The latest release from the Center for Libertarian Press Information
While the events rapidly unfolding in Iran after the recent election are of extreme interest and concern to freedom-loving people everywhere, Libertarians are asking the US Government not to involve itself in the affairs of the Iranian people. They also ask individuals to be wary of being stampeded into agreement with interventionist foreign policies through their natural concern for Iranians and their rights.
David Nolan, one of the founders of the Libertarian Party, warns that “None of us here in America—and probably very few folks in Iran—have any real idea of what exactly is going on there and how various individuals and groups are contributing to the disorder and violence. Under these circumstances, it would be foolish to encourage or tolerate US Government intervention in the affairs of people outside of the US.”
While the events in Tehran and other places in Iran may mark the growth of an era of superfast on-the-spot news communications via such media as Twitter, Facebook, and others, they may also mark the beginning of the successful manipulation of public opinion by exploiting those same superfast personal media.
Susan Hogarth, activist and organizer of the Party’s radical or hard-line faction, cautions “In an era of such rapid and overwhelming communication—in itself a good thing—those who have previously agitated for war or reprisals against Iran will certainly not miss the opportunity to shape public concern into calls for more US Government intervention into Iran’s politics. People should keep in mind that most interventionist wars begin with demonizing one or more political factions in the target land, and agitating or exploiting public concern for the people of that land to gain acceptance of interventionist policies. This is exactly how we were stampeded into war against Iraq, and we must be careful to not let the same thing happen with Iran. Giving in to a hasty impulse to ‘do something’ will only encourage the pro-war faction here in the US and make the situation even more difficult for the people in Iran.”
81 responses so far ↓
1 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:44 am
So libertarians are agreeing with Obama’s stated position. But you know the U.S. is manipulating things there unofficially. This is a choice between 2 reactionaries. Nothing revolutionary will come of it.
2 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:47 am
Just like the choice between Obama & McCain was a choice between 2 reactionaries.
3 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:50 am
As long as people vote in reactionaries, they will have reactionary governments.
4 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:54 am
“progressives, work within the democratic party for change” & ‘libertarians, work to reform the GOP through the Liberty caucus” are both non-starters.
5 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:54 am
By definition reactionary parties resist change.
6 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 2:07 am
How many think I should challenge the President, as well as let us not forget Dubya, to a supervised boxing match? Pay-per-view for charity? Which charity? How about the winner’s charity?
7 Morgan Brykein // Jun 18, 2009 at 2:56 am
Let them have the glory of their own revolution.
8 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:13 am
M.B., kind of like their last “revolution”?
9 Eric Dondero // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:40 am
Title should read “Some libertarians…”
Not all libertarians are leftwing pacifists, who cower in the face of fascism. Some of us do fight back.
Say No to Girlie Man libertarianism!
10 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 7:48 am
like the Obama revolution or the Reagan revolution?
11 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 7:56 am
Obama deliberately misled progressives by using the word “change”. To a progressive change means revolution & is appealing. & he knew the anti -war movement was the wedge issue for progressive support. So progressives were stuck with no viable candidate or him or Billary, who was clearly a hawk. He clearly had think tank advisors.
12 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:11 am
Think tank advisors hired by Kennedy & Kerry et al several years ago. Decades. They plotted the scenarios. A liberal democrat could definitly win. IF he was black. With certain characteristics & attributes. AND a certain sequence of events were orchestrated.
13 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:11 am
The American people got played like a violin.
14 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:12 am
All because there is no viable Progressive Party which could win EVERY election with a 40/30/30 plurality.
15 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:23 am
There are progressive Greens and revolutionary/radical libertarians. However they split & therefore suppress the progressive vote between the GP & LP.
16 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:24 am
However they could coordinate their vote. But nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
17 Melty // Jun 18, 2009 at 9:29 am
Simply dismantle the Empire cuz we can not afford it, and learn this lesson from Iran’s dysfunction – do not mix politics with the bloody God of Abraham.
