Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Helgoland]

Or a way of avoiding topics that could split your base.

"Gay marriage? States' rights!"

It's a miracle noone has suggested making the military budget a states' rights issue

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Some of the libertarians have. I've heard the argument that the federal military should be dissolved in favor of state militias.

[Zangi]

Some of the libertarians have. I've heard the argument that the federal military should be dissolved in favor of state militias.

It would make secession more of a possibility... and America would have a much smaller projection power over the world... but then, it would stand to reason that if there cannot be a federal military, they'd push for more CIA/FBI/surveillance powers.

[Nadaka]

Most libertarians I know look at the military as the ONLY legitimate federal program.

[Leafsnail]

I think a rule of libertarians is that there's no position too extreme for one of them to adopt.  See:

http://www.volokh.com/2011/02/15/asteroid-defense-and-libertarianism/

I think it’s O.K. to violate people’s rights (e.g. through taxation) if the result is that you protect people’s rights to some greater extent (e.g. through police, courts, the military). But it’s not obvious to me that the Earth being hit by an asteroid (or, say, someone being hit by lightning or a falling tree) violates anyone’s rights; if that’s so, then I’m not sure I can justify preventing it through taxation.

[kaijyuu]

Pretty sure you can find extremists for every political alignment. Pick my brain and you'll find at least a dozen radical views.

[Darvi]

Pretty sure you can find extremists for every political alignment. Pick my brain and you'll find at least a dozen radical views.

You want to do WHAT to that platypus?

[kaijyuu]

Pretty sure you can find extremists for every political alignment. Pick my brain and you'll find at least a dozen radical views.

You want to do WHAT to that platypus?

Only if it consents.


(note: being facetious )

[Owlbread]

Some of the libertarians have. I've heard the argument that the federal military should be dissolved in favor of state militias.

It would make secession more of a possibility... and America would have a much smaller projection power over the world... but then, it would stand to reason that if there cannot be a federal military, they'd push for more CIA/FBI/surveillance powers.

But why would America need a larger projection power over the world? Why is secession a problem

[Zangi]

Some of the libertarians have. I've heard the argument that the federal military should be dissolved in favor of state militias.

It would make secession more of a possibility... and America would have a much smaller projection power over the world... but then, it would stand to reason that if there cannot be a federal military, they'd push for more CIA/FBI/surveillance powers.

But why would America need a larger projection power over the world? Why is secession a problem

I'm just saying the possible effects of demilitarizing the federal gov't and handing that over to the states.

To not-really-answer your questions...
Why, America has been doing so since... the 2nd World War, preemptive action to ensure that things go their way and what-not.
Secession is not really a problem, right now.  But it is a possibility in the far future where a number of states decide that they would be better off not with the US and are willing to fight for it.  Having their own militia, while the federal gov't does not have its own army, states can be emboldened by that fact.  That is if the FBI doesn't uncover and cur them before it gets traction...

[Helgoland]

Some of the libertarians have. I've heard the argument that the federal military should be dissolved in favor of state militias.

It would make secession more of a possibility... and America would have a much smaller projection power over the world... but then, it would stand to reason that if there cannot be a federal military, they'd push for more CIA/FBI/surveillance powers.

But why would America need a larger projection power over the world? Why is secession a problem

If you accept a certain (quite reasonable) way of viewing history: Because it's a step in the wrong direction. Since the stone age, larger administrative structures have evolved to deal with larger-scale problems; and in a time when global problems are becoming a pressing matter you wish to go back?

[Owlbread]

Some of the libertarians have. I've heard the argument that the federal military should be dissolved in favor of state militias.

It would make secession more of a possibility... and America would have a much smaller projection power over the world... but then, it would stand to reason that if there cannot be a federal military, they'd push for more CIA/FBI/surveillance powers.

But why would America need a larger projection power over the world? Why is secession a problem

If you accept a certain (quite reasonable) way of viewing history: Because it's a step in the wrong direction. Since the stone age, larger administrative structures have evolved to deal with larger-scale problems; and in a time when global problems are becoming a pressing matter you wish to go back?

But problems are becoming global because of the larger administrative structures, in my opinion. The situation with Al-Qaeda stems originally from the USA's unbending support for Israel, an example of the USA's projection of power over the world. Without that, why would Al-Qaeda bother with the USA

And, yes, I do wish to go back. We're not solving the problems, we're only making them worse. I say fuck it.

[kaijyuu]

Any "world police" or "world government" made to deal with these global problems should be a coalition of countries, not any singular entity. It's not the US's job to police the world; if you think there's a power vacuum and that something needs to fill it, I suggest pushing for the UN to get increased capacities and/or a new thing to take its place.

[Lord Shonus]

The problem with Al-Qaeda isn't really about Israel at all. The group's original goal was replacing moderate Muslim governments with Taliban-style hardliners, and elimination of "Western" influence in Islamic affairs. Hard-line American support of Israel is a fairly recent development, post-dating the terrorist group.

[Owlbread]

The problem with Al-Qaeda isn't really about Israel at all. The group's original goal was replacing moderate Muslim governments with Taliban-style hardliners, and elimination of "Western" influence in Islamic affairs. Hard-line American support of Israel is a fairly recent development, post-dating the terrorist group.

But Al-Qaeda was formed in the late 1980s. America's been supporting Israel wholeheartedly since its creation.