I have been called a lot of things since I began writing about ten years ago on the folly of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the evils of the U.S. military, and the belligerence of U.S. foreign policy.

Many of the things I have been called I can’t repeat because they are so vile and filthy. However, the negative e-mails have tapered off quite a bit over the years since these wars have turned out to be such debacles.

One charge that has been consistently leveled against me is that I am unpatriotic because I don’t "support the troops" as they invade and occupy other countries and mete out death and destruction to "insurgents" and "terrorists." But who is really being unpatriotic? I think it is long past time that we question the patriotism of those who do "support the troops" in their foreign wars, occupations, interventions, and escapades.

Let’s take the case of Syria.

For months now we have heard how the United States must "do something" and intervene in Syria to end the brutal regime of Bashar al-Assad and stop the violence that has led to the deaths of 40,000 people since the outbreak of an anti-regime revolt last year. The familiar cry that dictator x might use chemical weapons on his own people is being resurrected to garner support for U.S. intervention.

The U.S. Senate, by a vote of 92-6, recently voted to "require a report on military activities to deny or significantly degrade the use of air power against civilian and opposition groups in Syria." This amendment (S.AMDT.3262) to the National Defense Authorization Act requires that

not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, submit to the congressional defense committees a report identifying the limited military activities that could deny or significantly degrade the ability of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, and forces loyal to him, to use air power against civilians and opposition groups in Syria.

Its purpose is to "advance the goals of President Obama of stopping the killing of civilians in Syria and creating conditions for a transition to a democratic, pluralistic political system in Syria."

The U.S. military is sending Patriot air defense missiles and 400 U.S. troops to operate them at two batteries in "undisclosed locations" in Turkey as part of a NATO force meant to protect Turkish territory from potential Syrian missile attack.

The aircraft carrier the USS Eisenhower is reportedly off the coast of Syria along with the USS Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group.

There are also reports that more than 3,000 U.S. military personnel have secretly returned to Iraq via Kuwait in response to the civil war in Syria that has spilled over into northern Iraq. The Pentagon is denying this report, which means it is probably true.

Never mind that the "evil dictatorship" of Assad was once supported by the United States.

Never mind that the CIA "renditioned" people to Syria to be tortured.

Never mind that the United States just concluded a disastrous war in Iraq and is still conducting another disastrous one in Afghanistan.

Never mind that some Syrian rebel groups have ties to al Qaeda.

Never mind that some Syrian rebels are foreign jihad mercenaries.

Never mind that some Syrian rebels have openly murdered Syrian Christians for not supporting the overthrow of the secular Syrian government.

Never mind that some Syrian rebels have committed acts of terrorism that have killed children.

Never mind that some Syrian rebel groups have tested their own chemical weapons.

Never mind that the United States and NATO developed their own chemical weapons years ago.

Never mind that George Washington – 230 years ago – warned against making "entangling alliances" such as NATO.

But even if all of these things are not true, even if President Assad is another Hitler, even if the rebels have the purest of motives, and even if the Assad regime is targeting civilians, executing POWs, raping women, killing children, torturing political opponents, using chemical weapons, instituting pogroms, engaged in ethnic cleansing, and committing genocide – the U. S. government has no authority whatsoever to intervene in any way. No U.S. soldier, sailor, airman, Marine, military advisor, CIA operative, contractor, or State Department employee has any business going anywhere near Syria. It is not the purpose of the U.S. government to be the policeman, security guard, mediator, or babysitter of the world.

What happens in Syria is the concern of Syrians and perhaps Syria’s immediate neighbors. Nothing that happens in Syria should be the concern of the United States.

Americans individually or collectively may despise the Assad regime, they may pray for the rebels, they may long for Assad’s overthrow, they may sell weapons to the rebels, they may donate money to the rebels, they may go help the rebels fight against the Syrian government, they may undertake humanitarian relief efforts, they may marry Syrian widows, they may adopt Syrian orphans, they may employ Syrian refuges – they may even take the side of Assad against the rebels. But the U.S. government should do absolutely nothing.

