It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Simple Truth In Three Sentences

page: 4
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

First, I never said I wouldn't defend my country..just that i would not use violence. In time of crisis, there will always be a need for medics, for those helping evacuate others, those making sure things work. By saying you, one devoted to the idea of defending one's things, would set my house afire...denying me of my liberties, possessions and pursuit if happiness, have proved to me that not only are you as bad as these hypothetical invaders, but that I should not ever consider Libertarianism. Thank you. Good day, sir.


Yes because one person should influence your already made up mind???

There are many forms of service.

If medical is your inclination, that is service is it not?

I misunderstood before.

I even commented after this post how medical carecwas service.

That is service, some of the hardest in fact.

I myself couldn't do it.

Better I die in combat, that I could bare more easily than serving the wounded.

It takes a special kind of courage to make that distinction.

I could not do it.

I applaud you stating you would.

It is a easier to watch your buddies just die in front of you than the slow lingering death in a hospital.


You have balls of steel so big they clink when you walk.

I would have to walk away, I could not watch men in that state and keep my sanity for long.




posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:16 AM
link   
a reply to: johnwick

I also apologize for heated words. I personally feel I would serve better alleviating the suffering of others than inflicting it. I don';t know about clinking balls - I just refuse to stand idly by when another suffers. That is my call, my duty and my responsibility.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Ironhawke


First, I never said I wouldn't defend my country..


Well, you certainly could have clarified. Were you trying to goad me into a reaction by lying through omission? You have to admit that the concept of a person not helping their community during a crisis is pretty uncool.

And I've been on this website long enough that I'm sure everyone knows I'm prone to emotional outbursts every once in a while.



just that i would not use violence. In time of crisis, there will always be a need for medics, for those helping evacuate others, those making sure things work.


Yes, and those are very good things.



By saying you, one devoted to the idea of defending one's things, would set my house afire...denying me of my liberties, possessions and pursuit if happiness, have proved to me that not only are you as bad as these hypothetical invaders, but that I should not ever consider Libertarianism. Thank you. Good day, sir.


Assuming thatyou're a Democrat, and all Democrats choke the chicken to images of Sheldon Cooper, because liberals are far more advanced at logic and science than everyone else and love them some Sheldon Cooper--then surely you could see why this glaring fallacy of authoritarian, ugliness is horrendously invalid, right??

Just because I'm a grouchy human being, doesn't mean that Libertarianism isn't a reasonable political party.

And, yes, if an army invaded and I watched someone simply do absolutely nothing as their community died around them (my original assumption due to your omission), I would, most likely, become right and proper upset.

But, contrary to your poor logic, my emotional disposition does not qualify as the proper measure of the validity of Libertarian ideas. I am but one human, and just as existentially flawed as any other.
edit on 2-4-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-4-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

This is the wall Libertarianism keeps running into - it denies liberty. You simply cannot conceive that defense can also incorporate those who will not kill. Guess the only clergy in a Libertarian society have Scripture in on hand and a gun in the other. So much for turning the other cheek. This scenario also denies personal responsibility by giving only one choice : fight. You claim that you hate the binary Republican/Democrat paradigm, yet are blind to your own binary options. Thank God this is not the monstrous society you envision.

You claim I am shirking responsibility by not fighting, when I have quite plainly explained that one can defend in ways not violence-related. And by the by, my non-violence extends only to myself, not others. By your own words Christ, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and all who have used non violence in their beliefs to change the world are shirkers and should have no say.

This is the monstrosity. This is the crisis. A world where you determine what is right for those who see different. I pity you. I truly do, for by your admission, Libertarianism is greed, division and love of self more than others.


I starred you and commented on this 2 times prior to reading this post.

Healing is service.

You never mentioned this, otherwise I would gave not made the prior remarks.

I will not edit them, because doing so cheapens the readers understanding of the dialog.

I misunderstood your position as healer not a fighter.

This changes nothing though.

I am not the be all end all of libertarians.

Why would my words turn your opinion so easily?

I don't speak for all.

