“We have no problem with the police intervening to end a criminal shootout. So why do we so passionately oppose having the U.S. federal state intervene in Syria and other places? There are multiple reasons. The Feds have a really bad track record (you can read a summary here); Tend to support bad guys and establish dictatorships; Constantly create new enemies; Force all Americans to support these interventions, even when they offend personal conscience. But does this mean that we have to sit idly by and watch bad things happen to good people overseas? We don’t think so. Instead, imagine what would happen if we had a Separation of Intervention and State.”
http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/whom-would-you-hire-to-intervene-in-syria
Related posts:
The Real State Secret: Spies Aren't Very Good At Their Jobs
Shares in Incorporated Co-op Cities Might Be the Next Big Thing
Hey, kids – let’s talk about heroin!
Why the Poles keep coming: The British welfare trap
Casey's Louis James Warns: 'Don't Try to Time the Market'
Bill Bonner: Give Thanks to ‘The 1%’
Ten Things to Expect from Obamacare in 2014
Is the War on Drugs Over?
Gary North: How Come We're So Rich?
White House Lies Undermine Its Credibility
Criminalizing Americans for Government Profit
Breaking the last taboo - Gaza and the threat of world war
Wendy McElroy: The Competitive Provision of Security
The Truth About SwedenCare
What Every Student in America Needs to Know About the Federal Reserve