A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

We Are All Spaniards



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 17th 04, 06:44 PM
S Green
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...
In article , "David Brooks"
writes:


Now, by "right" I meant the traditional middle-American conservative. WD,
what would the Libertarian viewpoint have been between Munich and Pearl
Harbor? What about after PH?


There wasn't an LP then, but I expect it would be divided, just as it is

now
about Iraq.

Libertarians do not believe in the initiation of force for politcal ends,

but
we have no problem with taking a war to the enemy's back yard once it has
begun.

The current division in the LP is one of world view rather than of

principle.
Some see terrorism as isolated incidents that must be addressed

individually.
LP members with this world view generally supported the invasion of

Afghanistan
but see little justification for Iraq.

Libertarian Hawks, like myself, see a larger world war, against

Islamofascism,
encompassing the whole of the middle east, and much of Africa, Asia and

Europe.
We look at the movement of Islamofascism as the enemy, and not just

individual
governments. Under that view, Iraq is a legitimate strategic target. Iraq

did
not topple the WTC, but Normandy didn't bomb Pearl Harbor either. In WW2

we
went where it was militarily expedient to fight fascism and we will fight
Islamofascism the same way now. Taking Iraq first minimzes the number of
Moslems we will have to kill to win this war.

But Libertarians are every bit as opposed to losing a war once we're in it

as
we arew to unnecessarily getting into one in the first place. We would

have
been quite content to let the marketplace decide whether capitalism and

the
rule of law would prevail over feudalism and theocracy, but they chose to

use
force and we will burn them to the ground if that's what it takes.


American libertarians make Hitler and his Nazis look like a soft touch.
Says a lot for the American right.


  #2  
Old March 17th 04, 07:49 PM
David Brooks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks - I concede your post is well argued and nuanced.

-- David Brooks

"Wdtabor" wrote in message
...


Libertarians do not believe in the initiation of force for politcal ends,

but
we have no problem with taking a war to the enemy's back yard once it has
begun.

The current division in the LP is one of world view rather than of

principle.
....snip...go see the parent for all of it


  #3  
Old March 19th 04, 03:09 AM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Wdtabor" wrote:
We look at the movement of Islamofascism as the enemy, and not
just individual governments. Under that view, Iraq is a legitimate
strategic target. Iraq did not topple the WTC, but ...Taking Iraq
first minimzes the number of Moslems we will have to kill to win
this war.


I find this argument illogical. Before the war, Saddam had radical
Islamists, "Islamofascists," to use your word, under tighter control
than in any other predominantly Muslim country - hell, he was
exterminating them. Now, the lid is off: we have handed the the
radicals a golden opportunity. They are already taking full advantage of
it by organizing and proselytizing masses of followers, something
unthinkable before the invasion. All this was foreseeable. The invasion
was folly; our enemies have been much enriched by it.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM
(remove pants to reply by email)


  #4  
Old March 16th 04, 04:17 AM
smackey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:ev85c.13233$Cb.306915@attbi_s51...
The socialists have just won the election & Zapatero has
pledged to withdraw troops from Iraq. Looks like it's
down to the US, Britain, Australia and Poland. Rather
like last time.


With this election the Spanish have actually legitimized the very attackers
they supposedly revile, and endangered us all in the process.

This election will encourage the terrorists like nothing else has.


What does this have to do with flying (rec.aviation.piloting, to be
specific), except the very tenuous connection ANY political,
especially international, issue does?
  #5  
Old March 16th 04, 01:52 PM
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

What does this have to do with flying (rec.aviation.piloting, to be
specific), except the very tenuous connection ANY political,
especially international, issue does?


Everything, and nothing.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.