War on terror -- global trade

It's a mistake to underestimate the danger in the world. Many countries are controlled by gangs of criminals determined to maintain power by any means possible. The instability of these countries continues to fuel regional and internal conflicts. There is also a history in the U.S. of our government misusing power and applying interventionist strategies causing needless conflicts and needless death and destruction.

There's evidence though that countries can learn from their past mistakes and develope more peaceful means by which to co-exist in the world. The risk of major powers fighting in world wars has been lessened through economic interdependencies and the assured destruction which would be caused by dangerous weapons of war more deadly and destructive than anything used in previous wars. Global trade and non-interventionist policies are the hope for the future, along with the demise of the power of nation-states. Global markets will deepen interdependence and lessen the importance of military dominance. A strong defense will be necessary for all countries, because the world will most likely never be safe from all aggression.

Ruthless tyrants are not amenable to the normal reasoned approach used by most of the world's countries to settle disagreements and develope treaties regarding co-operation and co-existence issues. These countries under tyrannical rule can not last much longer because they're falling too far behind in a world of technology and production. The ones relying on oil will fold when alternatives are developed and they have nothing with which to replace the income.

After 9/11 a response was called for to determine the extent of what we were dealing with, but now we know. Whether the response was the correct response will be determined by history, but we haven't experienced repeated attacks in U.S. There's not much benefit in being a second-guesser when all the information is not available.

It does seem that now we can begin readjusting our foreign relations policies. What we've learned about terrorism ought to enable us to create a much better defense against attacks, while preserving our rights as free citizens. There's no need to give up rights of privacy, or speech, or property, or person in general in order to combat terrorism. The threat is not greater than our Constitution.

I have no way of knowing the right timing, but at some point relatively soon the U.S. would be better off if we removed all military personell from overseas military bases and returned defense responsibilities to countries we've been supporting militarily. Global trade is the movement to a more peaceful world. Free trade coupled with a policy of non-military intervention would set the tone for the shift from military solutions to economic solutions. The rise of NGOs is a movement that should be encouraged globally so that no few nations are acting as Super-Police on the world stage. Supporting these organizations without political influence will be a tricky endeavor, but it's worth the effort. International politics within the incompetent mechanizations of the UN have failed. Just as private solutions are more effective intranationally, they'll be more effective internationally. The motives to find real solutions will be present, while statist politics will often benefit from conflict. The US would be smart to remove itself from statist politics.

Terrorism would have to stretch its hatred to lengths even sympathetic countries would find unbelievable if the US is no longer maintaining an interventionist policy in international affairs. This doesn't mean we back down from threats, it merely means we transcend the backward notion of interventionist military solutions and go beyond through technology and capitalist economic growth. We can build a defense system which will be capable of keeping the country safe and answering any real threat, but we must change the game and not be drawn into impossible conflict-games where terrorists and anti-capitalists make the rules.

The most important libertarian question -- Why?

Why do we think government will spend money in ways better than those who make the money? I don't know when this incredibly insane idea co-opted the American mind. After centuries of government mismanagement why did we get to the point that our country allows politicians to confiscate our money and waste it when we could use that money to purchase the things we need and want? Why have we allowed this? Why are we allowing it now?

Why does the MSM attempt to influence one part of society over another? The MSM have dropped all pretense of objectivity and have joined the left wholeheartedly in inlfuencing elections and government policy. Why have we overlooked this?

Why do we trust a president who shows no signs of changing the fundamental problems we face with intervention crippling our financial system and our industries? There is no evidence that the stimulus package or any of the trillion dollars they are preparing to spend will do any good that the private sector can not do better. Why are we agreeing to give this president and this congress more power than any American executive and legislative branches have ever had (with perhaps the exception of FDR's reign)?

Why do we continue to allow government to control the education of our children when it's obvious that for the greatest part public education is incompetent and unable to prepare children for the 21st century? Public education is a failed, bloated system which is controlled by unions and bureacrats and lacks the flexibility and creativity to meet the educational needs of children. Why do we not demand that it end?

Why do we think all the money spent on the war on terrorism is necessary? Compared to the threat, the efforts are overblown and only create a larger more intrusive government. Why are we being cowered into fear when our nation is greater than any small group of terrorists on the planet, and our defense capabilities, with improvement, could deter 99.9% of any real threat.

Why do we continue to allow our government to interfere in the affairs of foreign nations when it's been shown we are unwelcomed. The money we could save from non-intervention could be returned to the American people where it belongs. Why do we allow the bleeding to continue?

Why do we not see that privatization is the most efficient route to deal with societal problems? The government waste on social programs is astounding, yet we continue to allow government to create more redundant programs which only become bloated and wasteful.

Why does America not return to her libertarian roots and limit government to defense, cops and courts? Why was government allowed to get as big and controlling as it is without alarm over the monster that's been created?  Why are we afraid of freedom? Why are we not afraid of statism?

We know the whats, whens and hows, but why?

Photo from -- http://blog.creativethink.com