Elwood Diggler
Well-Known Member
not fear at all ace. common sense
Bring back the draft
- Thread starter ASCIIGHOST
- Start date
ASCIIGHOST
Well-Known Member
can i have my draft yet?
Elwood Diggler
Well-Known Member
have at it
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
You come here with all the blah blah generic discussions, fail to even read what is said and then tell me to go elsewhere when you can't answer a direct question. What a lard ass you have. You can't answer the question, loser. Why should anybody listen to you. So, tell me, in your ideal system, what means would you have to collect reparations if your neighbor polluted your water source and poisoned your family then denied doing it?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Lazy shit. You can't answer the question can you? So after telling everybody how superior you really banal philosophy is, you tell others to "read the book"? Nope. The question was directed to you, not some purveyor of rope sandals at Rainbow Gatherings and a dead man. Do you know anything or do you just spout off?
What I think happened is once you started to write your answer you saw how stupid it sounded. Your failure of a philosophy can't address the problem I posed.
Last edited:
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Lard ass? Oh come now sir, my gluteus is muscular and athletic. Just yesterday my lady was complimenting me on my finely tuned middle aged physique while observing my morning pushup ritual.
Now to your question...
In an ideal system a person would have a choice amongst arbitration methods rather than being held to one so called "justice system" which holds a monopoly on the use of force. The reason being, a monopolistic justice system has no incentive to provide actual justice since the consumer of said service is held captive by virtue of the monopoly held by the so called justice providers. Can you refute that consumers usually benefit when they have choices of who will be their service provider rather than one single source?
Also, you could easily answer any followup questions by reading less than 200 pages. (The Market for Liberty by Morris and Linda Tannehille ) I do think you have the capacity to do it, but your cognitive dissonance alarm would sound so loud in your fear addled brain when you discover that government is not needed you could suffer a mental breakdown...
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You get a cookie for having read the book.
Would you say people have the right to exercise domain over themselves and their justly acquired property, but not over OTHERS justly acquired property and others bodies?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Speaking of not being able to answer a question...
What do you do if the entity that harmed you IS government and they refuse to provide justice ? What then?
ASCIIGHOST
Well-Known Member
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Not a bad theory
tomuch
Active Member
<disclaimer>No war is ever decent, in any way whatsoever (not attacking you, only expressing my opinion </disclaimer lol>
I wouldn't be surprised.
Once again, not an attack; but only an American2dabone would ever say anything like this.
Or the ones that believe that soldiers shouldn't have intuitive, do their own stuff according to the circumstances and miljeau etc. I was active duty 4+1 years, I'll give you a hint The one country that didn't get annexed into the Soviet Union in 39-40, so yes, USSR was our eastern neighbor, and these days it's Russia. Hint #2: Polar circle.
Last edited:
tomuch
Active Member
That, and then you believing what you do is right (in the mission, you believe as well as your leaders, your team/s/unitls in whatever size, and your other personal opinions and/or moral codes.
heckler73
Well-Known Member
Under most conditions, yes. However, I can't eliminate the possibility for a need to remove "property" from one's access.
ASCIIGHOST
Well-Known Member
You misread what i wrote. The word is descent, not decent. This is crucial to my point of ending wars via a populous with same goals/consequences.
ASCIIGHOST
Well-Known Member
to bad you'll be the only one to acknowledge it. trolls will conveniently (uncle buck crew) avoid it, because war is their agenda, not peace.
ASCIIGHOST
Well-Known Member
This thread proves the hypocrisies of the various pseudo intellects of the forum. They want government force, until it forces them to do something they are against, or dont want to do. They seemed to miss this.... Wonder why?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Capitalism can not exist with out gov't, yet you support capitalism and claim to oppose gov't.
You're dumb.
ASCIIGHOST
Well-Known Member
This isnt about me. A draft cannot exist without a socialist mind set of "were in it together" yet you oppose a draft while you claim to support government rules and force.
You're a chicken hawk, war monger.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
There was not one part of this butt hurt jeremiad that rings true. It's one thing to be so assvexed that you cry on RIU, but to cry lies is just what I want you to do. You're my bitch. Go kill yourself skinhead.