[Radar]

1. "Anti-libertarian forces" is a euphemism for the military of nations do not accept western democracy or libertarianism. We have absolutely no legitimate reason or authority to attack such a force if it is running a country in a non-libertarian way.

2. The authority of the U.S. Government ends at our own borders. That is as wide as our position can legitimately be. No other sovereign nation on earth requires the permission of the United States, or the UN to run their country in any way they want whether it's Sharia law, a Monarchy, a Fascist Dictator, or a Communist totalitarian government. Nor do they require the permission of the U.S. or the U.N. to develop any weapons they choose.


3. Free nations have no authority or mandate to "liberate" nations that are not free, and nations that do embrace libertarianism do not EVER practice pre-emptive military action because it is not defensive force.

4. One does not need to sign a mutual military defense treaty, especially with nations that have no military to speak of, in order to have free trade with them. That's an absurd notion without an ounce of reality to back it up. We traded with virtually every nation on earth before WWI, and we had very few military treaties with anyone at the time.

5. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, and the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution defines the role and scope of the U.S. Military as being for the "common DEFENSE" of America. This means we have a DEFENSIVE military and anyone who denies this is a liar. This irrefutable, indisputable, undeniable, and 100% factual statement won't stop being the truth because you refuse to hear it. Article 1, section 8 also limits war making powers to being reserved for Congress alone and this power is granted to Congress in order to carry out the "common DEFENSE" of "we the people of the USA". Congress is given the power to make a formal declaration of war in order to make a defensive war. Congress is not given the power to grant this power to the President. This could only be done legally through an amendment.

The U.S. Military is Constitutionally a DEFENSIVE one because only when our military is limited to the DEFENSE of our own country, does freedom, liberty, justice, and libertarianism win. When it is used for anything other than our own defense, freedom loses and tyranny wins.

Because I know you better than you will ever know me, or even know yourself, I've accurately assessed that you are absolutely clueless about politics, history, logic, science, debate, geography, the U.S. Constitution, human nature, morality, psychology, the role and scope of the U.S. Military, and generally everything else. This is why I'm compelled to refute the never-ending stream of lies that you pollute this board with. I set you straight and shut you down each and every single time. You've failed to ever beat me in any debate on any subject at any time in the history of your time trolling this board, but your dishonesty, inflated ego, and stupidity prevent you from admitting it.

My positions aren't leftist. They are libertarian, but you're so polarized into the neocon, war-mongering, anti-libertarian stance, everyone is a leftist in comparison.



The U.S. Military is not here to defend any nation but our own or enforce UN resolutions. It's not here for humanitarian aid or peacekeeping missions. It's not here to overthrow dictators or to prop them up. It's not here to spread democracy or to overthrow it. It's not here to prevent other nations from developing nukes or any other weapons they want. It's not here to stop the flow of drugs from other nations or to protect U.S. "interests" abroad. It's not here to train the military of other nations or nation building. It's not here to cover the earth like the Roman empire or bully other nations or be the police of the world. It's not here to secure sources of oil. It's not here to take part in every petty dispute among other nations. It's not here to do anything other than defending our own country when we attacked. Attacking someone who MIGHT have weapons that they MIGHT use at some point in the future IS NOT DEFENSE.

You refuse to acknowledge the word DEFENSE in the Constitution even though it was listed twice as a way of limiting the scope and role of the military, yet you somehow think "police of the world" or "champion of global freedom" are in it when this flies right in the face of everything the founders said.

The founders didn't even want to have a standing army. They correctly saw it as a threat to our own freedom and knew idiots would see a large military and want to find ways to use it or to stick our nose where it doesn't belong.



Military non-interventionism IS NOT isolationism, but is one of the platforms of the Libertarian Party and a core belief of libertarian philosophy. This is why despite all of your empty claims, you are nowhere near being a libertarian. You ignore the most basic core principle of libertarianism. In order to join the Libertarian Party you have to sign a pledge that says you adhere to the non-aggression principle.

Claiming to be a libertarian who doesn't adhere to the non-aggression principle is like claiming to be a vegetarian who eats meat. Repeat it a billion times. It still won't be true.


Lastly, in your incoherent, twisted, and moronic rant, you asked for an example. An example of what? I am not in favor of protectionist policies. I'm in favor of free trade. FREE trade, not managed trade, and not any trade that requires the use of our military to defend any other nation as part of the deal.