Political Theory

Re: peace through strenth

cab21 — Mon, 20 Aug 2012 23:16:33 GMT

a war would generally be a long term effort, so overall. i'm thinking about war prevention as well as effectiveness should a war happen. i think the idea i hear conservatives say is they want to spend so much more money than any other country, that other countries would not attack the usa or the allies. it looks like they want to tax or borrow to do so rather than have people voluntarily contribute to a defense budget. my thoughts are that it is not peaceful to the usa citizens to either tax them or borrow money in their name to have the most expensive military in the world.

Re: peace through strength

cporter — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 23:52:52 GMT

There is no peace in taxed strength. By definition, you are being aggressed against for your money.

Re: peace through strenth

National Acrobat — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 23:17:49 GMT

Does anyone with a sixth grade education or more really not know what the TS meant?

As to the OP, there's quite a few other variables you would need to specify first before answering. If you meant more generally is complicit or coerced effort generally more effective, then probably complicit. However, the longer the effort, the more coercive measures might me necessary to maintain an effective force.

Re: peace through strenth

cab21 — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 23:08:51 GMT

i forgot the g when i first posted

Re: peace through strenth

John James — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 23:06:24 GMT

Oh. Is that something different? Or you just forgot all the g's?

Re: peace through strenth

cab21 — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 23:01:15 GMT

strength without a g

Re: peace through strenth

John James — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 22:59:26 GMT

What is "strenth"?

peace through strength

cab21 — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 22:58:50 GMT

which is stronger?

peace through taxed strength?

peace through voluntary strength?