]

Because, as you so rightly pointed out, Libertarians are DOGS IN THE MANGER " SPOILERS " and little else.