By and large, the military actions of the US and many other countries in recent history are equivalent to “breaking into a house” rather than as actions of self-defense. This is the circumstances for the Iraq war, Afghanistan, etc.
Agreed, I have never contended otherwise. So why this is relevent I dont know. And the aggression on the part of the state is one of the circumstances surrounding the actions of individual soldiers. There are other circumstances that need to be considered.
Keep reading.
Ive read the whole thing.
A war of aggression is illegitimate. I have never said otherwise. However that does not mean that all participating in the war is equally culpible for the crimes commited during the execution of the war. Some are more guilty than others. Some are guilty of nothing. What I cited was not meant to clear all of the “grunts”. If that is the way I presented it, I appologize. It was only meant to show that the paper clearly makes a case for drawing distinctions between participants in unjust state action and not convicting all agents for the crimes of the state. Which the passage you have cited continues to make the same case.
Indeed a murderer should fear a libertarian court. However, I am not making the assumption that all who participate in an unjust war are murderers. Not even all soldiers, or even all combat soldiers. Many would be. Some would not be. I also dont make the assumption that all who participate in just wars are only killing in self defense.