18 Daniel Kamerling // Jun 18, 2009 at 9:34 am
“None of us here in America—and probably very few folks in Iran—have any real idea of what exactly is going on there”
I have to say that as soon as I read this statement I began to lose confidence in the press release. What expertise does Mr. Nolan or Mrs. Hogarth have in Middle East affairs? I would certainly hope that the President has access to high-quality intelligence of what is actually going on over there.
There is a lot of strength from the quoted speakers when discussing non-interventionist policies from a libertarian perspective. However, once they dig into the weeds of the specifics of the current Iranian elections the comments stop holding water, in my opinion.
Perhaps I’m being picky since I agree with the ends of the release (stay out) but not with the means (context of situational knowledge of Iran elections).
19 Geoffrey // Jun 18, 2009 at 9:45 am
Top of the day,
Once again, I thought this was a “real” release from your USLP, until I checked their web site. Not that I disagree in principle — but it is very misleading title and I would urge those that run this web site to be more cautious when posting so as not to imply something as coming from an individual or two as being the stated policy of your USLP. I noticed this does not happen when it is a statement by Cato, Reason, or another libertarian leaning organization. Thus one must assume it is intentional, and therefore bad journalism on the part of IPR. Please do better in the future if you wish to retain any integrity.
Thank you and cheers,
Geoffrey
20 Michael Seebeck // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:23 am
Geoffrey, the LPHQ lacks the guts and wisdom to comment on this.
Stick to petitioning, Eric.
21 Michael Seebeck // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:24 am
Besides, it’s it in line with the non-interventionist plank of the platform.
I for one can say CLIPR speaks for me here.
22 Thomas L. Knapp // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:31 am
Geoffrey,
1) The release is clearly marked on IPR as coming from the Center for Libertarian Press Information.
2) There’s no implication whatsoever that CLiPr releases are official statements from the Libertarian National Committee. In fact, CLiPr’s site disclaimers makes it clear that they AREN’T.
3) That said, I’d bet money that most of CLiPr’s releases are seen and approved prior to release not only by more LP members, but by more LNC members, than are most releases that come from LPHQ.
23 libertariangirl // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:45 am
not to mention liked and approved by far more LPers after the fact.
I must admit a cpl times i havent taken the time to read where its from and who wrote it , just jumped right into the article . I then get excited when Ithink National is putting out such a good release , then I realize the truth:)
another great job TK
24 libertariangirl // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:48 am
Geoffrey , i dont think the releases by LP-Nat are run by any LPers. They have certainly been not representative of my beliefs more often than so.
25 Ross Levin // Jun 18, 2009 at 11:36 am
Good press release. So far, I’m happy that it seems like Obama actually is doing nothing.
26 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:36 pm
I agree with Seebeck, LG and Knapp;
Geoffrey, there is nothing whatsoever that says the US national LPHQ has any monopoly or patent on the word “libertarian.”
We’ll continue to run CLIPR press releases at IPR, and they will continue to say “Libertarians” in the title, just as they should.
Some time ago, I suggested that someone make youtube clips out of these as well. Anyone interested?
27 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:37 pm
I would certainly hope that the President has access to high-quality intelligence of what is actually going on over there.
Judging by Iraq and other past US regime actions, I have no confidence that whatsoever.
28 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Simply dismantle the Empire cuz we can not afford it, and learn this lesson from Iran’s dysfunction – do not mix politics with the bloody God of Abraham.
Good point. Or with any other gods, for that matter.
29 Donald Raymond Lake // Jun 18, 2009 at 2:13 pm
Oh come on, Paulie! It is so good to see SOME LIBERTARIANS speaking out instead of mumbling in their coffey, but the post was obviously misleading. Let’s [alternative activists] be better than Democans and Republicrate, not merely mimic them.
30 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 2:18 pm
in one tin ear, out the other. libs=losers again.
31 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 2:20 pm
i am so reassured libs agree with Obama. but what if you do not? do you beg him to “change” his mind?
32 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Lake,
It’s like I said – there was nothing misleading about it.
33 Thomas L. Knapp // Jun 18, 2009 at 3:49 pm
LG,
You write:
“another great job TK”
Thanks, but I don’t deserve any credit on it — I’m still on CLiPr’s review board, but not especially active, and I’m no longer the coordinator. Susan Hogarth is.
