A really good talk has broken out on The Libertarian Republican blog that exposes the deep divide between Republican and Libertarian views on defence and foreign policy. Carefully read the thread and the original post. This was one of my favorite comments which I responded to.
"I have to say that "military intervention everywhere" vs. "callous, amoral isolationism" is a false choice.
We didn't set up Radio Free Asia/Europe or VOA because we were just aching to invade the Communist Bloc at any day.
Military action against Iran may one day be necessary, but I'm resetting my Twitter account's time and place to Iran to assist the protesters- not to encourage a frickin' invasion of the place.
And yeah, we really do need to kick out the loopy Paul-bots and the remnants of the Buchanan fascists out of the GOP- they're on the wrong side of history and an embarrassment."
Best comment so far. I guess I'm a Randian on this as on most things.
I think her basic view would be that- no we as citizens of the U.S. should not be forced to fight for the freedom of Iran or forced to fund any war of that kind- until and unless they become a direct threat to us(which is open to debate). However, we are also free as individuals to condemn the actions of the Iranian government and aid the people there in any way we can- up to and including the active armed support.
We also should expect our government to not be funding Iran in any way as we do now through the IMF and World Bank or giving them any unearned respect through agencies like the "United Nations".
Most likely, regimes like this would have collapsed years ago without this support.Remember that Iran also gets lots of technology from countries like Russia which also receive tons of aid and loans. Has any of Obama's Hamas cash gotten into Iran or aided other Iran supported terror groups?