[Video] Ted Cruz: To My Grave I Will Owe Rand Paul A Debt Of Gratitude

[neoreactionary]

Is putting a stop to genocide evil? Is allowing the slaughter and rape of millions righteous?

hmmm..so you advocate spending more of our borrowed tax dollars from China to impose U.S. will and force over other country's because of perceived violence that is really none of our business....i say to the citizens of these country's that may be suffering some sort of transgression to their rights to.....FIGHT BACK...DO IT YOURSELVES. LEAVE ME ALONE. WHY IS THEIR PROBLEM, MY PROBLEM?

So that's a "yes" and a "no" respectively, then? Got it.

Most people do not share your moral intuition that putting a stop to genocide is evil and that allowing it to continue is righteous. Most people think the opposite.

 

[Brett85]

hmmm..so you advocate spending more of our borrowed tax dollars from China to impose U.S. will and force over other country's because of perceived violence that is really none of our business....i say to the citizens of these country's that may be suffering some sort of transgression to their rights to.....FIGHT BACK...DO IT YOURSELVES. LEAVE ME ALONE. WHY IS THEIR PROBLEM, MY PROBLEM?

Speaking for myself, I'm not in favor of using our military to stop genocide in foreign countries, but I also wouldn't say that there would be anything "evil" about doing so.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Speaking for myself, I'm not in favor of using our military to stop genocide in foreign countries, but I also wouldn't say that there would be anything "evil" about doing so.

There is when you take into account why they're doing that, the innocent people killed in doing so, the money stolen, exc.

I'm not saying it would be immoral for someone to assassinate Adolf Hitler.

As for Ted Cruz, I don't know what CaptLouAlbano's point was in his above insult, but the bottom line is that intervention is not a topic we should compromise on, and Ted Cruz is very much a hawk. That's the bottom line.

 

[Brett85]

There is when you take into account why they're doing that, the innocent people killed in doing so, the money stolen, exc.

I'm not saying it would be immoral for someone to assassinate Adolf Hitler.

As for Ted Cruz, I don't know what CaptLouAlbano's point was in his above insult, but the bottom line is that intervention is not a topic we should compromise on, and Ted Cruz is very much a hawk. That's the bottom line.

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm generally opposed to almost all interventions overseas, but I don't necessarily consider every intervention overseas to be "evil." I think it just depends on the reason for the intervention. If the reason for the intervention is to stop a genocide in a foreign country, I wouldn't consider such an intervention to be "evil". On the other hand, if the reason for an intervention was to take over another country's land or try to aquire their oil, I would consider that to be evil. So while I'm opposed to practically all overseas interventions for various reasons, I think the question of whether a particular intervention is "evil" or not depends on the reason for the intervention.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I guess what I'm saying is that I'm generally opposed to almost all interventions overseas, but I don't necessarily consider every intervention overseas to be "evil." I think it just depends on the reason for the intervention. If the reason for the intervention is to stop a genocide in a foreign country, I wouldn't consider such an intervention to be "evil". On the other hand, if the reason for an intervention was to take over another country's land or try to aquire their oil, I would consider that to be evil. So while I'm opposed to practically all overseas interventions for various reasons, I think the question of whether a particular intervention is "evil" or not depends on the reason for the intervention.

The real reason? Or the reason that is argued?

Would you agree that the intervention in Iraq was evil? Vietnam? Korea? WWI?

 

[BlackTerrel]

FP is not as black and white and you wish to make it (i.e. non-intervention vs intervention). There are four major approaches to FP (five if you count isolationism), and among those four you have hybrids of each. Fortunately, Rand understands that better than you do, and isn't spitting in the face of Ted Cruz and calling him "evil" because they may differ on some FP positions. Instead they work side by side often, and I have yet to see Rand correct anyone who adds Cruz's name alongside of his, when speaking of the growing coalition of libertarians in the GOP. Never one has Rand stated that Cruz "isn't one of us", or that "Cruz is evil" because of some FP stances he has taken thus far. You on the other hand, appear to be ready to lynch the man.

This. The world isn't that absolute. Sometimes people have differing views and neither one is evil or a "tool". They just have different views.

 

[Brett85]

The real reason? Or the reason that is argued?

Would you agree that the intervention in Iraq was evil? Vietnam? Korea? WWI?

I'm not entirely sure. I would at least say that all of those interventions were terrible ideas, and I can at least say that many if not all of these wars ended with results that I would describe as being evil. But, I'm simply discussing the motivations for these wars and whether the motivations for these wars were evil. After we invaded Iraq, many people on the left were saying that we went there to get Iraq's oil. If that's true, then I would say that we went into Iraq for evil reasons. On the other hand, if we went into Iraq to liberate the people of Iraq from Saddam Hussein, I would say that's a bad idea and very misguided, but I wouldn't say that that motivation would be evil. It's hard for me to give a concrete answer to that question when I can't read the minds of the people who orchestrated the Iraq invasion and can't know precisely what their motivation was.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I'm not entirely sure. I would at least say that all of those interventions were terrible ideas, and I can at least say that many if not all of these wars ended with results that I would describe as being evil. But, I'm simply discussing the motivations for these wars and whether the motivations for these wars were evil. After we invaded Iraq, many people on the left were saying that we went there to get Iraq's oil. If that's true, then I would say that we went into Iraq for evil reasons. On the other hand, if we went into Iraq to liberate the people of Iraq from Saddam Hussein, I would say that's a bad idea and very misguided, but I wouldn't say that that motivation would be evil. It's hard for me to give a concrete answer to that question when I can't read the minds of the people who orchestrated the Iraq invasion and can't know precisely what their motivation was.

OK, I understand but I'm a cynic, you know?

I'd maintain that to steal from the American people and murder people in order to stop genocide is evil, but we can agree to disagree on this. I know you still agree with me on the issue.

 

[philipped]

Dick riding much?