How patriotic am I? Nothing that happens in Syria is worth one drop of blood from one American soldier or one dollar from one American taxpayer. Nothing and not one. Not a paper cut. Not a scrape. And not one red cent. I am so patriotic that I don’t support U.S. troops getting within a thousand miles of Syria.

Since the U.S. military is nothing more than the personal attack force of the president, there is a chance that the president will order U.S. forces to intervene in Syria. If this happens, even most who oppose intervention will suddenly and vocally "support the troops" should Syria be their next military adventure.

But because the use of American troops should be limited to the defense of the United States, there should be no respect or support for any U. S. soldier who goes to fight in Syria. He didn’t have to join the president’s personal attack force. He can refuse to go and suffer the consequences or he can refuse to fight like soldiers did during the Christmas Truce of 1914.

To those Americans who think it will be "worth it" to "support the troops" as the United States expends blood and treasure in Syria: I question your patriotism.

Originally posted on LewRockwell.com on January 1, 2013.

  • pcm man

    I completely and totally agree with your point of view. I am a Vietnam veteran who was drafted. I had no choice in joining or not joining the military, I was FORCED to join. Not true now. These young men are voluntarily joining the president’s attack force because they want to and then they believe they should have special benefits when they are wounded! I flat out do not understand that logic.

    The U.S. Constitution is VERY clear. The national armed forces are for one purpose and one purpose only, our national defense of U.S. boarders. NOTHING ELSE! We are now in a state of constant warfare around with world. It is INSANE and totally unconstitutional.

  • Carpenter

    Libertarian Christian? I question your definition of Christian.

    And don’t get me wrong, there is NO such thing as a LIBERAL Christian. Liberal Christianity is NOT Christianity at all. It is a totally different religion based on un-Biblical, non-Christian principles, practices and liberal political propaganda.

    Libertarian Christianity approaches the same cliff (from a different angle) and some Libertarians go over into objectivism, Ayn Randism and Ron Paul worship. None of those are Christian!

    The way most politically active Libertarian-ists behave in the political arena is also very UN-Christian. Personally I don’t believe that anyone can be a Christian and a Libertarian (because of Ayn Rand’s relationship to the authoring of the Satanic Bible) because they are two different competing religions.

  • I suppose you will say the same thing about “Conservative” Christians too?

    Funny you would put such a comment on this article, rather than the host of other articles that are much more fundamentally focused as to why Christians can and ought to take a libertarian political point of view. I don’t know what your angle is, but LCC’s is not Rand worship, Ron Paul worship, or whatnot. I am hardly a fan of Rand in the first place.

    Besides that, where did you get the idea that Randianism equates to libertarianism? Rand never called herself a libertarian, and even denounced them for not holding enough of her views. Sure, some libertarians are big fans, but I sure am not.

    Additionally, what in the blazes are you talking about regarding the Satanic Bible? Who cares whether Ayn Rand was an influence upon LaVey? You know who else were influences? So was John Milton — author of Paradise Lost — Mark Twain, and Lord Byron the poet! Are you going to condemn all of them as well?

  • GrayCat

    You know that other Carpenter? The One Christians are supposed to be following? Can you cite a single instance where He and His disciples ever “supported” the “troops,” or war for any human nation for any purpose whatsoever? C’mon! Triple-dog dare ya!

    On the other hand, I can cite multitudes of Scriptures against Christians — Christians — using violence or force for anything. For starters, how about Galatians 5? Romans 12 & 13? James 2:13 – 4; 1 John; Matthew 5 – 7; 20:25-28; 22:34-40; 25:31-46; 2 Corinthians 10:1-5 (how could it be made any plainer?); and in the Old Testament even 2 Chronicles 20 for an example of truly godly faith. Have you ever closely, really closely, read Revelation 19? Who among the vast heavenly army has any sort of a weapon, and what is it?