34 Jim Davidson // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:00 pm
There’s nothing misleading about this press release. The whole reason for CLiPR coming into existence was the endless stream of nonsensical press releases from LP headquarters going back at least as far as the vile “FBI must be given more money to fight child porn” press release during the pre-convention slug fest last year.
If the LP headquarters could be relied up on to release information in a timely fashion instead of waiting weeks after the LNC passed an anti-Afghanistan war resolution last year, perhaps libertarian activists would not have to do nearly as much work to get the word out. As it is, the neo-conservative filth running the LP headquarters are determined to “soften” the message of peace, freedom, and prosperity to the point that it sounds like GOP talking points.
I say “hurray for CLiPR” and hurray for a clear anti-war message. The last thing the world needs is for the American Empire to poke its nose into Iranian politics. Should the Iranian people seek outside support for their political liberation, there are a legion of possibilities for them to consider.
In the same situation, Americans would not want their demonstrations over a stolen election to be interfered with by, say, Russian military intervention.
35 Michael Cavlan // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Sent to the Minneapolis Star Tribune.
Not published.
Go figure.
I find it interesting that our government and media are in a flap because of allegations of election tampering in Iran.
Who are we to speak to any other country about election integrity?
In 2004, nine people went from Minnesota to Ohio, joining others all over the country because of allegations of election fraud there and elsewhere. I know because I was one of them.
What we discovered was horrifying, almost beyond comprehension. Many of us, myself included came to the conclusion that the integrity of elections and democracy itself was in question and possibly lost forever.
What was even more horrifying was the deafening silence of many, once we returned from Ohio. No jostling of reporters or in depth interviews from elected officials for us. In fact virtually the only people who would even listen to us was groups like Minnesota Citizens For Election Integrity and Fair Vote Minnesota.
What makes this more chilling, if that were possible is the fact that we have seen this kind of ramped up rhetoric before. With another “country with weapons of mass destruction.” Or so we were told. I am speaking of course about Iraq.
Where we, as a nation were lied into an illegal war and now occupation of that beleaguered nation.
Perhaps if Ohio had nuclear weapons or had some export that the owners of our country were interested in, then perhaps we would have received those interviews and press attention.
Of course the ultimate irony of this entire situation is that Minneapolis is going to have Instant Run Off Voting this year.
With the votes counted, not on machines but with paper and hand counting in some cases. Which means that for some Minnesotans, we know now that our vote will indeed count.
Perhaps election integrity and democracy is not quite lost yet.
Michael Cavlan RN is a Registered Nurse
Who along with eight other Minnesotans
went to Ohio in 2004, to take part in the
historic Re-Count there.
Since then he has been a committed Election Integrity Activist.
Michael Cavlan also ran for US Senate 2006.
36 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:43 pm
michael, why don’t you try to win by endorsing the progressive libertarian alliance strategy next time you run? wiki-you seemed willing to buck the gp over your position on ireland.
37 Ayn R. Key // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:52 pm
@ dondero, #9
Pro-defense libertarians say “just do nothing” about Iran Elections.
Pro-war militant agressionist neoconservatives like yourself say we should bomb them if the election doesn’t turn out the way you like it.
38 Protestant Stalinist // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Robert, Don, et al, go back to the “Independent Icon” thread that has over 200 posts now. We need to make sure it beats the legendary Keaton thread which has 735 posts. The Protestant Stalinist Party disagrees with the Libertarian Party and advocates that Obama use his theological-political gravitas to impower Russia to invade Iran and restore it to the great Soviet Union where it belongs.
39 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Jim Davidson, American military intervention into Iran over elections cannot be compared to Russian military intervention into America over elections. Strictly in military terms, The former plausible, the latter sheer madness.
40 Catholic Trotskyist // Jun 18, 2009 at 4:55 pm
The Catholic Trotskyist party also says “go back to the Independent Icon” thread. It endorses the Libertarian Party’s position on the Iranian elections, however. The Iranian protesters are both libertarians as well as Islamic fellow travelers of Catholic Trotskyism. Moussavi has been reading this site and he is enacting the Fringe Alliance Left-Right Parallel Center fusion strategy of Catholic Trotskyism. Our Revolutionary General Barack Obama and the Holy Father Pope Benedict XVI only need to pray for the success of the new Iranian Catholic Trotskyist revolution, and that is enough, amen.
