Today in overthinking libertarian principles: you can't use a nuke in self-defense, but you can arguably possess one in self-defense. What are the libertarian arguments for getting rid of them, period? (Proportionality, dear God, is clearly part of the answer.)
-
-
Replying to @LucyStag
That's easy. Nuclear weapons do not just affect the target, but many other people around. It's like wildly swinging fists, hitting a lot of innocent bystanders' noses.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Maggie_McNeill @LucyStag
without nuclear weapons, we would have had a conventional WW III with the Soviets in the 1950s or 1960s, I'm almost certain. They're theoretically / ethically dubious ...but actually deliver a ton of value. Lot more liberty saved with them than lost.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Ah, but she only asked for a libertarian argument, not a libertarian argument I actually believe in.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Replying to @Maggie_McNeill @LucyStag
give the customer what they want! :)
12:24 PM - 31 Jan 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.