Libertarian presidential candidate mounts pro-peace television commercial campaign

[tpahl]

I'm sure the terrorist attacks would stop after we did that.

Why do you think the terrorists are attacking us?

Travis

 

[DKSuddeth]

Their options are not free trade or black market trade. It is often black market trade or death.

which is exactly why we need to remove these regimes. To not see that is to be blissfully ignorant.

I am sure you are. If more people knew of Badnarik you would have a harder time argueing Bushs failed policies.

Although I am probably giving you more credit than you deserve. Your arguement so far has basically amounted to 'your crazy' 'your cookoo' . I have yet to see any logic behind your assertions that more troops and less trade will somehow result in less terrorists.

I've let you carry on your campaigning for badnarik because I believe its important to see all sides, however, when you see me use the 'your crazy' 'your cookoo' statements, i'm only calling them as I see them. You've yet to see any logic in my assertions of more troops because you fail to see logic period. Many people on here are trying to tell you that you CANNOT have free trade, with a nation or with a nations people, without a free government. The alternative is a black market which results in exorbitant prices, risks that are greater than the benefits, and opens the door for all kinds of illegal trade such as WMD's.

The logic you are trying to imply in Badnariks policies will not work for the simple reasons of not being able to use free market rules in a market that isn't free. If you can't see that logic, then I can't help you.

 

[tpahl]

which is exactly why we need to remove these regimes. To not see that is to be blissfully ignorant.

we have not done a good job of installing better governments in the past. I have serious doubts whether we will now either. But putting all that aside, the purpose of the US military is to make AMERICA safer, not liberate foriegn nations.

I've let you carry on your campaigning for badnarik because I believe its important to see all sides,

Oh thanks for being so nice as to 'let me' express my views.

however, when you see me use the 'your crazy' 'your cookoo' statements, i'm only calling them as I see them. You've yet to see any logic in my assertions of more troops because you fail to see logic period. Many people on here are trying to tell you that you CANNOT have free trade, with a nation or with a nations people, without a free government.

And I have explained to them that free trade can still exist. It is called a black market.

The alternative is a black market which results in exorbitant prices, risks that are greater than the benefits, and opens the door for all kinds of illegal trade such as WMD's.

The risks are not greater than the benfits, if that were the case then they would not be trading. When a government bans trade on everything, then trading milk and eggs is done on the black market. Just because I am supporting a black market does not mean I am supporting trading WMD.

The logic you are trying to imply in Badnariks policies will not work for the simple reasons of not being able to use free market rules in a market that isn't free. If you can't see that logic, then I can't help you.

I understand that you are having a hard time calling it free trade if people are trading in a black market or not trading at all. But regardless of whether we as americans trade freely with another nation that allows free trade, or trades with people from another nation in a black market because theiur government does not allow for it free trade, or whether we do not trade with a country at all for whatever reason (except for our government banning it), it is all examples of a free trade policy from the US federal government standpoint. If you want to call it something other than free trade just because the other side is not recipricol or because the other side is done under the table, then fine... call it something else. Whatever you call it when the US federal government does not restrict trade between Americans and the rest of the world is what I support as well as Badnarik and the Libertarian Party.

I am sorry if my insistance on calling it free trade caused any confusion.

Travis

 

[JIHADTHIS]

And you' still haven't addressed the fundamental flaw in your logic. The Islamofacsists would not care if we pulled everything back into ourselves and became total isolationists! They'd still want us dead because we are the "non believers" :spank3:

 

[Annie]

From the Rules:

1- Freedom of Speech -"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The above quote is directly from the first amendment. The USMB respects freedom of speech and allows for much more than what is demanded. We'll allow more than what is on other boards but there are limitations. Contrary to popular belief, freedom of speech DOES NOT give you the right to say anything you want anywhere you want. I will allow common sense to dictate the difference between one expressing themselves and one who is disruptive to the board.

Guess who gets to decide 'disruptive?'

11- Banning -Users that break any rules will be issued a warning, either in the thread the offense took place in or via PM. Continued breaking of the rules will result in a temporary ban of your account, anywhere from 24hrs up to 2 weeks. If the conduct is severely detrimental to the board, the account will be banned permanently.

Moderators will decide whether or not someone has broken the rules. These decisions will not be questioned by existing members. There will be no airing of grievances on the board, in ANY forum, about the way the board is ran. Any posts condemning moderator action will be deleted. Further posts on the subject will result in a ban. If a user has a concern about the board they are free to PM a moderator or administrator.

For failing to heed DK's advice and being basically disrespectful, take a 24 hr time out.

 

[DKSuddeth]

we have not done a good job of installing better governments in the past. I have serious doubts whether we will now either. But putting all that aside, the purpose of the US military is to make AMERICA safer, not liberate foriegn nations.

I'm well aware of the success/fail rate of installed governments, however, I would rather take my chances on a newly installed government than I would with a current government that I know is bent on attacking us.

Oh thanks for being so nice as to 'let me' express my views.

Thats what I'm here for.

And I have explained to them that free trade can still exist. It is called a black market.

The risks are not greater than the benfits, if that were the case then they would not be trading. When a government bans trade on everything, then trading milk and eggs is done on the black market. Just because I am supporting a black market does not mean I am supporting trading WMD.

how do the benefits outweigh the risks in 'free' trade that has been deemed illegal by the other nation? Explain to me, in detail, how trading with people who risk death/imprisonment is not risk outweighing the benefits.

I understand that you are having a hard time calling it free trade if people are trading in a black market or not trading at all. But regardless of whether we as americans trade freely with another nation that allows free trade, or trades with people from another nation in a black market because theiur government does not allow for it free trade, or whether we do not trade with a country at all for whatever reason (except for our government banning it), it is all examples of a free trade policy from the US federal government standpoint. If you want to call it something other than free trade just because the other side is not recipricol or because the other side is done under the table, then fine... call it something else. Whatever you call it when the US federal government does not restrict trade between Americans and the rest of the world is what I support as well as Badnarik and the Libertarian Party.

I am sorry if my insistance on calling it free trade caused any confusion.

Travis

How can you call it free trade if the 'trading' partner has to break the law to do it?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No nation building was used in earnest but the US failed to realize that the atlantic and pacific cannot protect us anymore. The terrorists of the world can go anywhere, do anything, be anyone they choose so we're left with few options. One of them is to do nothing but will result in more terrorism around the world. The US resorted to Isolationism after WW1 and look where it got us. The other is to remove the world leaders that support terrorists and provide an opportunity for terrorism to die out on its own because of better economic opportunities for people that would be terrorists. While we do that, we'll kill the ones that are too full of hate to change their lives for the better. It's an all around better deal than having a globally violent war and deaths in the hundreds of millions later.

Yeah. Dk's a neocon! Finally.