Do you support abolishing the military?

[Cutlerzzz]

Why ask why?

Why did the US invade Iraq?
Why did N Korea invade S Korea?
Why did did Japan invade Manchuria?
Why did the Soviet Union invade Finland?
Why did Germany invade Belgium?
Why did France invade Spain?
Why did England invade France?
Why did the Turks invade Europe?
Why did the Moors invade Spain?
Why did Spain invade the Incas?
Why did Macedonia invade Greece?

Are you insinuating that none of those countries had reasons to go to war on any of those occasions? Are you conflating Germany invading Belgium to China invading a country 300 times the size of Belgium and twice China's GDP? Are you conflating pre modern warfare to modern warfare, where Afghanistan or Iraq can financially cripple super powers in less than a decade?

 

[Pericles]

Are you insinuating that none of those countries had reasons to go to war on any of those occasions? Are you conflating Germany invading Belgium to China invading a country 300 times the size of Belgium and twice China's GDP? Are you conflating pre modern warfare to modern warfare, where Afghanistan or Iraq can financially cripple super powers in less than a decade?

Only the dead have seen the end of war.

 

[green73]

A standing army is the bane of liberty.

Yes!

 

[green73]

I want to at least know what we need an army for. Canada and Mexico are the only countries we have a border with. Otherwise, our army is not physically capable of being used unless it is deployed overseas.

So long as we have a standing army we will remain at war. Without one, we would never go to war.

The military ultimately operates at the behest of the City of London.

 

[green73]

Give it up folks for Sean Hannity!

Don't be an assburger.

 

[green73]

abolishing the military?

No.

Limiting it,, Reducing it. putting it on a very short leash,, Yes.

Pfft.

 

[green73]

Ron Paul doesn't want to abolish the military or army. What would you label him?

Appeal to authority fallacy. Does anybody commit it more than you?

 

[eduardo89]

The military ultimately operates at the behest of the City of London.

Been reading a bit too much Lyndon LaRouche, have we?

 

[green73]

I wonder what the market would say?

Will you pay $1000 a month for military "protection"?

What are you saying? You think in a free market it would cost that much?

 

[green73]

Been reading a bit too much Lyndon LaRouche, have we?

Never read him.

 

[enoch150]

Those are some crazy poll results. Apparently anarcho capitalists now make up a majority of the members of this forum.

A few years back, on John Stossel's show, Glenn Beck argued in favor of privatizing the military. Glenn Beck is not an anarcho-capitalist.

 

[eduardo89]

Never read him.

You should. His plan to link Europe to China with Maglev trains across Siberia is fascinating.

 

[surf]

What are you saying? You think in a free market it would cost that much?

really, that's $300 billion (don't curse me if my zeroes are bad).

are we really that concerned that we will be invaded by those pesky Canadians?

edit: Peacemongers up 3 (goals by Obafemi Martins, Eddie Johnson, and Clint Dempsey) as we head into the second half

 

[krugminator]

The fear of jihad is completely overblown. I'm sure those peaceful Muslims would never launch nuclear weapons at a non-Muslim country with no military. After all the people of the United States have Bitcoins and could form militias to defend itself. And if they did nuke the United States, it would be our fault for interfering in their affairs.

 

[eduardo89]

are we really that concerned that we will be invaded by those pesky Canadians?

I'm more worried about Canexicans. They can screw the US from both ends.

 

[green73]

You should. His plan to link Europe to China with Maglev trains across Siberia is fascinating.

Huh.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

The fear of jihad is completely overblown. I'm sure those peaceful Muslims would never launch nuclear weapons at a non-Muslim country with no military. After all the people of the United States have Bitcoins and could form militias to defend itself. And if they did nuke the United States, it would be our fault for interfering in their affairs.

I created a thread specifically for you. I'm a little sad you never showed up.

As to this post, research delivery systems. Enriching uranium. That sort of thing. To say that that is unlikely would be such a gross under-exaggeration it is ridiculous.

 

[Pericles]

The fear of jihad is completely overblown. I'm sure those peaceful Muslims would never launch nuclear weapons at a non-Muslim country with no military. After all the people of the United States have Bitcoins and could form militias to defend itself. And if they did nuke the United States, it would be our fault for interfering in their affairs.

Islam is a religion of peace, and if you disagree, or remark on the tendency of the Great prophet to be a child rapist, someone will be along soon to behead you.

 

[green73]

Interesting poll numbers. Since we have a number of ancaps here it doesn't bode well for the statists who claim to be "constitutionalists". Statism is so corrupting.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

The fear of jihad is completely overblown. I'm sure those peaceful Muslims would never launch nuclear weapons at a non-Muslim country with no military. After all the people of the United States have Bitcoins and could form militias to defend itself. And if they did nuke the United States, it would be our fault for interfering in their affairs.

Do you really think that only the regime's military can produce protection from nuclear weapons? Who do you think builds these sort of things now? You can bet your arse it isn't the State Department!