The simple litmus test of whether we are freer because of soldiers fighting for us is this: Are we more or less free since the wars began? by Dan Steward
(libertarian)
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Just to keep this article from becoming ridiculously long, I'll only go back as far as World War I. What kind of freedoms did we have before the many wars that mankind fought in the last nearly 100 years? Did we gain any new freedoms or did we just lose ones that we had?
Before these wars, we were not required to hold a passport to travel abroad. Just in the past few years we have also had to by law, carry a passport just to fly to our neighbor of Canada. Did they fight for us to have a thieving I.R.S. or an absolutlely corrupt Federal Reserve constantly devaluing our money?
We were free, before the soldiers fought for our freedom, to do with our property and ourselves as we saw fit. Now we are inundated with absurd regulations that instead tell us that someone other than ourselves has a higher claim upon us and our property than we do. Did men who were paid to kill other people go forth into other nations and fight so that we may have that? If they did then it can be easily proven that they fought for our enslavement instead. It appears that the lie repeated often enough not only is believed, it is not even questioned.
We have an added "war" on drugs, that made us slaves to government edict. Property may be seized without due process by the police, to enrich the coffers of those who did the original theft. The Fifth Amendment is turned on it's head and you must have the resources to sue in court if you are innocent, just to regain your homes, vehicles, or other property. If not then you are an innocent who was ripped off by those pledged to protect your property. What freedom could ever come of that? Did armed soldiers make us free with that? If so, how? I am a man of what my friends and family tell me capable of vision yet, I just don't see it.
Government pushes us around with numerous laws and regulations. Did the armed services fight for that? We didn't have to carry papers before the wars, have numerous licenses just for the "privilege" to do business in our community. Are you going to tell me I'm more free because of what a man did with his gun to another person in Korea, France, Germany, Vietnam, Afghanistan, or Iraq? Are you for real?
I could go into several dozen pages of just what freedoms we had but no longer have before the wars of the last hundred years. I won't do so because I think you get the idea. Or at least I sure do hope you have the idea by now. If not, then I was wrong and your freedom means nothing to you, please go about your business.
With Liberty,
Dan Steward
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 53
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Dan Steward only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Dan Steward is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
During 1911 through 1912 the American citizens were completely against getting involved in WWI. In fact, if our government never forced us into WWI, there would have never been the punitive treaty of Versailles and Hitler may not have been able to come in power if our government would have listened to the people.
In February of 1913 the Federal Income tax was created [link edited for length] and later in December of that same year, a year the US citizens wished not to get involved in the war, the Federal Reserve was created [link edited for length].
In 1917, our government pulled our citizens into the war as they had finally confiscated enough wealth to fund the fighting. The Federal Reserve was not as brazen back then as it is today, so the printing presses were much quiter then than they are today.
Dating back to the civil war [link edited for length], our government has used the income tax to fund these wars and, more recently, the Federal Reserve.
If people want peace, if the people want economic liberty, they simply need to stop paying their income tax. It is simple as that. Many are afraid of going to prison so they continue to pay their taxes. It is now the patriotic duty of all citizens who wish not to continue these needless wars and spending of wealth by the Federal Reserves's dollar devaluation, to simply discontinue funding them through the income tax. The Federal Reserve will just continue printing money anyway.
A tax revolution is non-violent, it is civil disobediance. This act alone, if coordinated by enough people, would end the wars and cripple the Federal Reserve. Our federal prison systems would be full, but this is the price that many of us I know are willing to pay.
This government is not listening to the people. Two years ago the Democrats had a mandate to end the Iraq War, but costs have increased since them along with troop levels. Obama campaigned on getting out of Iraq, but Gates still remains at the helm. More fighting. McCain was at least honest to say he will continue to floudner the nationa's wealth for 100 years in Iraq.
Both Obama and McCain are trumpeting against Iran and Russia and are willing to spend a lot more of our economic and civil wealth in stopping these countries from doing whatever we are told they are doing.
Both candidate support Isreal and will continue to send more money for support.
Both candidates wants to move the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jesrusalem. Wonder what type of fighting that will encourage.
Both want more troops in Afghanistan.
Nothing will change until the people stand up. Over 120 million though, wish to watch their Dancing with the Stars and Fox/CNN news and eat up whatever they are told.
As I think I more accurately said in my article called "What Is A Soldier", soldiers fight for the LAND, they don't fight for our freedom. Freedom is fought for by the people and courts who uphold it every day. In fact, soldiers even take freedom AWAY FROM us ~ ask the Japanese, the gays, the women, the blacks, the anti-war protestors who have been bullied and suppressed by soldiers.
They "fight for the land"? Are you for real? The land is dirt. A pile of dirt told them to pick up a gun?
Soldiers kill other human beings and destroy their property because they are instructed to do so by higher ranking military personnel. Those higher ranking people get their orders from politicians with an agenda, most usually one of conquest.
Only easily led idiots fight for a pile of dirt or even a "flag".
"Courts" are mostly interested in collecting funds from those they consider subject to their ever changing diktat du-jour (haha gotcha again with that word, dude).
Courts do not fight for freedom as freedom means an absence of dealings with said courts and their methods of extracting cash from and pushing around, those who they deem under their jurusdiction.
Thanks for sticking to the subject, Carl. It is much more pleasant and productive to debate than to listen to tired tirades.
You both are right, soldiers fight for land and because someone in authority told them to. We wouldn't be here if we hadn't fought for the right to claim this land from the european powers. The same land they and us wrongfully seized from the Native Peoples. And most wars are fought because the power elite convinced others to shed their blood for one pathetic reason or another. I think we can all agree War is in most all cases a grievous evil.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