I speak only for myself.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:22 AM
link   
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

First, my apologies. This is one of those hot-button topics for me, as well. Second, there was no intended attempt to lie by omission - I posted several times about my belief that I could defend in non-violent ways. As fir the others...yes, I vote Democrat only until something better comes along, yes I love me some Sheldon Cooper, and no, just because I revere Spock does not mean I'm any good at logic. Again, my apologies.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

First, my apologies. This is one of those hot-button topics for me, as well. Second, there was no intended attempt to lie by omission - I posted several times about my belief that I could defend in non-violent ways. As fir the others...yes, I vote Democrat only until something better comes along, yes I love me some Sheldon Cooper, and no, just because I revere Spock does not mean I'm any good at logic. Again, my apologies.


Apology accepted, and I promise I won't burn down your house.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:31 AM
link   
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Oh good, cause just about the only possessions I really care about are my computer and my books lol



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

I also apologize for heated words. I personally feel I would serve better alleviating the suffering of others than inflicting it. I don';t know about clinking balls - I just refuse to stand idly by when another suffers. That is my call, my duty and my responsibility.


Sir!!

You sell yourself short of your position!!!

Anyone willing to work a field hospital has my absolute gratitude.

We have disagreed before.

But the clinking of you your balls when you walk is our biggest.

Many can fight.

Few have the proper empathy for the healing arts.

I would happily fight in defense of your medcenter if it was needed.

I am the other type.

I am not made for healing.

I am gruff and aggressive when my folks are threatened.

I resort to physical negotiations when they decide that's the road they want to follow.

Others are the diplomats.

I am not not that class.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

First, my apologies. This is one of those hot-button topics for me, as well. Second, there was no intended attempt to lie by omission - I posted several times about my belief that I could defend in non-violent ways. As fir the others...yes, I vote Democrat only until something better comes along, yes I love me some Sheldon Cooper, and no, just because I revere Spock does not mean I'm any good at logic. Again, my apologies.


Your service in defense of your country certainly wouldn't have to be with a gun in your hand. If I ever fell wounded I would be grateful for men like you. I am not sure why this is a 'hot button' issue for you. Libertarians are happy to let you live any life you wish. We just don't want to be forced to change our lives for you.

Now if we were invaded we can all find a role to defend our homes and families. It doesn't need to be violent, but to sit by while your friends and family were killed and deprived of their property would be heinous.

Oh, btw, Libertarianism IS that better thing you have been waiting for...just come join us!




posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 02:32 AM
link   
How in the everloving blue hell did we just have a discussion about Libertarianism become 3 pages of war and fighting? I ask this largely because we are currently witnessing that there is zero difference between Democrat and Republican national leaders where warfare is concerned... both parties wage endless war for (global corporate) profit. As a Libertarian, if I'm asked "what about wars?" my answer is first and foremost "What wars? Ain't gonna be no *snip* because a true Libertarian president ain't gonna start no *snip*." Aside from Afghanistan, what was the last war the United States was involved in which the United States didn't initiate? When was the last time another nation attacked the USA? By my calendar, we're looking at Pearl Harbor... an event which occurred 75 freaking years ago. Since that point in time, an endless stream of globalist empire building has taken place, conducted y a steady stream of GOP and Democrat presidents and Congresses. But yes, let's obfuscate the issue and pretend that a Libertarian US government is going to result in some form of massive war requiring conscription and warfare within the contiguous 48. :rolleyes:

ETA( As to the left or right leaning Libertarian issue raised a couple of posts above mine, I'm a far right leaning Libertarian with a major caveat. Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone, meddle in my business, however, and I am extremely socially and economically to the right side in defense and retaliation against government nannying, stranger's hands shoved into my pockets grubbing after my money, and expectations for any sort of personal belief shift to accommodate whatever special interest of the day is in style at the moment.)
edit on 2-4-2015 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 04:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: greencmp




Yes though, they are adamant that it be reserved for defensive use only.


Well there you go than, Libertarian FAIL!

How are you suppose to make peace and friends if you don't go and blow up neighbourhoods across from yours.

You can only have peace as long as you keep everyone else fighting among themselves, and hope they never figure out that you are the catalyst.

Silly Libertarian , Everyone knows that you must $hit in your neighbors yard so they don't want to $hit in your yard. Its just political cheerleader common sense. Get with the KoolAid , ahh I mean game.


