As a general rule-of-thumb, in relation to the "I'm a Libertarian"s, I tend to simply use their same Free-Market/Minimal Government logic they use for Healthcare, to apply to other areas of the US system, in order to "test" how Free-Market and Minimal Government they actually are. To my knowledge, one of the biggest and most over-bloated Government Services is the United States Armed Forces.
No ****, sherlock. Again, you're preaching to the choir. I've acknowledged
TO YOU that America spends an insane amount of money on its armed forces.
I wonder how many of these 2008-born "I'm a Libertarians" want the same system for Military as they do for Healthcare..... y' know 'cause Free-Market/Minimal Gubermint n' all that.
Our military isn't a service "rendered" to the American people in the same manner as Medicare and Medicaid.
I'm aware of that, you mentioned your views in-relation the The Libertarian Party earlier on. I'm not disputing that, what I'm saying is that just because you self-identify as a Libertarian and even have a plastic card saying so, doesn't necessarily mean you truly have consistent values with what you claim to believe in.
I don't have to agree with everything that my political party represents. That makes me no less a Libertarian. I've said nothing on this thread that conflicts with Libertarian principles.
So when people try to convince me of their genuine political views by offering to show me their "Membership card", to me it's a rather meaningless thing to say. Hence why, if people made cute little plastic cards for their
general alignment (i.e. "Left" "Right" "Liberal" "Conservative" etc) and then tried to pass it off as "proof" of their values, it would be almost as daft.... and just as funny.
At the end of the day, I know good and well what I support and why. I know good and well which parts don't sit well with me and why.
I've never implied you want to eradicate and have no Government, just that you hold a double-standard with Healthcare. The slogan on the LP website is "Minimum Government, Maximum Freedom." So let's see some of that with the USAF, right?
What do you not comprehend about "I support cuts"?
I'm just not going to throw labels around like "extreme", when I'd like to examine what extreme cuts would look like and how they would impact Americans before voting in favor of them, just as I'd like to see a universal healthcare proposal before rejecting it on a ballot.
Make sense?
No. I don't hold a double standard with health care. I told you I support military cuts. I'd like, as an American to see what those cuts look like and understand how they will impact my community. That's not anti-Libertarian. It's irresponsible not to think through how decisions impact your local community.
According to the USA LP website:
"The military budget of the United States, conservatively measured at around $700 billion (but probably closer to $1 trillion once all security measures and veteran benefits are considered), is approximately equal to all of the military budgets of all other countries combined. If the US military budget were cut in half, it would still be the largest in the world. Then, if it were cut in half again, it would STILL be the largest in the world. Then, if it were cut in half a third time, reduced to only one-eighth its current size, it would STILL be the largest in the world. And that's using the conservative measure.
Whatever motivates this enormous budget, it is certainly not for the defense of American soil. Indeed, when the Department of Homeland Security was created, this was a virtual admission that the Department of Defense had goals other than homeland security. No foreign army has the slightest capacity to invade the United States, and as North Korea has demonstrated, even the possession of a single nuclear weapon is enough to deter invasion."
Sounds me to like their calling for extreme cuts to the USAF, which is exactly what you're not calling for - see below:
"At times, I do consider my local economy when voting. We have one of the highest concentrations of military in the world here in my area. I don't want our economy to buckle due to extreme military cut backs. But at the same time, I don't support excess spending in this arena either."
Unfortunately, the US Military is currently massively excessive. I don't even think it could actually get any bigger without completely gobbling-up it's host nation! If you're not against "extreme" cutbacks to it, then you are supporting a massively over-bloated and excessive Government Service - and subsequently lose the right to label yourself as "Fiscally Conservative" and having "Libertarian principles".
Yeah...I know...
You're using the term "extreme" cut backs without providing a definition as to what, specifically, that would detail.
Again, the Commonwealth of Virginia has one of the largest concentrations of military in the country. It would be unwise for me, regardless as to my political affiliation, to not consider my local economy when voting.
This doesn't negate my support of military cuts and I might support "extreme" cuts as a Libertarian if I knew what the hell they were and what they entailed. If they entailed closure of all of the military installations in my state and impaired our shipbuilding (one of the largest int he world), the results would impair our economy resulting in further strain on our government (more specifically, American tax payers).
Would I still be in favor? It depends. I need to see the big picture. I'd need to educate myself on:
a. What we're spending the most money on within the auspices of our armed forces?
b. How can we cut, while keeping what's needed to protect and react to threat?
c. How can we cut without excessively damaging American economies?
These aren't anti-Libertarian principles. I'm all for cuts. I want to see
excess go. There isn't anything anti-Libertarian about wanting "extreme" defined for me. You're throwing terminology out here that we're not using as Americans.
The Libertarian party isn't platforming for "extreme" military cuts. You're reading this yourself. The Libertarian party isn't bucking against "Universal Military". We don't use such terminology in the states.
Explain to me how I'm not in support of:
i: A desire for military cuts?
ii: The Libertarian concept of a smaller military?
One thought and ideal doesn't necessarily negate another.