To claim that giving out food occasionally or whatever else you think “good” they do is far outshadowed by the murder they commit with the dollars stolen for them.
Thief! Scum! What right have you to go and get a job where you KNOW you will get your precious student loans paid by my stolen hard-earned money? You go in, smilingly, willingly, to steal from me from your own benefit. You are worse than a welfare mom, because at least she does nothing for the money. You’ll become a uniformed murderer for it! I can’t believe someone who calls themselves an anarchist would ever do this.
Did I say you are ? What I do say is that you seem to be justifying a lot of previous wars.
Did I say I’m offended ? Actually the one who sounds sore is you.
Yes. And at the same time you are trying to justify a lot of destruction and aggression - Do you seriously think that anyone here believes your propaganda on the cold war ?
I wasn’t talking about ‘your’ crimes. On the other hand, are you telling me you think that no crime was ever committed by the American military ? I mean, like wiping out whole cities, that kind of stuff ?
Just like you.
Such is life.
You seem to be missing a piece of information here : the ‘mothers of plaza de mayo’ is the outgrowth of an informal left-wing army. As such they would be quite glad shooting me. I can probably expect a more fair treatment from the US government than from these guys.
So Firefighters, Policeman, and Ron Paul are also scum for taking stolen money. I am just taking an advancement on the money that will be stolen from me in the future anyways 
I am not willing to steal from you at all and do not know where you reached that conclusion. I am not joining the IRS. We need to remember that defence is a legitimate service, but it is done terribly by the state. As for murder, I do not plan to kill anyone unless they try to kill me, or others. So that would not be in the category of murderer.
BTW: you are more of a thief for not acknoledging land as property:)
That’s a dispute over the definition of property, I am operating on good faith and believe what I say, and in any case from another thread. You, on the other hand, know full well that your room, board, and precious gun will be paid for by stolen money. My money, which you have no right to. Your perspective is very convenient, wouldn’t you say?
As for the murder bit, if you go into a man’s house to rape his wife, and he tries to kill you, but you kill him instead, how far do you think the “self-defense” bit would fly? Mercenary. Assassin. You will be the invader. They have every right to try to kill you. You have no right to be there.
Most land where fighting takes place is already public(stolen) property. That property is no more the insurgents than it is mine. Many of the house raids are of terrorists that have killed innocent civilians and have no right to stay alive. But for the many house to house searches of innocent civilians, most of them have an IQ over 1 and wont shoot at a group of marines, and thus I will not have to kill them. Just like drug raids, or tax raids here where people do have the right to defend their possesions, but 99.9% of the time they are smart enough not to. I have already thought out the innocent civilians house searches and decided that if I am ever in one(unlikely seeing that Iraqi soldiers now do the house to house searches and that will likely become more common) I would compensate the victims with some of my combat pay.
I still agree there is no way to be a compassionate occupier, but it is very simple not to be a murdering one.
P.S. I would guess that most of those civil servants think they’re doing the right thing. They are incorrect, of course. You, however, claim to be an anarchist. You have seen the light, as it were. Yet still, you would become an government thug. Lots of people are wrong. I was and no doubt every one here has been wrong on government at one time or another. That people buy the propoganda is no surprise; that’s what propoganda is for. You are not mistaken, you are a vile hypocrite, looking forward to the day you get your blood money. That, or you’re insane. Which do you prefer?
First off I would never(nor would I be ordered to) rape a man’s wife so that is completely irrelevant. I answered this inquiry in detail above.
I realise in full I have no right to your property, but you have to understand that I am not stealing it from you. And just because you do not think land is property does not change the fact that it is anymore than a communist not thinking my money is property. I still have a right to stop you from taking it.
I believe there is too many personal attacks in this thread and less civilized discussion. [I also believe there is a lack of philosophical consistency. It is difficult to determine who is genuinely trying to defend libertarianism and who is not. Anyhow…]
Technically, that is a mistaken economic perspective. The way in which the state finances its operations and the way it justifies its extortion leads us to get sucked into that false economic perspective. I would like to recommend the following reading: Is There a Federal Deficit? by Walter Williams (April 18, 2006) which explains the fallacy that you are just post-poning your payment. I will quote only a portion:
Some might be tempted to answer that it’s future generations who will pay. That’s untrue. If the federal government consumes $2.4 trillion of what Americans produced in 2005, it must find ways to force us to spend $2.4 trillion less privately in 2005. In other words, the federal government can’t spend today what’s going to be produced in the future.