41 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Protestant Stalinist, if I thought beating the Keaton number was plausible and worthwhile, I’d join in the festivities. But I do not think so. Keaton is my #2 pick so far for vp. KK #1.
42 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:03 pm
sweet & sour Mary #3.
43 Steven R Linnabary // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:05 pm
I gotta’ agree with Michael, all the hypocrisy over Iran’s elections…and hardly a whimper from the MSM!
All in all, a good news release. And IF I had to give it any criticism, it would be with Susan self-identifying as …activist and organizer of the Party’s radical or hard-line faction…, rather than as a Libertarian activist and former member of the LNC (or some other “title”). But that is a very minor quibble!
PEACE
44 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Keaton is too focused (stuck on) on anti-war & Prop 8.& has no military experience like KK.
45 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:09 pm
KK is able to relax in the Virginia mountains & choose her battle.
46 Robert Milnes // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Whereas I am getting my electricity shut off in a few days & am checking maxed out credit cards for my next meal at WalMart. Sure would be nice to be mining gold in CA right now like I planned!
47 Steven R Linnabary // Jun 18, 2009 at 5:20 pm
OOOPPS!!
I gotta’ agree with Michael, all the hypocrisy over Iran’s elections…and hardly a whimper from the MSM…over massive fraud in US elections!
PEACE
48 libertariangirl // Jun 18, 2009 at 6:43 pm
TK_
LG,
You write:
“another great job TK”
Thanks, but I don’t deserve any credit on it — I’m still on CLiPr’s review board, but not especially active, and I’m no longer the coordinator. Susan Hogarth is.
me__ in that case another great job Susan
49 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 6:53 pm
I gotta’ agree with Michael, all the hypocrisy over Iran’s elections…and hardly a whimper from the MSM!
Naturally.
50 Mik Robertson // Jun 18, 2009 at 7:51 pm
@ 43 A very good assessment.
51 Mik Robertson // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:06 pm
@9 “Not all libertarians are leftwing pacifists, who cower in the face of fascism. Some of us do fight back. ”
If you want to look at the face of fascism, look at the Republican Party. Until we can implement liberty in the United States, it is probably not a good idea to try to do it elsewhere.
52 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:24 pm
“Regime change starts at home” is a good slogan. Too bad it was appropriated by a lot of folks who thought Obama represents any meaningful change.
53 Mik Robertson // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:35 pm
I agree Obama represents no meaningful change, although the tone of US foreign policy has improved somewhat. In the end, I think any foreign policy changes will be superficial.
54 Ross Levin // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:39 pm
paulie – I think they have very good information about the situations they put the military into, it’s just that they’re imperialist pigs and rather stupid (although that’s kind of redundant).
Here’s a good article about ’04 in Ohio vs. ’09 in Iran: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7224
55 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 8:45 pm
I think they have very good information about the situations they put the military into,
Military intelligence is so notoriously unreliable that calling it an oxymoron is not mere hyperbole.
56 Erik Geib // Jun 18, 2009 at 9:17 pm
If Eric Dondero is a ‘pro-war libertarian,’ then I suppose I could be an ‘anti-government progressive.’
Ha!
57 Susan Hogarth // Jun 18, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Daniel @18 says:
I would certainly hope that the President has access to high-quality intelligence of what is actually going on over there.
Yes, but whether he does or he does not, it’s still, I think, a bit unrealistic (or arrogant) to think that any rapidly-developing situation in a foreign culture halfway ’round the world can be understood enough to make informed decisions about intervening in others’ lives. Remember, this is *government* we’re talking about – incompetence walking. The same bureaucrats who gave us images of American soldiers being greeted in Iraq with flowers.
58 Mik Robertson // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:13 pm
@55 “Military intelligence is so notoriously unreliable that calling it an oxymoron is not mere hyperbole.”
