Comments on: Angela Keaton resigning from LNC

By: Gary

Gary — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:30:47 +0000

“730 rayehawk // Jan 4, 2009 at 2:07 am

Rachel, is there something you are not telling us?

Yep. I’d druther have been shooting stuff than wanting to shoot something.”

Un-friggin’-REAL

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:47:16 +0000

living dead….

http://armyofrage.com/

By: Prospective Advertiser

Prospective Advertiser — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 01:31:49 +0000

This thread is dead.

By: Coming on the back of the LP

Coming on the back of the LP — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 00:39:52 +0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_torture

By: Prospective Advertiser

Prospective Advertiser — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:22:42 +0000

Too much is never enough.

By: rayehawk

rayehawk — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 06:07:37 +0000

at 11:35 pm
p) That would be a neat trick given the LNC meeting was in San Diego at the same time.
Rachel, is there something you are not telling us?

Yep. I’d druther have been shooting stuff than wanting to shoot something.

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 01:40:07 +0000

They are saying "enough already"

By: Billy Goat Eater

Billy Goat Eater — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 19:55:37 +0000

It is now seven to eight.

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:54:19 +0000

Ze plane, Boss, ze plane!

By: paulie cannoli

paulie cannoli — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:53:59 +0000

It will never die.

By: Gene Trosper

Gene Trosper — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:40:04 +0000

It’s alive! IT’S ALIVE!

Maybe you can call it a “Frankenthread” for rising it back from the dead.

By: JimDavidson

JimDavidson — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 18:21:58 +0000

Is this thread still alive?

By: JimDavidson

JimDavidson — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:59:30 +0000

Did you say something Holtz?

By: Brian Holtz

Brian Holtz — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 16:54:27 +0000

Jim, wake me when you can muster any substantive disagreement with something I’ve actually written.

By: JimDavidson

JimDavidson — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 00:06:11 +0000

@717 I don’t regard substitution of straw men for my arguments, or your tendency to arbitrarily set new “rules” for what constitutes an acceptable discussion to be debate. If you think I’ve lost any argument with you, your powers of flowing a debate are minuscule. When you’ve been spread as far out of the room as you are, you might think you’re still in the debate. But going in by the opposite door because your arguments were spread completely around the planet doesn’t count for victory.

I really do regard you as someone likely to equivocate about anything. Go read the Porter’s speech for some hints as to where that will take you.

By: Libertarian Joseph

Libertarian Joseph — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:09:04 +0000

Perhaps the US gov would authorize acceptance of Japanese into US society, that would also be an option… Not forcefully, however. Through negotiations with individuals and land owners.

By: Libertarian Joseph

Libertarian Joseph — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:06:31 +0000

I would have also negotiated peace with Japan. The deal: we leave you alone, you leave us alone. If they reject, I would have tried to destroy their state and replace it with nothing. I’d have troops stationed there and let the people come up with their own governments

By: Libertarian Joseph

Libertarian Joseph — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 19:03:43 +0000

If I was Truman I would have just ended the war. No unconditional surrenders. I would have just taken my forces and brought them back to wherever they came from.

By: Brian Holtz

Brian Holtz — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 17:49:11 +0000

It would seem inconsistent to say we don’t know whether Truman’s decision led to a net prevention of deaths in the 1940s, but that there may be future deaths that we will learn can be laid at Truman’s feet. Instead of imagining that the books on Truman will still be open nearly a century after Hiroshima, maybe we should ask whether FDR should have listened to Jewish pleas to bomb Hitler’s death camps. Or whether Claus von Stauffenberg should have planted his bomb against Hitler even if the only opportunity for it would have taken out some innocents. I don’t see how all this talk of “time horizons” can result in a metaphysical guarantee that forswearing all possibility of collateral force-initiation will always lead to the least number of innocent deaths — or whatever metric of force initiation you might want to use.(*) We just have no reason to think the universe is constructed such that, by taking such a tool out of your toolbox, you guarantee yourself better results. (* It’s interesting how anarcholibertarian quibbling about how to quantify aggression seems to disappear when we start counting deaths of innocents.)

Jim, I didn’t bring up the subject — Susan did. Like I said, it’s in her mental box labeled â€œIn case of Holtz winning argument, break glassâ€. I don’t care much about whether Truman himself was moral; I just found it interesting a few years back to ponder what decision I would make if I were teleported into his shoes. I have zero interest in nuking any cities in Pakistan or Iran, but feel free to fantasize that I do if it helps you rationalize our various disagreements. Demonizing a debate opponent is as close as most libertarians ever come to conceding they are wrong, so I sort of welcome demonization from you.

You’re certainly correct that Truman cared more about American lives. If the world had magically turned anarcholibertarian when the bomb went off over Hiroshima, then Truman would have been tried by a jury of his peers. There’s no mystery about what verdict they would have reached.

By: Libertarian Joseph

Libertarian Joseph — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:02:53 +0000

I think IPR needs to setup pages for comments because sometimes the comments get too long lol.

like 100 comments per page

[1] [2] [3]