Subject:
|
Re: We'll take in your poor, your homeless, your oppressed...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 2004 20:29:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1262 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> These are LMF answers, mind you... not mine, which are rather muddier
That's fine with me--I'm interested in examining the philosophy itself,
> > I'm curious--under the Flash(tm) philosophy, what happens if one sovereign
> > nation invades and subjugates a second nation, thereby imposing the sovereignty
> > of the invader over the invaded?
>
> Armed conflict happens, presumably.
>
> > What kind of action can be taken in response,
> > since the invader could simply assert that the invaded nation is now part of it.
> > In other words, who gets to decide which country's sovereignty is valid,
>
> The citizens of the invaded country. As always, just as if they were considering
> secession peacefully.
Okay, I think that makes some sense. But couldn't the dominant nation simply
impose upon the seceeding nation a fee of, say, a billion dollars per person to
effect the secession?
> > and
> > what's to prevent one nation from annexing another,
>
> The Second Amendment should help slow down invasions considerably, properly
> applied.
Sure. Actually, this is one of those cool points on which my opinion has
evolved, thanks largely to discussions in OT.debate (take that, you naysayers
who claim that this forum doesn't change anyone's views!). I've recently begun
to believe that a defending force (even a small one) can put up sufficient armed
resistance to make it not worth the invader's effort.
But can we posit a case in which a small nation like Kuwait is invaded by a
vastly more powerful neighbor? The conflict might be bloody and costly, but if
zillions of dollars in oil revenue are at stake, might an invader think it worth
the price?
> > if that second nation can't
> > repel the annexation? In what forum can the invaded nation plead its case?
>
> The case can be pled in the court of world public opinion when the Valiant
> Resistance(tm) seeks volunteers and cash (from private citizens, not
> governments, mind you) to help overthrow the oppressor.
Reading through all of this just now, it sounds like the LMF model describes a
world without nations, rather than a world with a whole bunch of individually
sovereign states. Contracts between parties, rather than alliances between
countries. Is that an inaccurate way to phrase it?
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
120 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
