You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Veterans for Liberty? Not as Much as They Say.
No wars are unconstitutional either congress voted for the act of war or the president used his authority to deploy troops.
And your view of an immoral war is only your view.
I served in many arenas throughout 10 years of USMC duty and was proud of all the conflicts.
And no I don’t believe in the current government taxation. I disagree with income tax and there should be no such thing as money laundering but there was an admendent passed to make income tax legal so as much we don’t like it. It is completely legal by our governing documents.
Maybe you should become an expat
You don’t sound like a happy person
Without a Congressional declaration of war, the President has no Constitutional authority to order troops anywhere.
As for my view of immoral war, are you at all aware of just war theory in the first place? Beyond that, how is murdering foreigners at the behest of politicians ever a moral act?
As for the income tax, dead strangers cannot confer authority over me without my consent. Legality has no moral or rational authority, either. Slavery was legal, too, remember. Stop making your pathetic excuses for injustice in the name of legality. Don't be a damned tory.
I am not happy about injustice inflicted upon others and upon me. Your response is to suggest exile? Your patriotism is dead. Your love of liberty is dead. Your soul is enslaved, and you are not my countryman. You are no heir to liberty.
That is where you embarrassed yourself again. The president ordering troops is not unconstitutional because it is not defined in the constitution. It is powers given to him by laws passed by congress with constitutional authority to do so.
As long as you don’t understand how our country is built. Nothing else you say has any merit.
So, it's not unconstitutional because congress decided to surrender their constitutional responsibilities without amending the constitution.
Brilliant.
No real answer for the moral, rational, or constitutional argument besides appeal to status quo and false authority. The Constitutional experiment was to restrain political power, and it has been an utter failure. And people like you are ready to either wear jackboots or lick them in your haste to support their usurpation.
The constitutional experiment has not failed. Your complete lack of understanding of this basic principle is your downfall.
Are their issues ? Yes. But they are not unsolvable.
Not unsolveable? The Constitution was written to restrain government, but government has given itself exceptions to every restraint. We have no power to reimpose those restraints.
We have the highest incarceration rate in the world, global military conflicts without any declaration of war, confiscatory taxation, micromanagement regulation, licenses and permits mandated for everything that isn't outright illegal, and a byzantine legal code that makes anyone a "felon" if anyone cares to investigate enough. That is a failed system.
Even with a written Constitution and an explicit bill of rights that reinforces the idea of limited government to explicitly-granted authority in the 9th and 10th amendments, the leviathan state grew like a cancer.
That is failure.
As Lysander Spooner said 150 years ago, "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist." No one has demonstrated practically that he was in error sincce then.