Who exactly are these people commenting on Amash's Facebook?

[Spoa]

1. Ron Paul didn't kill anyone. We are talking only about people who killed innocent foreigners in a war that wasn't related to American security. You apparently are blind to the qualifiers in our statements. Read them.
2. Ron Paul said that if he was drafted with the convictions he currently has, he would refuse to serve.

On your first point, innocent foreigners get killed in wars. By your admission:

It seems to me that the last war for freedom was probably WWII.

Well, innocent Japanese were killed during World War II. I suppose that means we should discredit WWII as a war for freedom too??? So you have just contradicted yourself.

On your second point, Rep. Paul would probably not be drafted due to his age, and he also has privileges granted to a members of congress.

 

[jj-]

Who still saved the lives of these "American killers" you speak about. By your standards, that would make him an accomplice to the crime.

lol, not true. Doctors don't have to judge every patient to determine if he is a criminal. The justice system does that. It's not unethical for a doctor to treat a criminal, because even if he treats them, they'll go to jail if the justice system works. There are doctors who treat people in jail. There is nothing unethical about that.

 

[jj-]

On your first point, innocent foreigners get killed in wars. By your admission: Well, innocent Japanese were killed during World War II. I suppose that means we should discredit WWII as a war for freedom too??? So you have just contradicted yourself.

Their deaths were a consequence of self-defense. You have a right to self-defense. Innocents may die in the process where you defend yourself, but the action is not comparable to one who kills when his security isn't threatened, like the military does in most wars. You're equating someone who defends himself to someone who kills without being threatened. The sort of arguments you bring up shows pretty well that your position is unjustifiable.

 

[Spoa]

No trial = no guilt.

Additionally, saying a non-citizen is not innocent until proven guilty is taking a positivist view of government; a view that holds that government grants rights. Do you believe that government grants rights?

I believe Osama Bin Laden is guilty by his own admission. I do not believe government grants rights...I believe that we are one nation under God, so our rights are granted by our creator. But would you have rather endangered our troops by trying to capture Osama Bin Laden? Which would you choose---endangering the criminal or endangering our troops? Also, consider the rights that were taken away from thousands of people on 9/11 by Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden.

 

[Spoa]

Their deaths were a consequence of self-defense. You have a right to self-defense. Innocents may die in the process where you defend yourself, but the action is not comparable to one who kills when his security isn't threatened, like the military does in most wars. You're equating someone who defends himself to someone who kills without being threatened. The sort of arguments you bring up shows pretty well that your position is unjustifiable.

I disagree with your recollection of history. My understanding is that Americans dropped an atomic bomb on a Hiroshima and Nagasaki...neither of which were military bases. Also, Americans were not fighting a war against the Japanese in those two specific areas. America dropped a bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the war as quickly as possible so that more American lives would not be lost.

 

[Brett85]

Innocent foreigner? Like Osama Bin Laden!!! I'm sure that he's innocent. What about Al-Qaeda followers who helped plan the 9/11 attacks? I guess they're innocent too. If we follow your logic, we should round up all our soldiers and put them in jail. I would strongly disagree that Osama Bin Laden is an "innocent foreigner that wasn't related to the security of the United States" especially when he led the attack on New York City, the Pentagon, and almost the White House!

Exactly. Some people here are simply opposed to all wars, even wars that were a result of a terrorist attack in which 3,000 American citizens were killed.

Almost all of us are opposed to offensive wars like the War in Iraq. There's no disagreement there. But I think we should blame our politicans for using our military innappropriately; not blame our troops who simply want to serve our country.

 

[Brett85]

But Rep. Paul served during the Vietnam War. Is he an American killer too since he was willing to serve his country?

According to some people here, Ron Paul actually is an evil killer simply for serving his country.

 

[Spoa]

lol, not true. Doctors don't have to judge every patient to determine if he is a criminal. The justice system does that. It's not unethical for a doctor to treat a criminal, because even if he treats them, they'll go to jail if the justice system works. There are doctors who treat people in jail. There is nothing unethical about that.

Do you believe these "American killers" should be put in prison if they killed innocent civilians in self-defense. I encourage you to read "Lone Survivor"...a true tale about a Navy seal who released Afghan civilians, only to find out later that these civilians gave away the Navy seal's hideout to the Taliban. This Navy seal was the only one to survive of his team. Under current law, one cannot kill civilians even if he/she thinks it could save their lives. I do not believe these American killers are survivors. Have there been some that have intentionally killed Afghan civilians on purpose...of course, and I believe that they should be punished. But most are just there under the orders of our government.

 

[jj-]

But most are just there under the orders of our government.

Oh, who used this line before? The debate is over.

Remember guys: if you're just following orders, then everything is OK.

 

[Brett85]

JJ seems to believe that you can't support the troops if you oppose the wars. That's the exact same talking point that comes from the neo-cons. Who would've ever thought there would be common ground between libertarians like JJ and neo-cons like John Bolton?

 

[jj-]

JJ seems to believe that you can't support the troops support the killers of innocent people who pose no threat to your country if you oppose the wars oppose the killing of innocent people who pose no threat to your country .

Sounds right to me.

 

[jj-]

I found this argument in another place:

I wonder why those praising the military don't have more respect for police officers then..., by their logic, cops also signed up to fight, believing that they are fighting for something good. Don't the cops defend their freedom too? Shouldn't they remember those killed in the line of duty this Memorial Day?

By the way, I am no fan of cops...just pointing out their hypocrisy....and considering all the death & destruction the military is responsible for, cops look like saints by comparison.

 

[Brett85]

I suppose you believe that 9-11 was an inside job as well. There's no other way you could possibly say that it's immoral for our troops to kill terrorists like Osama Bin Laden.

 

[QuickZ06]

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

 

[Supernaut]

When was the last time a soldier actually died defending this country? The idea that we are going to be invaded and conquored by third world brown people unless the 'Merican military protects us is the biggest crock of shit of all time.

I'm sure Traditional Conservative and Spoa beat off to this song

 

[Brett85]

@Supernaut-All of us oppose offensive wars like the war in Iraq, and the soon to be war in Iran. The only disagreement Spoa and I have with you and others is that we believe that you can support the troops without supporting the wars. Ron Paul believes this as well.

 

[Supernaut]

@Supernaut-All of us oppose offensive wars like the war in Iraq, and the soon to be war in Iran. The only disagreement Spoa and I have with you and others is that we believe that you can support the troops without supporting the wars. Ron Paul believes this as well.

edit delete.

 

[jj-]

I suppose you believe that 9-11 was an inside job as well. There's no other way you could possibly say that it's immoral for our troops to kill terrorists like Osama Bin Laden.

Apparently you have the blindness-to-qualifiers-in-my-comments syndrome as well. I was specifically referring to people who kill innocent people in a war that has nothing to do with the security of the united states, which is most of the military. The just killings are exceptions. I don't think we should praise a mass of people for a rare action exceptional individuals take.

 

[Brett85]

Apparently you have the blindness-to-qualifiers-in-my-comments syndrome as well. I was specifically referring to people who kill innocent people in a war that has nothing to do with the security of the united states, which is most of the military. The just killing are exceptions. I don't think we should praise a mass of people for an action exceptional individuals take.

I don't believe that our military intentionally kills innocent people. (For the most part, there's always a few crazies in a large group.) I think you're focusing your criticism on the wrong people; you should focus on criticizing the people in Congress who are responsible for getting us involved in unnecessary wars.

 

[Brett85]

edit delete.

...