Very well. *gives his royal approval*
(sorry, I can be really sarcastic sometimes =D)
How many times has another country invaded? 9/11 doesn't count, because that was a criminal act of murder and should be treated as such; not an act of war.
Agreed, it was murder, but it was also a kinda warrish act. I mean, yes it was a murder, but if it takse a war to catch the criminals so they don't do it again.... although, they fight a guerilla warfare =P
The fact is that the United States of America is geographically in the perfect position for a libertarian/anarchist state, because we are protected by two vast oceans on either side, with friendly countries to the north and south. If we have military at all, I think it should be limited to Army Reserves, and Coast Guard. But beward of our government's wars, most often when they call it a "defensive" war, it is more of an offensive one.
Well I'm not gonna argue, because I simply disagree completely. hehe =) If we had little military might, I would assure you we would be "claimed" by Russia, Japan, China, Germany, etc. Or maybe even England again. or France. It's been tried, and I'm sure it'd be tried again. So, go Bush
Me neither. I don't think anybody should have nuclear weapons. They serve no practical purpose and only point out the glaring megalomania of our leaders today.
What's megalomnia? hehe. Something to do with crazay about Bigness? =P And as to nuclear weapons in general, I don't know. It suppose it is inevitable they would be discovered. And now that they are, if we allowed "third world countries" that, um, have a bit different ideas and morals, to gain the upperhand, I'm afraid we'd have some major problems. It seems as though some countries simply don't care much about life in general. Can you imagine what would have happened if Hitler had gotten the Atom Bomb before anyone else? I think we'd all probably be dead.
But anyway, my main point is, since others will not stop producing them (as well as biological weapons)... which we have found from experience .... heh
Then driving while using substances should be outlawed, not the use of the substance itself.
'tis a good point... however, the drugs also make you more apt to do some very stupid things, including murder.
My problem with the drug war is that it assumes that the government owns my body and not me. I also believe that prohibition laws do far more harm than good. Did you know that marijuana is 10 times stronger today than it was in 1970? Do you know why? Because of government crackdown on its use, people have been cultivating it to have more and more THC. If it was never illegal, it wouldn't be as dangerous. Also, the drug war gives the government excuses to pry into our private lives. The government can search your house, your car, etc. all on hearsay evidence. If you have a roommate (or a child) who has drugs in your house, the government can confiscate your house, even if you didn't know that the person had the drugs. It has happened.
If it were not legal, I think we'd have a lot more problems. During the prohibition, crime DID go up... simply because people tried to smuggle it and such. But domestic violence and accidents and all of that went DOWN. Little is said about that. I think the general productivity of the American market... I mean like the whatdoyoucallit, hehe... economic system, you know, it was good. Mind blank, sorry
As to prying into our private lives... I am all for smaller government. I would disagree with anarchy, hehe, government is a God instituted thing. But I would say the government is way too big.
And it was never the government's job to provide (i.e., social security, medicare, medicaid, etc).
