Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (340430)	6/14/2007 4:58:41 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575624

No oil supplies would be a major concern. If we didn't import oil, most of our major trading partners would. The price we pay would still be determined by the world price. And we would be in a situation where we are very likely to need to import oil in the future. The Middle East has the deepest, and in many cases easiest to access reserves. re: They are not the same in general, but their the same in terms of what we are talking about. No, they are not. Police forces are standard operating procedure to enforce the law. Wars are not the normal state of things... they are entirely elective unless we are attacked. They are both responses to create security. If creating security is a subsidy they are both subsidies. That's not what I read. Google Libertarian and non-interventionist. Do that and you will get the opinions of specific Libertarians, or specific schools of thought within libertarianism, but not the whole breath of libertarian thought. The basic principles of libertarian are simple, but widely varying specific proposals fit withing those ideas. Now if Iraq was a peaceful and free country, invading it would be initiating force. But Iraq's army had initiated force on others, and Iraq's regime continued to initiate force against the people of Iraq. The fact that they where born in Iraq does not mean they deserve any less protection from that force than anyone else. As a practical matter, you can't, and wouldn't want to, invade every totalitarian country. But ending a totalitarian regime is not against the basics of libertarianism. Defending others from force, is not initiating force, or as I said before it isn't naked aggression. It would only be seen as aggression if you view the country as a collective as more important than the individuals within the country, an idea that runs counter to most libertarian thought.