Originally Posted by firststrike01
It wouldnt matter if the US military built an entire infrastucture for all the 3rd world countries in the world. Becuase if it comes at the cost of a single human life that otherwise would have survived it isnt worth it. Also all of that infrastucure would be built with stolen money (taxes). And eveyone in the military is paid for with taxes. Im sure you would probly call anyone who is given money from a robbery an accomplice so why dont you say the same about anyone in the military? Because they are not providing a wanted service for many people they are taking from. But I wouldnt even mind that last fact as much If they werent also helping a criminal organization kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people.
LOL im sure you will dismiss my logic because if doesnt fit your tyranical world views.
First I dont dismiss your logic instead I question the very foundation of it..
You claim taxes are theft and yet there is (though you express otherwise) no gunman at your home asking for taxes. You willing choose to pay them when you choose to live in this country. But in any case lets continue on
1) You failed to provide any sort of rebuttal for chaplains, medics, and other support personnel who are not actively engaged in fighting so im assuming you are granting me that point.
2) You provide peace as a sort of measure that anyone can just agree to and assume everyone else agrees to it as well. What would happen if the United States foreign policy were entirely devoted to pure peace and no fighting? Dont you think another nation would immediately attempt to invade the nation?
3) You made an argumentative fallacy when you claimed that
"It wouldnt matter if the US military built an entire infrastucture for all the 3rd world countries in the world. Becuase if it comes at the cost of a single human life that otherwise would have survived it isnt worth it."
I would dare say if most third world countries were given the option to execute 1 man in exchange for an immediately leap into modern infrastructure the choice would be completed and the person executed within a matter of minutes not hours. But personal viewpoints aside the argument is a pure fallacy of logic. The premise you begin with doesnt even lead to the conclusions you provide. Mostly because you provide no argument at all.. Are we supposed to take your conclusion at face value with no explanation? You claim military personnel and those who support them are brainwashed yet you seem to take your conclusions at face value much like a person who is brain washed would do so.
4) You have provided absolutely NO logical, factual, implied, or perceived notion as to how you seek to establish peace without a military force behind that peace.
5) You have provided no methodology for governance without taxation.
6) You have not in fact provided any logical argumentation for your views, ideas, or methods and are merely here to provide ad hominen fallacious attempts at rebuttal.
7) You completely fail to produce any sort of logical argumentation period. You cannot seem to produce an argument that can even stand to basic validity tests much less soundness...
Since you likely dont understand let me define validity for you
"In logic, an argument is valid if and only if its conclusion is entailed by its premises and each step in the argument is valid."
8) When you can produce a valid and sound argument in which you explain both A) how you can run a governmental system over a reasonably sized population without taxation of any form and B) how you propose society as a whole enact peace without a military force behind said peace then perhaps people will take you seriously...
9) You never provide any sort of references for your facts you merely express them as fact purely because you say so?
Originally Posted by firststrike01
Fact: your 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist!
Fact: your 4 times more likely to die from lightning than a terrorist!
Do you want to start a war on police or lightning?? lol
You seem to be 100 times more likely to make up statistics as well
Maybe you just dont really know h ow to build your argument... ill try to help you in as objective a manner as possible...
Would you agree in your view point that
A) Human life is one of the most valuable precious things.
B) Any act by another human being which destroys another human life no matter the reason is inherently wrong.
C) Thus, if a person kills another person for any reason what so ever they are inherently and intrinsically wrong.
D) As such, any governmental system, corporation, or person who engages in human destruction or allows it to be committed is equally as wrong as the individual who does the killing.
Is this your basic position?