I did it.
It's easy.
Click on the link below and send a letter to your Congressperson.
I don't want to cause a huge transcontinental debate so I dropped the non SF addresses. But I don't understand this one.
It seems completely appropriate to me that the US pays to repair some of the property damage it has caused in Iraq. To me, "You break it - you fix it" is as good and ancient a moral principle as you can find. And I thought that was true for most libertarians?
Demanding that Iraq pay for it reminds me of the Chinese governments habit of sending the relatives of executed prisoners a bill for the ammunition used.
I heard a rumor about how Halliburton got a $50M bridge rebuilding contract that an Iraqi firm offered to do for $300k. That's the end I'd start looking to cut this cost.
/Lars
I agree that we should fix what we broke. But we need to cut it off at that. We shouldn't fix what Saddam broke, or socialize them.
-Mike
Lars Petrus wrote:
Mike,
I know it's common to say "we" when what's meant is "the U.S. government," but I think it's important to distinguish between people and governments.
Assuming what you mean is that the U.S. government should pay to fix what it broke in Iraq, I agree. However if the new Iraqi government isn't grateful enough about Saddam's overthrow to offer to repay the bill as soon as they have the resources to do it, I think it would be legitimate for the U.S. government to use money and resources recovered from Saddam and his Baath Party to which no one else has a specific claim to cover these costs.
Yours in liberty,
<<< Starchild >>>