Give it time Leto... as these two positions become popular with the electorate, the Liberals will make it part of their platform as well.
It's what they do.
I have been thinking about this thread and I think the difference of opinion stems from the foundation of our different positions on the subject. Specifically:
Quote:
|
History shows that the natural state of human affairs is not freedom and peace. Freedom is actually a historical aberration. One thing is certain: freedom does not defend and maintain itself. Peace must be purchased at a very high price.
|
I would argue that Freedom is a natural state of affairs. It is military force that strips those freedoms away.
Peace need not come at a cost but it frequently does. There have been many solutions that brought "peace" that did not come from the end of a gun.
The US fought a civil war and a war for independence but other nations have settled their differences peacefully (Canada for one and the split between Slovakia and Czech Republic for another).
The key here, as in all things, is a balance. Yes, we need standing armies to defend our nations and to lend assistance when needed to our allies abroad. BUT... something is clearly out of balance with the US outspends all of the other nations military budgets combined.