equality72521

If someone had the money and built docks in international water ships could off load their guns and then pick them back up.

Michael, You assume that I like the Idea of killing women and children. I am simply recognizing the reality of war. In war you do not win by killing more of the enemies soldiers than they kill of yours, you win by making war so unstomachacheble the enemy no longer has the will to fight. How did we win against the Japanese? We made war with us impossible. The reality is who makes war possible? is it a state? is it an army? no, a state must be able to pay for its armies. This is why I am also for arming every dissident in Iran. So long as a population goes along with the state (ie does not openly and physically oppose) the population is not "innocent". to demonstrate my point. If a US soldier in Iraq is in a fire fight with an enemy combatant and that enemy comes out holding a woman as hostage and is still firing on the soldier that soldier should return fire with the intent to kill even if it endangers the life of that soldier, even if that soldier knows he will take the woman's life. It has nothing to do with that woman, it has to do with the rules of war. If your enemy knows that holding a woman hostage will not stop you from killing him you will find women dont get held hostage. when you go to war total war is the only option I ask this question with no agenda. Have you ever been a soldier in a war and been in battle? I'll take a shot at speculatively answering this question, even though I don't personally know the degenerate to whom the question was posed. Of course he's never been a soldier in war or been in battle. It is almost always the most cowardly chickenhawks who scream the loudest about total war, killing the enemy without remorse, and salting the earth with them. Easy words coming from a sociopath who has never experienced the hell of life in a war zone. This pathetic excuse for a human being would piss in his pants if he were ever in such an environment and heard bullets flying by him and bombs exploding. Martin Martin you are right I have never been in war. However this does not mean that I have not been in a situation where the same principle applies. my youth was not an easy one and i did whatever it took to survive, this is why I advocate total war, and I do so knowing fully well what it means. A valuable lesson i learned from my youth was not the need for total war so much as if others believe you will use total war. If you make the threat you must be willing to carry it through. For example if we were to elect a president who openly stated their military philosophy as that of total war, and it was believable this would be enough to accomplish the desired end. The Art of War I.7 It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of carrying it on. Or in the words of the Latin's Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.

I think it's kind of creepy. It's the snob's equivalent of graffiti -- "We want to shove our art down your throat whether you want it or not; we don't want to invite you to experience our art and let you choose for yourself; no, we know better than you do what type of art you should have in your life, and how and when you should be exposed to it." J I have seen several of these and some of the interviews with people involved and people who have experienced these. I did not come away with that being the intent, your interpretation seems to be cynical. This is actually a perfect advertisement tool. U2 did the same thing when they did that performance on the back of a flatbed truck. There are a number of people who would never be exposed to classical western art and this is a way to inject it into modern culture. As far as I have seen these things never last a long time (usually less than 10 minutes) and in several cases (a ballet in one case) it is used to preview an upcoming show.

Spring 2006 Vol. 1, No. 1 This article is from TOS Vol. 1, No. 1. The full contents of the issue are listed here. "Just War Theory" vs. American Self-Defense Yaron Brook and Alex Epstein Share PDF Available: To purchase a PDF of this article, click here. Authors' Note: This essay is partially based on a lecture, "The Morality of War," delivered by Yaron Brook at numerous venues across the country including the 2004 Objectivist Summer Conference. It has been nearly five years since September 11, 2001—the day that Islamic terrorists incinerated thousands of innocent individuals in the freest, wealthiest, happiest, and most powerful nation on earth.... ===================================================================================== EDIT FROM MSK; This poster posted the entire article and I just deleted it. Here is what I gleaned from the very same The Objective Standard page this poster copied the article from: And for the record, here is the requested backlink for TOS that the poster didn't even bother to provide: “Just War Theory” vs. American Self-Defense Yaron Brook and Alex Epstein NOTE TO EQUALITY: I don't want to restrict you, so pipe down. Michael

Michael, You assume that I like the Idea of killing women and children. I am simply recognizing the reality of war. In war you do not win by killing more of the enemies soldiers than they kill of yours, you win by making war so unstomachacheble the enemy no longer has the will to fight. How did we win against the Japanese? We made war with us impossible. The reality is who makes war possible? is it a state? is it an army? no, a state must be able to pay for its armies. This is why I am also for arming every dissident in Iran. So long as a population goes along with the state (ie does not openly and physically oppose) the population is not "innocent". to demonstrate my point. If a US soldier in Iraq is in a fire fight with an enemy combatant and that enemy comes out holding a woman as hostage and is still firing on the soldier that soldier should return fire with the intent to kill even if it endangers the life of that woman, even if that soldier knows he will take the woman's life. It has nothing to do with that woman, it has to do with the rules of war. If your enemy knows that holding a woman hostage will not stop you from killing him you will find women dont get held hostage. when you go to war total war is the only option

The problem with the FSP as I can see is that it is way to anarchist. Perhaps it is not nearly as anarchist as it appears but to many who like the concept of the FSP, I have reservations due to my distaste for Anarchy. A minimal state is needed. Where do you see anarchy here? From what I've read, they are holding the government to it's consitutional obligation where the maximum role of the government is to the protection of life, liberty, and property. This comes straight from their 2005 mission statment. (Free State Project) ~ Shane http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5zGZ75v4jE&feature=player_embedded I give you free Grafton as an example. Alson an article http://www.freestateproject.org/news/media_archive/0191.php Trying to Organize Anarchy in our day. There can be no denial that there is a strong anarchist element in the FSP.

Victory is mine... Muahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahah "Gay Rights" groups will be outraged when they find this hurts their cause. I read some polls that said support among gays for gay marriage drops off when Civil Unions are legalized. Yay for Civil Unions cant wait for them to become the norm.

David, First there is lots to gain from our relations with Israel. While I do agree that we should cut Govt funding (I support private funding of Israel), Israel is a prime location for launching attacks against middle eastern powers. If you do not believe that Iran is a threat than you need to look more closely at the facts (side note WikiLeaks proved bush was right about WMD's in Iraq). Something else we must consider is the link between the US and Israel and how that would be viewed and embolden our enemies over there. As to Israeli's torture? seriously. A nation has the right to defend itself. Terrorists have no rights. As to pushing the Palestinians out. They ought to push them all out. Expel the lot of them out of gaza, it was a mistake to ever return it to begin with. When will the Israel's learn that you dont give land to your enemies because it just means they can launch their rockets at you closer than before. The greatest flaw with America's policy in the middle east is that we are nation building. We need to bomb the shit out of our enemies and then leave. dont democracy build, dont nation build. Bomb them and let them rebuild on their own.

Reidy, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coming_Insurrection These people are here in the US as well as Europe. They are going to make the 1960's look like a child playing soldier. They must be stopped and they must not be allowed to do this. Thank the gods for glenn beck and the Tea Party. The invisible committee and their ilk keeps me up at night.

Shoplifters Brant? Your thinking too small. This was just the test run... Next stop, The US Treasury... Boy wont they be surprised when they get there.

The problem with the FSP as I can see is that it is way to anarchist. Perhaps it is not nearly as anarchist as it appears but to many who like the concept of the FSP, I have reservations due to my distaste for Anarchy. A minimal state is needed.

Ladies and Gentlemen I would like to welcome you to the Brave New World brought to you by the invisible committee, and George Soros. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/violence-as-thousands-of-uk-students-protest-tuition-fees/ If the Brits are smart they will put this down with extreme prejudice. This has gone beyond the right to peaceful protest to an open attempt to spark violent revolution. Put it down, put it down hard, and put it down fast.

a friend and I were actually discussing this recently and he came up with a very good idea. (Note: He is a former Mormon who was very into religious ref.) In a nutshell he said "Do you know how to solve the problem with the middle east? its quite simple. Pick 5 cities, one in Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, and for good measure another one in Iran. Then bomb the shit out of those cities. Don't stop there. Fill several 747's with salt and then salt the earth of those cities. There is only so much farmable land in the middle east. How many cities do you think you would need to do that to after that? none."

http://www.knightarts.org/community/charlotte/reports-from-the-field-rac-charlotte

Dude, you need to get laid, and to get your snout out of other people's crotches. The paragraph above sounds like it came from someone who loathes the very notion of homosexual activity. This rhetoric is ugly, brother, and only serves ugly ends. Please turn down the knobs on this kind of wordsmithery. William, When minimum wage was first brought into existence in the USA there were people who said that it would cause job loss. The minimum wage did not immediately lay off thousands of people. What places like hotels who could not afford to pay people like elevator operators did was to put in elevators that did not need those operators. You say there has not been a sudden collapse of civilization. True, the question however is what will things be like in 10-15 years? open your sight not just to the short term but to the long term as well.