One method to force us to spend less privately is through taxation, but that’s not the only way. Another way is to enter the bond market. Government borrowing drives the interest rate to a level that it otherwise wouldn’t be without government borrowing. That higher interest puts the squeeze on private investment in homes and businesses, thereby forcing us to spend less privately.
Granted. I am not going to question your honor. The state misleads most people to conceal the actual theft so that none of can recognize the responsibility.
However, now that you know your expenses incurred today are paid by confiscating property today from other people – as opposed to dismissing it as just “an advancement on the money that will be stolen from me in the future anyways” – are you willing to change your outlook? or does that matter to you?
This is a nasty playing of the devil’s advocate on my part because practically everybody uses the state to his advantage to a degree. It really is difficult to avoid doing so.
What about the children of the people that resist? Your “collateral damage”?
So, an IQ “under 1” disqualifies you from life, eh? Or at least, an IQ low enough that you’d shoot at MARINES!!! I mean, my god, they’re like bulletproof and shine with divine light and stuff. They can flick a pebble so hard it will pass through a cinder block and 3 men before stopping.
Oh, wait, you are made of meat like the rest of us. And a person who shoots you in his house because you’re invading because you SUSPECT there may be a TERRORIST (aka soldier without a state) there, is totally reasonable to do so. Why, some people would say it’s even worth dying to protect you and yours from an invading army. Even one that’s coming to “make the world safe for Democracy”.
You could get paid to give speeches in hospitals as a substitute for ipecac, judging from my reaction to you. Jesus Christ (and I’m not even a Christian)!
Much of the stolen money is mine from the job I currently have and if you want to get real technical it is mine from the money stolen from my dead grandparents. You can not identify who the money was taken from, so I obviously do not know if it is yours or if it is mine.
Please respond in the proper thread to the land rights issue. This one, and I know you don’t like it, is about you and your desire to be a clomping rifle-carrying jackbooted jackass for the state.
Now, lets think here. I have money I made by producing something someone was willing to pay me for. I’m not saying it’s totally pure money, but I’m not a government employee. Some government pig steals some of my money, and pays you with it. How is it you are not being paid with money stolen from me, now?
Your dead granparents… WHO ARE DEAD!!! You don’t know, and cannot know, that that money would have come to you. They might have given it to charity, or drank it away, or whatever. In any case, the money today doesn’t come from some kind of stolen money trust fund, it comes from me and at my expense and against my will. It’s like these jackasses who think that they are owed social security because social security money was stolen from them. They are, by the people who stole it. If they aren’t around any more, they should be SOL. But no, because by mere virtue of my birth I signed some sort of “social contract”, “the government” feels free to steal my money to pay their obligations.
Except, one can only really be held to an obligation that one incurred oneself. I stole nothing from anyone, so no one has a right to what I have except me.
I doubt there have been many cases of the innocents shooting at marines and it is extremely unlikely I will ever have to raid the house of an innocent at the point when I join, otherwise I wouldn’t. And 2 or 3 innocents vs. a platoon of marines, yea you would have to have an IQ under 1.
Your hypothetical simply is not likely to occur.
I will not steal one penny from you any more than the current Social Sercurity recipient steals from you.
edit: “did not” replaced with “will not”
In that case, you are apologizing for the continued theft perpetrated by statesmen.
No, I am simply trying to get across the point that the military does not do the job of collecting taxes stealing money.
Are you kidding me? How do you think that over 100 thousand Iraqis are dead, and only 4,000 Americans?
This forum needs an ignore feature. It’s your free choice to join the military, but your ignorance and willful denial makes me feel ill.
The theft is less relevant than the other issue: they are wasteful and used for imperialism because of the theft. Just like the government is allowed to run an absurd Ponzi scheme because of the theft required for “social security.”
The Iraqis were all terrists - it should be self-evident. Next ?
ps: That was sarcasm