Simple, the market decides by having the most competent courts decide what violates Libertarian law. What the UN thinks doesn’t matter, since they are not an Austrian concept.
You seem like a hothead so I doubt you would be in a position of power, or used as a third-party arbiter.
h.k,
I’m not arguing in the context of a libertarian court system, I’m only referring to the current situation.
And I’m not hotheaded and would make a dang fine arbiter! 
The current situation is hopeless, since there is no top-down solution for something so complex and nuanced.
Jewish people have property rights over some areas, Palestinians over other areas and not in homogenous reservation zones.
No, the Arabs don’t simply want to destroy the state, the want to kill or otherwise get rid of the Jews. They target civilian areas. If the state of Israel were abolished, the Jews there would still identify themselves as Israelis, still speak the same language, still live in the same area and hold the same beliefs. I’m not defending the state at all.
I’m ignoring him because a) I’m not interested in a debate right now when I’m already involved in another one on an actual debating site and b) his entire post seems to be trying to aggravate me rather than have any legitimate discussion; saying I support apartheid or that I’m a Jewish supremist. I’ve noticed that to be a pattern with Israel-haters.
Lol. Of course they are. Mention China or Russia; you get an actual discussion. Mention Israel…
hahah, but if the Israeli State were abolished who would use excessive force against those that can barely defend themselves? Where would the Heaven on Earth be located? hahahaha
I’m calling bullshit. You got mad because of the other thread and made a whole new thread about ME and MY opinion in hopes that you would get others on your side that way you didn’thave to post a real response. “Not interested” indeed…
Says the guy who comes to an anarchist forum saying that preemptive war is legitimate. hahahahahah I’m glad it aggravates you.
Not having any facts whatsoever other than claims that ‘you hate Israel’ and that ‘all arabs want to kill all jews’ is a thing I notice that the Israeli-apologists have. It fits right into that idea of Jewish supremacism if you ask me…assumptions about others that don’t support their preemptive wars…
haha it is laughable even thinking about it.
Go find the geopolitics threads. People get called xenophobes on the regular. Especially with China and India. (You just don’t notice it because all of the focus is on Islamic ‘Terrorism’) I am just not afraid of the BS accusations.
Preemptive war may possibly be compatible with libertarianism, it just depends what you mean by it. Let’s look at the same principle but on a small scale:
You are in your house, and I am in mine. You and I don’t get along much, and we say nasty things about each other, such as how we wish that the other weren’t alive. You then shoot and kill me.
You are in your house, and I am on the very edge of your property. I am preparing all sorts of weapons with which to invade you. You then shoot and kill me.
The key difference between the two scenarios is that in the second scenario, it is clear that I am the aggressor, as I am threatening you, and threats are a violation of the NAP. In the first scenario, you are the aggressor. So, if you define preemptive as the second scenario, then sure, preemptive war is compatible with libertarianism. But I don’t think that’s what people mean by preemptive war. It seems to be tossed around when one state is getting more powerful, and another state doesn’t like it and “preemptively defends itself”.
This is not a reason for preemptive war…
Perhaps you started following too late in the discussion. I will repost what Aristophanes said before he (or perhaps a mod?) edited it. I don’t need to repost some of the snarky comments without profanity, as you can just read it yourself:
Okay, so that last two didn’t have profanity, but I wanted to include at least one insult that didn’t have a curse word in it. And he suggested that he might just be trolling us. So, perhaps it might make more sense to you now why someone might choose to ignore his posts.
I’m also a little disappointed that the mods did not at least publicy reprimand Aristophanes for his behavior. Papirius was banned for 30 days for a lot less. Same with Smiling Dave.
I have no clue what’s going on at this point except that Luminar is trying to defend Israel, which I still don’t get.
Make sure you keep things off of the subject at hand and try to revert the thread to petty squabbles that you are involved in.
Ope! GOOD JOB!
Rather than posting the comments that invoked those reactions (I edited them immediately after I posted them) I’ll just link to the actual thread and if people want to read it, they can. It is not as if those comments were unprovoked…context is everything. But taking things out of context doesn’t bother those who are intellectually dishonest.
After you implied that I am racist and Malachai called me a collectivst I got hostile. I don’t monitor the actions of the mods, maybe they haven’t gottent around it it yet? Maybe they saw my reactions coming from provocations?
You see, by not calling the mods to ‘reprimand’ people for expressing controversial opinions I clarify that I am more of a man than you.
Aaannd I was wondering where everyone has been, so thanks for clarifying.
Yeah, no one should be defending any state or gang over in the Middle East. This means that no one should support or defend the state of Israel or the PLO. Both are guilty of aggression against their subjects and the subjects of the other. That the state of Israel happens to have more power and therefore can aggress more is immaterial. Neither deserve a libertarian’s support.
Oh, Aristophanes, what are we going to do with you. At any point in time, you can choose to actually clarify what you meant. I asked a simple question that you dodged repeatedly. Here are some examples of possible responses:
You meant that all Jews that reside within the borders of Israel are racists and demons.
You meant that only the politicians and soldiers within borders of Israel are racists and demons. (Of course, many of those soldiers are conscripted, but perhaps you would still support this statement).
You meant that only the politicians (rulers) within the borders of Israel are racists and demons.
It would have been nice if you actually responded. Maybe you have a fourth opinion. But you chose to insult and ridicule…RIGHT FROM YOUR FIRST RESPONSE TO ME. And my very first question literally only asked you to whom you were referring. But please, continue to accuse and ridicule. You stay classy.
Except that the Arabs and Jews that lived there before the Israeli State came into existence didn’t really have a government…they didn’t start wars…sounds fairly okay to me. The only thing they were that isn’t really that libertarian is theocratic. That goes for the arab tribes and the zionists.
Well, this is bunk.
You realize that since Israel is a State that their actions are sovereign in the eyes of the other states in the world, right? This point absolutely matters. They have far more resources and have diplomatic cover and legal authority. They cannot be called “terrorists” (even though I think many here would call their actions terrorism) simply because they have a state…
the palestinians are like the native americans…seriously how can so many people here dump on the US Founders, but at the same time support Israel???
Okay, gotlucky, I am being honest with you here (as I was in the thread that you didn’t actually read): I went off on the grammar thing because I thought you were questioning who in the prior sentence I was referring with a plural pronoun. If you go back and read the thread I do answer your question (politicians and bureaucrats; racists and demons…not that hard to wrap your mind around). But, now that you mention soldiers. Them too. I don’t care if they were conscripted. As Malachai said in that thread ‘individuals act’ they could see what they are doing is wrong, but don’t. Those bulldozers still (bull)doze.
Well, this is bunk.
You realize that:
What a weak response.
The PLO has a seat at the UN?!?! (observer status is not memebership into the UN, big guy)
Or does Israel simply see them as a political party that doesn’t have a state to operate in?
Israel still doles out tax money to the PLO. The PLO is not sovereign which is the primary feature of a state.
Your comments remain bunk.
lmao
an even weaker response. You really are way in over your head aren’t you?
People interested may think these are informative:
Irrelevant. Last I checked, Taiwan is not a recognized sovereign state, yet somehow it is a de facto state…It is immaterial what type of seat the PLO has if it is a de facto state. A state is a state is a state.
Really? Equivocate much? Not only is the PLO a state (as in, you know, a government ruling by aggression), it also has territory. I wasn’t aware that the PLO was a political party within the borders of Israel. I thought the state of Israel banned that.
And America doles out tax money to Israel. The state of Israel is not sovereign which is the primary feature of a state.
LMAO.