““Government has three primary functions. It should provide for military defense of the nation. It should enforce contracts between individuals. It should protect citizens from crimes against themselves or their property. When government-- in pursuit of good intentions tries to rearrange the economy, legislate morality, or help special interests, the cost come in inefficiency, lack of motivation, and loss of freedom. Government should be a referee, not an active player.””
— Milton Friedman

Tags: Milton Friedman ∙ goverment ∙ military ∙ contract law ∙ mala in se ∙ good intentions ∙ morality ∙ special interests ∙ inefficiency ∙ motivation ∙ freedom ∙ referee

Comments

NeoNote — Not defense

Thursday - 19Apr2018 Filed in: Morality & Modern Life&Politics&Gallery&Liberty

❝❝I just want to point out that American "defense" policy involves military action against nations when Congress hasn't declared war.

Even Trump complained when Obama launched military actions without Congressional approval.

You tell me. Should we change the Constitution so the President can attack any other nation on his authority alone? Or should we insist Congress does it's job?

Is this about America, right or wrong?

Or is it about liberty?

How about multiple missile attacks?

And is it right to launch missiles into other nations? You've said that eight months is sufficient. Is four months? Is four weeks? Is four days?

Is it right for other nations to launch missiles into our country?

After all, we have a proven record of meddling in the governments of other nations.

So you are saying that the U.S. has the unique power to fire missiles into other countries.

So much for freedom.

Obviously there is.

And it's even covered by that top ten list of yours.

At the very least, I think using a missile against innocents qualifies as murder.rob

Too late.

I do have a solution for the opium fields. But it doesn't involve armies. It would be a lot more effective though.

Oh?

There are an awful lot of people who got shot at who would disagree with you.

ETA: Not to mention all those overseas military bases.

You're arguing over definitions and a matter of degree.

Might doesn't make right. I've told you that before.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do something. Or that you are justified in doing it.

Justified?

And if we're wrong, does that make us weak? Or just a bully that no one wants to face?

There is a century old story that I tell sometimes. Back during the Russian revolution, President Wilson sent American troops to intervene. The "mission" was murky at best, which led to failed promises and out-and-out lies. Wilson did this without Congressional authorization, we weren't at war with Russia.

Fast forward a couple of decades. Some of the Soviet General Staff had faced American soldiers in the trenches. They knew exactly what American words were worth.

And after WWII, that shaped the Cold War.

All because an American President took it on himself to intervene in a revolution without Congressional authority.

Don't get mad at me. It's right there in the Constitution. And if Congress hasn't declared war, then why are American troops fighting?

Considering who has been President, do you really want no checks and balances when it comes to war?

So why do we have troops fighting when war has not been declared?

Politicos have sacrificed the nation's honor and the lives of American troops for what?

Why do we have troops fighting when war has not been declared?❞❞

NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.

Tags: picture ∙ American ∙ defense ∙ military ∙ Donald Trump ∙ Barack Obama ∙ Constitution ∙ presidential power ∙ Congress ∙ missiles ∙ Robert Taft

Comments

Gun control

Thursday - 22Feb2018 Filed in: Gallery&Quotes & Thinkums&Liberty

“Is that what they are saying? Is that right?”

Women in combat

Sunday - 07Feb2016 Filed in: Morality & Modern Life&Quotes & Thinkums

❝❝Speaking only for myself, I want the U.S. armed forces to be the toughest, most capable sons of a gun on the face of the planet. Especially the elite units. I want them to make other national leaders nervous, even if they are half way across the globe. I want whispers in the darkest shadows of just what happens when someone dares threaten freedom if an American serviceman can do something about it.

Any female who can fill the physical and mental requirements without any allowances for their sex has my respect. All the more so if they show the warrior virtues. But by all the warrior gods they'd better damn well hold their own and more.❞❞
— NeoWayland

NeoWayland's news watch from a libertarian angle

“Is that what they are saying? Is that right?”