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

Thread: How should the US respond to sanctions?

  1. #61


    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


    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.
    Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons. - Ron Paul

    Paul Krugman's column refuted, week after week!
    a weekly podcast by Tom Woods and Bob Murphy

  4. #63


    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.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  5. #64


    If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad kidnapped Michelle Obama, would the USA be justified in sieging Tehran for ten years, or just until 2016?
    In New Zealand:
    The Coastguard is a Charity
    Air Traffic Control is a private company run on user fees
    The DMV is a private non-profit
    Rescue helicopters and ambulances are operated by charities and are plastered with corporate logos
    The agriculture industry has zero subsidies
    5% of the national vote, gets you 5 seats in Parliament
    A tax return has 4 fields
    Business licenses aren't even a thing

  6. #65


    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.
    Best of luck in life.

  7. #66
    Wallingford, CT & Eastern Shore, VA

    Join Date
    Apr 2010


    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 California, Iowa & Texas

    Join Date
    Apr 2010


    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