Quote:
Originally posted by DeltaBetaBaby
The basic principal of the LP is the non-use of force, and in the opinion of many (myself included) you can not be pro-Iraq war and be a Libertarian.
|
That is NOT the basic principal of Libertarianism. That position is a derived interpretation of the basic principals of Libertarianism.
The Libertarian party holds two positions that, when viewed together, are
pure fantasy. The first is that the US military should be purely defensive, and the second is that US borders should be wide open. This is nonsense. True security is derived from economic interdependence. This was learned from how Germany was treated after WW I, and how the losing nations of WW II were treated.
If American borders are to remain reletively open through the forseeable future, we need to posess a militrary with the capabilty to offensively engage in two simultaneous theaters of operation. Once the world becomes economically interdependent (hopefully in the next 50 years,) the need for a military with offensive capability will diminish.
In the mean time, when there are genocidal nations like Iraq that were proactively engaged in the support of terrorism, and the destabilization of the progress of the world order that has existed for 60 years, military force will be needed.
I can vote Libertarian because I agree with their domestic agenda, and because I live in a Kerry state. Until the LP pulls its head out of its ass with regard to the absurd, contemporary combination of a purely defensive military and wide open borders, the LP will remain a fringe, and largely irrelevant party.