There was that stretch in the early part of the invasion of Iran, er sorry, Iraq where the US military went zero for fifty with missile strikes targeting individuals based on intelligence information. Not only is it unreliable, it comes at huge expense not only in the cost of military hardware but human lives and property.
I have heard the intelligence community itself estimates they have a 50% accuracy rate. I can do that by flipping a coin.
I will offer my services to replace the military intelligence apparatus. Any time anyone needs an answer requiring information that the intelligence community could have provided, the President can call me and I will flip a coin. I will be as accurate if not more so than any intelligence used in recent history.
59 Susan Hogarth // Jun 18, 2009 at 10:53 pm
lg @48 thanks – just trying to fill Knapp’s stinky ole shoes
60 Susan Hogarth // Jun 18, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Steven @43 point well taken. I’m still not sure that was the best route. Some sort of national factional leadership role seemed more significant than state party outreach director, though
61 paulie // Jun 18, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Thanks Susan!
BTW, give me a call when you get a chance.
62 Susan Hogarth // Jun 18, 2009 at 11:07 pm
Oh, right, P. Saw you called. Avail now for quick chat.
63 Stefan // Jun 19, 2009 at 2:32 pm
Good PR Susan. If you think about, also with regard to Gaza in the beginning, no PR was released by the LP and I have also not seen their name on the letter and advertisement in the Washington Times to support HR 1207 “audit the Fed” bill, whereas I have seen other third parties, like the GP and CP plus a whole range of political organizations across the spectrum. Theya re really late off the mark. Int he PR, one could perhaps also add that both main contenders in Iran support nuclear power plants and this should be legitimate, Obama should have been called out at his suggestion that iran wants to manufactured nuclear weapons (didn’t he read the CIA report last year?) and a lifting of sanctions should have been suggested. Free trade with Iran will aide specially those protesting Iranians and open up the political way perhaps faster and more effectively than any of the “revolutionaries” there and we know a capitalistic society becomes more “capitalistic-libertarian” over due course. Iran has been quite libertarian in the past as well, so they have a strong history.
64 Stefan // Jun 19, 2009 at 2:38 pm
Notice hoe Eric Dondero does not allow for women to be libertarians, he is only addressing “girly men” and “men”, no women! And what does he want to attack in Iran??? The PM does NOT rule the country, why doesn’t he attack NK instead, that has NO election and no internet of any sort, so we do not know what is going on there.
Eric somehow manages to each time make himself laughable with his outrageous anti-libertarian statements, e.g. statements with both “right” and “left” libertarians want to strongly disassociate themselves from.
65 Stefan // Jun 19, 2009 at 2:42 pm
While Eric proclaims fascism in Iran, e.g. the merger between govt. and corporate power as per Mussolini’s definition, would he care to tell us all the “big” companies in Iran that expand so much and want to take over the world??? If you think about all Eric is writing, it is such a treat if it were not that he is actually serious.
66 Susan Hogarth // Jun 19, 2009 at 2:53 pm
“In the PR, one could perhaps also add that both main contenders in Iran support nuclear power plants and this should be legitimate…”
Thanks, Stefan – there were many things that could have been added (someone suggested pre-release adding info about the US gov’t meddling in Iran’s politics historically, which is also a good point). It’s always a temptation to turn a PR into a thesis, but I think it’s probably best to keep them tightly focused on a particular issue rather than going in-depth or trying to get complementary issues in.
Stefan, would you like to be part of the PR-writing team? I think we will be branching into op-eds and other types of communication soon (LTEs, vids, etc.). Be honored to have you aboard. Just let me know.
67 paulie // Jun 19, 2009 at 2:56 pm
would you like to be part of the PR-writing team? I think we will be branching into op-eds and other types of communication soon (LTEs, vids, etc.).
Sign me up, I may be able to help.
68 Susan Hogarth // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Paulie, I sent an invite (gmail). Didn’t you get it?
69 paulie // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:16 pm
No
70 paulie // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:17 pm
travellingcircus
two Ls
71 Susan Hogarth // Jun 19, 2009 at 3:23 pm
Re-sent.