Unfortunately there are more Randroids than there are objectivsts. Then there are the Objectists who dont know they are objectivists. I believe there are more Objectivists who dont know thats what they are than there are Objectivists who know they are. The distinction I make is that of Shakespeare "A rose by any other...". A Socialist is a socialist if they know it or not, or if they deny it or not. If you believe in redistribution of wealth you are a socialist, there are many people in todays world (that number is dropping), these people are socialists and most of them dont even know it. Btw have you guys seen the "friendly neighborhood communist" video produced by the CPUSA

Conservatives are to blame for a lot of things, and they are often middling statist. They do not want Statism on the level of the Commies, progressives, Modern Liberals, or any other kind of Socialist. However if we were to rank these with 100% being absolute Statist and 0 being absolute Anarchist. Communist 100%, Progressive 95%, Modern Liberal 85%, Democrats begin at about 70%, Republicans rank at about 60%, Conservatives rank at 50%-60%. Bismark however was no conservative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_Bismarck His proper label would be Monarchist Please leave your delusions at the door

I am more concerned with the tyranny of the minority in todays world. As to the language and gay marriage. I would ask you to reconsider. Here in the US the fag agenda is being pushed heavy in schools, children are being taught that homosexuality is normal, they are being brainwashed. There is a difference between tolerance and brainwashing and the fags in this country (which are a type of homosexuals) are assaulting heterosexuality, they are assaulting masculinity, they are assaulting peoples values. I do not agree with conservatives, I think they are irrational and inconsistent however they have a right to teach their children as they see fit. Gay marriage is one method of normalizing fagitry.

Adam, I used to believe that about Rove. Until November 1st when I saw him in an interview. Believe it or not he is not a brilliant tactician, he fell into the victory in 2000 and 2004. It was a complete accident. Morris is a brilliant tactician, so is Luntz, they get it. Rove is an establishment type who doesnt get anything. When he said "when i saw clinton in SNL playing the sax and was left scratching my head when he didnt flop." I knew he fell into the bush victories. I am now convinced that Bush without Rove would have done things much different and his presidency could have ended much better. Rove destroyed bush.

Oh no, not snakes, anything but snakes! Shayne how old are you. Just curious.

Adam, I have been following the voter fraud closely. ACORN did not go away, they are still out there. The Unions did not go away they are still out there, and to believe that they did not swing some of the elections is foolish. However two races that I was referring to was not a question of voter fraud. Alaska is one of them, the media and the Republican party acted outrageously. The same thing with the O'Donnell race. The Republican party stole the election from the tea parties. Their attitude was "How dare you challenge us", Tea Party America dared challenge the GOP and Tea Party won.

I live in Utah and we did pretty well, except we voted back in the jackass Jim Matheson, thank you Salt Lake City. Carl Wimmer got reelected here as well (I didnt get to vote for him). We also passed Prop A which was against Card Check. As to gay marriage, I have my own thread on this and am strongly opposed to gay marriage. Up to this point I have not mentioned my own sexual pref. because 1 its one of those things that once you put out there you cant take back. and because 2 I dont see a need to broadcast it. However I have experienced quite a bit of tongue lashing and had implications that I am against homosexuals. Well I am a gay male, and I am completely against "Gay Marriage" which is an anti-concept. Language is Sacred and "gay marriage" is a distortion of language. Although I am opposed to the reason why most of the judges got turned out (religion) I am for the turning out. The law is the law and what those judges did was a distortion of the original intent of the law and it diluted the law. BTW to answer the accusation NO! I am not a mormon nor have I ever been a mormon.

I used to think the FSP was a joke. Not quite out of the joke column yet, but close.

Well said sjw...thank you for restoring some sanity to this topic. I share your expectations. We shall wait and we shall see. In the mean time it looks like Obama is a lame duck unless, of course, the Republicans do something incredibly stupid between now and 2012. Ba'al Chatzaf We won last night in a big way. I don't mean the Republicans but I mean the Tea Party Americans. While we didn't take every race and some were stolen out from underneath of us we did win. For having the Democrats and the Republican establishment against us we saw a major comeback for America. With men like Rand Paul in the senate this is going to be a good year. On the house side of things we had a sweep. The GOP had better to get it together or they will go the way of the Federalists and the WHIGS.

House d-1 R-8 Senate d39-R26