Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 61 to 67 of 67

Thread: How should the US respond to sanctions?

  1. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    2,882

    Default

    The only response the US government would find rational is to attack a third country which has no involvement in the matter, similar to 9/11 and Iraq.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #62
    Truth is treason ... Occam's Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Empire of Lies
    Posts
    7,214
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    LOL. You pulled *exactly* the same duck-and-dodge in the other thread, too.

    So, I'll just have to repeat the response I gave you there:

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Sorry, try again. I did NOT offer a false dilemma.

    Either sanctions are an aggressive/initiatory use of force which can justifiably be met with defensive/retaliatory use of force, or they are not.

    You can argue one or the other, but not both.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Every government, and the international community disagrees with you.
    Argumentum ad verecundiam et populum.
    quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus approbetur · fiat justitia, ruat caelum · sic semper tyrannis
    The Bastiat Collection - FREE PDF

    Frédéric Bastiat
    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      - The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      - Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      - Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      - Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

  4. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tsai3904 View Post
    I'm not really looking for one answer that will make me understand everything and be done with this thread. Just trying to facilitate discussion so if you want to come up with your hypotheticals, go ahead.

    I'm wondering would people here who are very non-interventionist support a military war if very harsh sanctions were imposed on us. Say if our sanctions on Iran were instead imposed on us by a powerful country, would that justify us sending boots on the ground to said powerful country (regardless of each country's military strength).
    I am noninterventionist and I would probably support the war. (If hypothetically, Iran was a global superpower with influence reaching far beyond it's border, etc.) Resist by all means possible. Especially if said country had obvious plans of wanting to come and plunder our rich resources, or said country was dicking around for decades causing a by and large authoritarian regime to be able to seize power oppressing everyday folk. Hard to compare apples to oranges on whether I'd support the war. I support the right to defend yourself and property. That's as simple as I can say it.
    As for those who said: "Let us eliminate every injustice, for there is no such thing as a partial injustice; let us tolerate no robbery, for there is no such thing as a half-robbery or a quarter-robbery," they were regarded as idle visionaries, tiresome dreamers who kept repeating the same thing over and over again. Besides, the people found their arguments too easy to understand. How can one believe that what is so simple can be true?

  5. #64

    Default

    If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad kidnapped Michelle Obama, would the USA be justified in sieging Tehran for ten years, or just until 2016?
    Stop the Looting and Start Prosecuting! Gold plated Tungsten IS Money!
    We Must Dissent A colher não existe.
    A government is just a body of people, notably, usually, ungoverned.

    "You mean this entire war started because The Empire dressed as the enemy? That's exactly what happened in the last major war! Our government is so stupid!"

  6. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tsai3904 View Post
    Ok pretend a made up country that we have no relationship with imposes sanctions on us. What is the right response?
    Your loss.
    If the entire world imposes sanctions on the US?
    American made goods will become common again.
    I yearned for a reason, I sought and I fought only to realize that there are no reasons but the ones we choose.
    As in all things, choose wisely. You are, after all, the aggregate of your choices.

    Choose your reason, become you're reason

    Semper Fi

  7. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wallingford, CT & Eastern Shore, VA
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by idiom View Post
    If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad kidnapped Michelle Obama, would the USA be justified in sieging Tehran for ten years, or just until 2016?
    Now that is a false dichotomy.

  8. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    California, Iowa & Texas
    Posts
    406

    Default

    USA foreign interventionism by the neocons have caused an influx of Iraqi and other refugees seeking asylum in nations all over Europe.

    So how should USA aggresssion be handled by the European and world community ?

    The USA will have to feel the pain and be responsible for it's aggression around the world eventually, n'est ce pas ?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123




« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •