You need to read up more on your history books. The reason that Congress is forced to vote, EVERY YEAR, on a standing army is to ensure that it is necessary.
If the framers wanted a large and permanent military, they wouldn't make Congress vote every year to keep it going.
Your article qouted hardly any founding father nor the constitution correctly. It managed to qoute Henry David Thoreau, a transcendalist! lololol!
infact it left out this whole passage;
Quote:
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
This states specifically what is allowed to fund by raising taxes. The constitution designated taxes for keeping a military. To say that funding a military is Big Govt like Marcus Douchant by implying its discretionary and un american is idiocy.
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
So it's every two years instead of one.
And, for the dense such as gtown, the military in its current incarnation is most certainly excessive in scale and scope. That's the argument, not that the mere existence of the armed forces is "big government."
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Yawn. Until you are able to follow the conversation, you can return to your bush action figure doll.
Sure, you think that while you pleasure yourself with your john Birch plaster of paris appendage. See how completely easy that was? Useless.
Quote:
Isolationism is not opposition to shooting up half of the Middle East in order to spread "freedom." That's called sanity.
Neoconservatism is not confined to military action fool. Neoconservatism is more than often spreading representative democracies through diplomacy and backing revolutions without having to invade countries. Poland and Western Europe are examples. Lebanon is another prime example.
The Iraq war was not primarily advanced because of Neoconservative ideals, but at first because it was sold as an immediate threat. Neconservative and preemptive military action are not synonomous.
Quote:
Neoconservatism is nothing other than the progressivism of the Roosevelts and Wilson, rediscovered. The amusing thing is that today's "conservatives" fail to grasp that the tradition they uphold is simply the progressive militarism of a century ago.
More of MB's "Look at me!' i'm a purist douche. Wilsonianism is only applied to recent neoconservatism only because of some of the empty rhetoric of Wilson's 14 points. Wilson's actual foreign policy was to prop up military coercion through an International Party, Neoconservatives today believe Wilson to be naive and are distrustive towards International govts.
True Wilsonian philosophy is more attributed towards Jimmy Carter. Infact if we just focus on Neo Conservatism, we see it's a rival to Kissinger, Nixon, And Bush 1, amoral national foreign policy. Policies that Marcus now attributes to leading to the shit we have in the ME after WW2.
Quote:
Waging war is a bipartisan affair, as it expands the power of the state at the expense of lost individual liberty.
LOL, it's also a constitutional affair, otherwise the constitution wouldn't differentiate between times of war and peace. LOL!
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
So it's every two years instead of one.
And, for the dense such as gtown, the military in its current incarnation is most certainly excessive in scale and scope. That's the argument, not that the mere existence of the armed forces is "big government."
Yes it's excessive if we still had the big nasty British occupying the great Lakes and Canada, and 3/4ths of our congress was backing France!:lol:lol
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Yes, gtown is that stupid.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Yes, gtown is that stupid.
You know when Marcus Bryant has been owned when....:lol
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
And, for the dense such as gtown, the military in its current incarnation is most certainly excessive in scale and scope. That's the argument, not that the mere existence of the armed forces is "big government."
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Claiming that since the Constitution authorizes the existence of the military, that justifies its current bloated state and wars of preemption (not to mention other military ventures) in pursuit of liberating the world by force is asinine. Only a truly deluded neoconservative would believe that.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
Yes it's excessive if we still had the big nasty British occupying the great Lakes and Canada, and 3/4ths of our congress was backing France!:lol:lol
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
Sure, you think that while you pleasure yourself with your john Birch plaster of paris appendage. See how completely easy that was? Useless.
Yes, you are.
Quote:
Neoconservatism is not confined to military action fool. Neoconservatism is more than often spreading representative democracies through diplomacy and backing revolutions without having to invade countries. Poland and Western Europe are examples. Lebanon is another prime example.
BFD. It attempts to justify wars not on the basis of national defense, but rather in terms of spreading "democracy" in foreign states.
Quote:
The Iraq war was not primarily advanced because of Neoconservative ideals, but at first because it was sold as an immediate threat. Neconservative and preemptive military action are not synonomous.
Oh, the neoconservatives had a major hand in that, and not to mention that Bush eventually settled on 'spreading democracy' as the causa belli.
Quote:
Wilsonianism is only applied to recent neoconservatism only because of some of the empty rhetoric of Wilson's 14 points. Wilson's actual foreign policy was to prop up military coercion through an International Party, Neoconservatives today believe Wilson to be naive and are distrustive towards International govts.
So the flavor's changed a little, but it's still the same old shit stew.
Quote:
True Wilsonian philosophy is more attributed towards Jimmy Carter. Infact if we just focus on Neo Conservatism, we see it's a rival to Kissinger, Nixon, And Bush 1, amoral national foreign policy. Policies that Marcus now attributes to leading to the shit we have in the ME after WW2.
[/B]
What war did Carter drag the US into in order to extend democracy? Moron.
Quote:
LOL, it's also a constitutional affair, otherwise the constitution wouldn't differentiate between times of war and peace. LOL!
Is there ever a time of peace? Both parties prefer a permanent state of war in order to limit the constitutional liberties of the people. Predictably, you were yet unable to understand the obvious.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Claiming that since the Constitution authorizes the existence of the military, that justifies its current bloated state and wars of preemption (not to mention other military ventures) in pursuit of liberating the world by force is asinine. Only a truly deluded neoconservative would believe that.
:whine
Yes, Marcus Bryant, we know you can repost the same bull over and over. Let me see, how did we change Lebanon and POland, western Europe by force?
If you could actually post your own thought rather than verbatim regurgitated by self important tools, you'd actually prove your point.
You have been proven that your assertion and fears that neoconservatives want to spread peace in every single corner of earth as fallacious. If you're just going to repeat the same things all over again, then again, you are the deluded one.
And as far as the military being bloated, the Soviets have violated the Monroe doctrine even to this day, and we've beefed up intelligence and third way methods along with infrastructure to protect our trade, and our way of life. The Founding Fathers did not experience this kind of phenomanae in their day, wait..... They did!
The british were blockading the great lakes and charging ridiculous taxes on merchant ships, the French and the SPanish were intent on encroaching towards our established expansion plans, we in turn backed the Texas Revolution to spread representative democracy, and then we launched attacks on indians loyal to britian and its navy. ROFL!
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Yes, it's been proven to me that the wise neoconservatives don't want to 'spread democracy' by citing examples of when democracy was spread and claiming the neoconservatives deserve credit for that.
Before I forget, in what article of the Constitution lies the Monroe Doctrine?
There is no justification for spending half a trillion a year on the military, unless you believe that the American state should be spreading democracy around the world, like the delusional neoconservatives.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Yes, you are.
It's easy to bring the 4th grader out of Marcus everytime.
Quote:
BFD. It attempts to justify wars not on the basis of national defense, but rather in terms of spreading "democracy" in foreign states.
No, that was True wilsonianism, it was intent on spreading democracy because of its belief in that superior form of govt. Neoconservatism use democracy because they believe it is vital for our defense interest. A distinct difference in that one, and also that NeoConservatism is very much anti UN.
Infact i have to remind you that your hero Eisenhower, who railed against a bloated military did infact employ neoconservative dogma.:rollin
Quote:
What war did Carter drag the US into in order to extend democracy? Moron.
I agree with using the word moron here, cept its the Moron who is still stuck on the cable news rhetoric of "neoconservative= invasion of territories." After already providing examples inwhich neoconservative policy didn't use force, you still manage like the true idiot you are to repeat this same fallacy. The flavor has yet changed and still the same shit stew.
On to Carter, Carter advocating changing foreign governments for "human rigths". He altered the wilsonian doctrine from "democracy" to a more specific "human rights" cause. Again, Neoconservatism doesn't have to call for military action, see Poland, Lebanon.
Quote:
Is there ever a time of peace? Both parties prefer a permanent state of war in order to limit the constitutional liberties of the people. Predictably, you were yet unable to understand the obvious.
I understand the cynicism behind that belief, and to a point it's partially true. So now that you admitted that you were wrong about the constitution's implication of limited liberties in times of war, i expect a thank you.:lmao
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
It's easy to bring the 4th grader out of Marcus everytime.
I thought that'd make it easier for you to understand.
Quote:
No, that was True wilsonianism, it was intent on spreading democracy because of its belief in that superior form of govt. Neoconservatism use democracy because they believe it is vital for our defense interest. A distinct difference in that one, and also that NeoConservatism is very much anti UN.
Infact i have to remind you that your hero Eisenhower, who railed against a bloated military did infact employ neoconservative dogma.:rollin
Ike isn't necessarily my "hero."
Quote:
I agree with using the word moron here, cept its the Moron who is still stuck on the cable news rhetoric of "neoconservative= invasion of territories." After already providing examples inwhich neoconservative policy didn't use force, you still manage like the true idiot you are to repeat this same fallacy. The flavor has yet changed and still the same shit stew.
On to Carter, Carter advocating changing foreign governments for "human rigths". He altered the wilsonian doctrine from "democracy" to a more specific "human rights" cause. Again, Neoconservatism doesn't have to call for military action, see Poland, Lebanon.
It doesn't have to, but it has, in total accord with its doctrine.
Quote:
I understand the cynicism behind that belief, and to a point it's partially true. So now that you admitted that you were wrong about the constitution's implication of limited liberties in times of war, i expect a thank you.:lmao
I admitted no such thing. Both parties enjoy claiming the need to limit civil liberties in a state of war.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Yes, it's been proven to me that the wise neoconservatives don't want to 'spread democracy' by citing examples of when democracy was spread and claiming the neoconservatives deserve credit for that.
Before I forget, in what article of the Constitution lies the Monroe Doctrine?
There is no justification for spending half a trillion a year on the military, unless you believe that the American state should be spreading democracy around the world, like the delusional neoconservatives.
Wow, first of all Marcus Bryant i don't pretend to know everything like you do.
Second, who implied the Monroe Doctrine was in the constitution? What a sad example of MB trying to grasp for strawmen to seem as if he's won any point yet. Let's see i used the Monroe Doctrine as an example to justify military buildup because James Monroe was a founding father, and he knew of our constitution's purpose and didn't see a conflict in applying such doctrine. It was used as an example to give credence to the fact that we were fighting Soviet intervention because of their violiation, which we as americans have held as our duty to keep for the past 150+ years. To Marcus Bryant, American political thought has never left Washington's farewell address.
3rd, Military buildup has been used for reasons outside of Neoconservatism, to imply that that's the sole reason why military buildup occurs is naive or at the worst deliberately misinformative. Either case could be legit with MB since he's both dishonest and naive.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
[QUOTE=Marcus Bryant;3511773]I thought that'd make it easier for you to understand.[/QOUTE]
No, i already understood your disposition.
Quote:
It doesn't have to, but it has, in total accord with its doctrine.
You're a quarter of the way there, cmon, maybe you should get into 4th grade mode, i could simplify it for you there once you get there.
Quote:
I admitted no such thing. Both parties enjoy claiming the need to limit civil liberties in a state of war.
Ofcourse you never denied that the constitution never talked about times of war and peace, i responded to you in this manner because you were talking as if Limited Liberties was an extraconstitutional clause not in our law. That was the whole point of that argument, thanks.
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
Wow, first of all Marcus Bryant i don't pretend to know everything like you do.
I guess that's only when you don't.
Quote:
Second, who implied the Monroe Doctrine was in the constitution? What a sad example of MB trying to grasp for strawmen to seem as if he's won any point yet. Let's see i used the Monroe Doctrine as an example to justify military buildup because James Monroe was a founding father, and he knew of our constitution's purpose and didn't see a conflict in applying such doctrine. It was used as an example to give credence to the fact that we were fighting Soviet intervention because of their violiation, which we as americans have held as our duty to keep for the past 150+ years. To Marcus Bryant, American political thought has never left Washington's farewell address.
Obviously the founding fathers intended for wars of preemption and a massive standing army because the Constitution granted to the legislature the power to establish a military.
Quote:
3rd, Military buildup has been used for reasons outside of Neoconservatism, to imply that that's the sole reason why military buildup occurs is naive or at the worst deliberately misinformative. Either case could be legit with MB since he's both dishonest and naive.
I never said that was the sole reason. Again and again, you misquote, miscite, and completely misrepresent my argument.
The original discussion, which of course you sought out as a means to attempt to exonerate neoconservatism from its disaster in Iraq, was whether libertarianism was compatible with a military of the size and budget well beyond what is needed to defend this nation, wars of preemption, and the curtailment of civil liberties. It is not.
The true 4th graders in this thread are the ones who believe that that federal government should be spreading democracy around the world. For the state is good and doubly good when it invades 3rd world countries and kills scores of brown people in order to liberate them from the asshole who we had a hand in installing there in the first place.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
I guess that's only when you don't.
Obviously the founding fathers intended for wars of preemption and a massive standing army because the Constitution granted to the legislature the power to establish a military.
I never said that was the sole reason. Again and again, you misquote, miscite, and completely misrepresent my argument.
The original discussion, which of course you sought out as a means to attempt to exonerate neoconservatism from its disaster in Iraq, was whether libertarianism was compatible with a military of the size and budget well beyond what is needed to defend this nation, wars of preemption, and the curtailment of civil liberties. It is not.
The true 4th graders in this thread are the ones who believe that that federal government should be spreading democracy around the world. For the state is good and doubly good when it invades 3rd world countries and kills scores of brown people in order to liberate them from the asshole who we had a hand in installing there in the first place.
ORLY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Yes, it's been proven to me that the wise neoconservatives don't want to 'spread democracy' by citing examples of when democracy was spread and claiming the neoconservatives deserve credit for that.
Before I forget, in what article of the Constitution lies the Monroe Doctrine?
There is no justification for spending half a trillion a year on the military, unless you believe that the American state should be spreading democracy around the world, like the delusional neoconservatives.
:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Nevertheless, i didn't see the Team America video coming.
Also, Since you seem to never go off the "Neocons are synonomous with warmongers" script, it seems this endeavour is futile.
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Why should I not? It's the latest shining example of the American state "spreading democracy." Wilson's experiment led the greatest global conflict of the 20th Century.
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtownspur
ORLY?
Sure, I never said it was the reason for the build up. The quote you offer regards maintaining the military at its current level. Duh.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcus Bryant
Sure, I never said it was the reason for the build up. The quote you offer regards maintaining the military at its current level. Duh.
backtracking eh? you did say that the current buildup is only justified for neocons reasons. Your qoute not mine. As far as being specific about the current buildup, unless you subtract the iraq war that's only 300 billion a year at its peak, most of the military buildup is towards things other than nation building. We withdraw out of iraq, we still have a huge millitary budget so i don't see how this helps your argument.
07-01-2009
Wild Cobra
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
I think Marcus is just a troll, attempting to act like a libertarian.
07-01-2009
gtownspur
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I think Marcus is just a troll, attempting to act like a libertarian.
nah, just a tool.
07-01-2009
Marcus Bryant
Re: Will legalizing weed fix the economy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wild Cobra
I think Marcus is just a troll, attempting to act like a libertarian.
LOL. Yeah, because a real libertarian would be for preemptive wars, a military empire stretching across the globe, and the state torturing and spying on people.
You only latched on to the libertarian label after you and your ilk managed to shit on the conservative one enough such that it's now an epithet in American politics.