72 Stefan // Jun 19, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Susan: yes, you are correct, and was thinking about it. It is best to keep it short and to the point, rather that focus on all the different aspects. State the principal simply. It is also easier to keep it straight and simple, as there could always be some who do not agree with a certain specific, or a fact or historical interpretation etc. It is better to attract the people first in the party, and then one can always discuss in more detail within a party or movement. Focus on the principle, and deal with the particular application of it in detail later. Well done, once again.
73 Susan Hogarth // Jun 19, 2009 at 7:16 pm
Stefan,
Thanks. I’ll send the check later.
74 Eric Dondero // Jun 20, 2009 at 6:28 am
Can someone explain please how sitting on our hands, and not standing up for democracy around the globe is a positive for the Liberty Movement?
Was it a good thing that Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge slaughtered over 2 million Cambodians in 1977/78/79, under Jimmy Carter’s “non-interventionist” foreign policy?
Was the murder of 2 million Cambodians something that leftist libertarians are proud of? Maybe you all look fondly upon that event of the past, and wish we would return to such policies?
75 Steven R Linnabary // Jun 20, 2009 at 9:07 am
Ironic Eric, that you would use today to complain about Carter sitting on his hands. On this date in 1979, ABC newsman Bill Stewart was shot by General Somoza’s National Guard (live, on national TV).
It was this horrific action that led directly to Somoza’s downfall and eventually to (at least somewhat) free elections in that Nicaragua.
It was precisely the US propping up the hated Prince Sihanouk in Cambodia that eventually led to his overthrow by the Khmer Rouge.
As a libertarian, I was ashamed of US support for the murderous and hated Sihanouk. At least with the Khmer, the US was not forcing the brutality on the people of Kampuchea.
Likewise with the overthrow of the hated US backed Somoza regime in Nicaragua, at least the US was not forcing our brutal military regime on the people.
I suppose your question is in response to the election protesters in Iran. Trouble is in that country the US has absolutely no credibility. It was in Iran that the US overthrew the elected government and imposed the sadistic Shah Reza Pahlavi on the people there.
The US as no credibility when it comes to imposing our regimes on people around the world.
But the people of Iran are better off today, as are the people of Nicaragua and Cambodia. And the US was not involved in imposing our dictatorships on any of them.
PEACE
76 Melty // Jun 20, 2009 at 9:32 am
If your trigger finger’s getting itchy, why not take out some really nasty but puny tyrants. That way you could knock out the whole job over the weekend, locals with flowers in the rearview mirror. I suggest snuffing off the entire ruling family of Equatorial Guinea. Or if that’s too obscure, take more colateral damage for more glory and perhaps a global standing ovation by mowing down the thugbosses of Myanmar. Just a thought.
77 Melty // Jun 20, 2009 at 9:50 am
…second thought, there’s too much work to do for such shenanigans. I say, get busy today to get the last man out of Kyrgyzstan by July fourth, rather than dawdle til August and let the door hit us in the ass.
Meanwhile, let the krauts and nips be, clear off of the Korean Peninsula and place them at safety in Guam,. . . . . .
78 libertariangirl // Jun 20, 2009 at 11:29 am
Dondero__Can someone explain please how sitting on our hands, and not standing up for democracy around the globe is a positive for the Liberty Movement?
me__ none of our business.everybodys had to fight to be free. nation building is not libertarian . Neither is interventionism.
my solution would be to hep enable the people themselves . You know the saying ‘if goods and services dont cross borders than armies will’. well id start there .
also id keep infecting their people with the spirit of freedom thru the internet and other ways , and watch what happens . IRAN will be free one day , but it aint our job to facilitate it.
79 libertariangirl // Jun 20, 2009 at 11:30 am
militarily that is
80 paulie // Jun 20, 2009 at 11:25 pm
The US ‘secret’ war in Cambodia, and the massive bombing of the civilian population, is what led the Khmer Rouge to power.
81 Deran // Jun 21, 2009 at 6:31 pm
It would be interesting to me to read a comparison among US third parties; Left (I know the PSL is very pro-Ahmedinejad and anti-protestors) Right and Center.
Leave a Comment