I guess that was kinda funny, sort of. Maybe?

Not sure.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: doompornjunkie
a reply to: Ironhawke

Ha I get it!

All of your posts are in honor of April fools! Dude you almost had me for a second.


lol



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: doompornjunkie
a reply to: Ironhawke

Ha I get it!

All of your posts are in honor of April fools! Dude you almost had me for a second.


lol



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 04:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: Metallicus

Libertarian lean to either the left or right; rarely nonpartisan. Bill O'Reilly swears he is a Libertarian. Believe him?


And here I am thinking that libertarians were the smokers.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 05:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: johnwick

This is the wall Libertarianism keeps running into - it denies liberty. You simply cannot conceive that defense can also incorporate those who will not kill. Guess the only clergy in a Libertarian society have Scripture in on hand and a gun in the other. So much for turning the other cheek. This scenario also denies personal responsibility by giving only one choice : fight. You claim that you hate the binary Republican/Democrat paradigm, yet are blind to your own binary options. Thank God this is not the monstrous society you envision.

You claim I am shirking responsibility by not fighting, when I have quite plainly explained that one can defend in ways not violence-related. And by the by, my non-violence extends only to myself, not others. By your own words Christ, Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and all who have used non violence in their beliefs to change the world are shirkers and should have no say.

This is the monstrosity. This is the crisis. A world where you determine what is right for those who see different. I pity you. I truly do, for by your admission, Libertarianism is greed, division and love of self more than others.


I am actually very encouraged by this discussion.

It seems like, with a few simple clarifications, you might well be disabused of your erroneous preconceptions about libertarians.

Most of the complaints you have made are not relevant or incorrect. I don't want to just declare the 'truth' and presume conversion, you will have to do a lot of research of your own to convince yourself but, I think you might well change your mind if you do.




posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

Depends on what it is they are smoking.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimNasium
Guten Tag- I read the following which was part of a post re: Worship = War Ship...

"The Truth" doesn't need anybody speaking for it. The Truth needs no book, no doctrine, no dogma, no hierarchy. Truth stands on it own, the rest is pushing to compete with The Truth, which is "falsehood".

If Your truth needs to be PUSHED how true is it really?

The Truth is the only thing that never changes, in a world where "change" is the only 'constant'...

namaste
one of those quotes that looks good, until you actually pay attention to it and realize it's a load of crap.

The truth is far from being an unmistakable monolith that's impossible to ignore. It's the exact opposite. More like a flower than a mountain.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ironhawke
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Ah, mob rule, then. Or another way to look at it : Rule by Strong, which is what this would inevitably fall to. One would only be free so long as others agreed with that freedom. I'm free to be nonviolent, as long as my neighbour approves. I am free to love who my community approves. I can have any business I wish, as long as my peers deem it ok. Somehow, I doubt this was what the Founding Fathers envisioned.


Full blown libertarianism is world wide libertarianism. There would be no countries or wars in a libertarian economy, and everyone would be the richer for that.

Until there are no countries, our country will have to keep some kind of defense force. A nuke-them-while-they-are-crossing-the-ocean insurance policy would be enough to start. Libertarianism would invent defense systems that favor libertarianism over time.

Some day the world will be libertarian, because its the way people naturally live.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Metallicus

Libertarians believe in individual liberty, personal responsibility, no wars and don't care what you believe, what you do or how you live your life.



Sounds really great!

Well until you realize that about 250 million in America really do not care about any of this above... oh what a great world that would be...


Good point!

The 250 million people are made that way.

If they were raised watching libertarianism, working to get what they wanted would be normal. Right now normal is ignorance and nanny state dependency.



posted on Apr, 2 2015 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Heres a truth for you. In a capitalist society, human beings will absolutely trample on whoever gets in their way in order to have the largest portion of pie they can get.
This truth is what Libertarians (and Republicans) fail to grasp.
That we are still a CIVIL society and the less amongst us deserves to be protected. Were it not for Government stepping in, anybody who wasn't a land owning white christian male would be the only ones allowed to survive in this country.




top topics



 
33
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join