Unless you think you can take their land?

So individuals can be hired but not nations?:confused:

Yes. You can't hire a nation because that is an act of aggression against the citizens and soldiers of that nation. Their resources and lives will be claimed by the government you've hired. Generally, libertarians acknowlege the right of the nation to defend itself but do not extend that right to defending so-called allies. (Besides whose constitution has our military personel sworn to uphold and protect?) Radar is acknowleging the reality that the US will defend Israel but that reality does not fit in libertarian theory.

If you start wars with the intent of taking land, or for any reason that is not defending your own nation from a direct and imminent attack, you're not a libertarian.

That's right. Private individuals can appoint other private individuals as protectors, but since the military is paid for by ALL citizens, it's illigitimate to use a military to defend another nation. For instance, let's say Italy and Ireland went to war for some reason (Italy would lose) and the American military joined in the dispute on one side or the other.

If the military helped the Italians, all of the Irish people in America would be paying to murder their own families despite their own wishes, and vice versa if the situation were turned around.

The only time war is legitimate is when your own country is directly attacked BY ANOTHER COUNTRY, and even then, only when war is formally declared, and then only against the nation who attacked you.

Starting wars is also the ultimate act of aggression, and it unnecessarily places the lives of Americans in danger, and it violates the U.S. Constitution.

Griff gets it. I don't think America should take any side in this or any other foreign dispute, or send any money OR WEAPONS to any other country in foreign aid.

Interesting. So, if I open a shooting range on my land and bullets happen to fall on your land, causing damage, I would be responsible?

What about indirect damages? Someone mentioned a poorly located strip club, if you attact customers that harm my customers or drive them away I have a very strong intrest in shutting you down. Even lowering the desirability of my location is damage in my mind.

Yeah, I think we've done this one before.

If I shoot my high-powered rifle on my land, and the bullet enters your house through a wall, missing your head by an inch, am I responsible for anything other than repairing the hole?

And what if the windows are open? Let's say I shoot a bullet with my high powered rifle through one open window, past your forehead, then next to your wife's ear, and just miss the top of your kid's head before exiting through the other open window and landing in a lake down the street, am I all cool as far as libertarians go?

No -- the owner of that lake is going to require compensation for introducing lead into his water supply.

I forgot to mention that I own the lake. ;)

Really? That's a damn fine shootin' lake. You may want to consider taking the blocking house by force so you can own that property and have a clear shot.

As far as libertarians go, we believe you have the right to do anything you want as long as your actions don't physically harm or endanger non-consenting others or their property, or infringe upon their rights.

Merely pointing a high powered rifle through your window in the direction of other people is an assault. It is a crime as it endangers the person, property, or rights of a non-consenting other. The person with the rifle should do serious jail time.

See, this is why libertarians don't have more power in the government.

Too many different versions, too much confusion, too much disagreement...