Yes, a true Libertarian, like Ron Paul, would advocate for bringing ALL of our troops home from everywhere and never intervening unless we are directly attacked.
The Tina Fey quote was about seeing Russia from her house, the one quoted is accurate... "The basis for the line was Governor Palin's 11 September 2008 appearance on ABC News, her first major interview after being tapped as the vice-presidential nominee. During that appearance, interviewer Charles Gibson asked her what insight she had gained from living so close to Russia, and she responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska": Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/russia.asp#wTgA5TcC2M8aeUfi.99"
A more accurate term would be "non-intervention" because no libertarian would actually advocate isolating his/her country from another. He would just not want his government to interfere in the internal affairs of the government of another country. So yeah, anyone who claims to be a libertarian but advocates military aggression has failed the first question in the libertarian litmus test. ::EDIT:: Yeah this.
Opening a coordinated network of torture centers, coordinated by somebody who trained Latin American counter-insurgents to do extreme violations of human rights? That doesn't cause resentment.
Glynch and rimbaud please stop responding to each other until you learn to use the quote function properly.
Oh I agree so much...I wish Clutch could make KingCheetah a mod! Spoiler If it happens, please don't ban me, KC...pleeease
For every dollar this "group" raises the price of oil per barrel, Saudi total holdings (reserves) goes up by $250 billion dollars. This could be the world's most profitable investment. Hell, once they stole the bank reserves, it's self funding. They have nothing in it but the start up costs. Hire a crazy mercenary to raise a crazy mercenary army, turn them loose, profit. *everything is always about the money *edit* This story just posted: The winner from Iraq crisis: Energy stocks http://money.cnn.com/2014/06/18/investing/iraq-energy-stocks/index.html?section=money_news_companies Investors are now betting oil prices could remain in the triple-digit territory instead of reverting back toward $80.
I actually met Rimbaud once back in the day. He is a youngster so I don't know his excuse. Hey at least I can touch type unlike Deckard who claims he uses one finger or was it two?. These new fangled computer things can be difficult.
It is called a typo on an ipad (because I deleted too much). I think one transgression in 15 years is a decent track record, though. Especially combined with the nonstop awesome that I vomit onto here. In any event, proper usage of the quote function on the bbs appears to be a positive turn for this thread. I am glad I have contributed.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." So now as Maliki is desperate for US Air Power, Ms. Clinton calls for Nouri al-Maliki to step down.... on FAUX. “If I were Iraqi, I would be thinking hard about -- do I want Maliki to continue to be prime minister?” Clinton said. “He has failed as leader, purged the military, rearranged the government, gone after Sunnis. That is a recipe for continuing instability.” Doubt if it would do any good at this point, but she's not wrong.
Petraeus: U.S. Must Not Become the Shia Militia's Air Force http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-not-become-the-shia-militia-s-air-force.html “The surge in Iraq, the surge that mattered most was not the surge in forces it was the surge of ideas that changed our strategy,” he said. “You cannot have 18 to 20 percent of the population feeling disenfranchised; feeling that it has no stake in the success of the country, in fact it has a stake in the failure of Iraq. Of course we reached out to the Sunni Arabs.”
Petraeus is right. The surge would've failed if not for convincing the Sunnis to fight for the government. This Is why my opinion is that if we had left US forces in this still might've happened once the Iraqi central government failed to adequately build an inclusive government. At that point the Sunnis, and Kurds, have no real reason to fight for a government they don't feel part of. This is more reason why I think some sort of partition is the only viable solution.
No it absolutely is not important. Unless you still think John Kerry has a chance in the 2004 election, of course. You have to make decisions based on the situation now.