    What you wrote (and evidently believe) is simply not true.

  • Carpenter

    the first act of Libertarianism (and the very first political action in history) occurred in the garden of Eden when Satan gave the Apple to Eve and she ate of it. That is what Libertarianism has produced. That is what Libertarianism is. Its freedom from God. Its freedom to do anything you choose.

    Libertarianism is, without a doubt, the evil apple from the evil tree who’s roots reach right down to hell.

    And you can deny your allegiance to Ayn Rand but the Libertarians, as a whole, cannot. Most Libertarians (and Tea Party people) absolutely adore Ayn Rand. Her Philosophy is also the foundation on which the Satanic Bible was authored.

    The Church of Satan dot com even says:
    “Essentially, Satanism is at base a rational philosophy of pragmatism, materialism and skepticism, generally promoting a libertarian point of social view…” quoted from the The ChurchOfSatan dot com

    “Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand, is an acknowledged source for some of the Satanic philosophy as outlined in The Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey.” quoted from the The ChurchOfSatan dot com

    Like it or not the The Church of Satan is a LIBERTARIAN organization. I’m sorry but I will not go down that road! I could never be a Libertarian nor could I vote for a Libertarian even if he THINKS he is a Christian.

    I say this not to condemn or to insult you but to wake you up. Nothing good can come of Libertarianism.

  • GrayCat

    You really should do A LOT MORE research.

    You might even learn that libertarianism IS NOT LIBERTINISM, which you have actually been talking about.

    Contrarily, it is God who is the First Libertarian, and so He chose to create human beings in His image, also with the right to choose.

    Have you bothered to look at any of the articles dealing with these issues here at this site? Let alone anything else about actual libertarianism?

    “Mr. Libertarian” himself scathingly denounced Ayn Rand, and for good reason.

    And did you happen to look at any of the Scripture references given in my first response to you? Have you ever bothered to study the Bible for yourself?

    Where in the Bible do you find permission for CHRISTIANS to fight and kill anyone for any nation/government in this world? I’d really like to know. Would you try to claim that the Satanic Bible is evil, but Christians participating in worldly war is not?

    The only good possible to us does come from “libertarianism”: the freedom to choose God and His good, obedience to Him, over the other temptations in this world, as found in the account of Jesus’ trial in the desert following His baptism. One of which was the delusion that any human being has the right to rule any other human being (1 Samuel 8, for Old Testament origins and support, yah?). Surely you’re familiar with that? That the rulership of other men is worship of Satan?

    Regardless, if you’ve bothered to even attempt to be anything but knee-jerk condemnatory, you’d find that at the very least, THIS site has nothing to do with Ayn Rand and Objectivism. And as a Christian, that little bit of honesty should mitigate your self-righteousness and willful misinformation. And it should prompt from you an apology to Norman Horn and the readers of this site. That’s if, of course, you are truly a humble follower of that other Carpenter, the one Christians are supposed to be following.

  • Carpenter

    what I have noticed most about Libertarians is that they seem to HATE all Republicans.

    Libertarianism is a Cultic Religion based on Hatred and they will do anything, and say anything, and support anything, they’ll even SIDE WITH THE COMMIE/SOCIALIST/LIBERALS as long as they are condemning Republicans.

    And that is why Ron Paul got 1/10 of 1% of the vote in 1988. That is chief reason that Christians will never vote for or support Libertarians. Basically they are just bad people who LIE about other Christians for political (satanic) purposes.

    also, GOD is not a Libertarian. He does not want to legalize heroin (like Ron Paul), he does not want Marijuana legalized, nor does God condone homosexuality, abortion and ultimate freedom to do anything you chose. GOD is the Anti-Libertarian.

    The god your thinking of, the Liber(al)tarian god, the god of freedom and perversion is the Devil.

  • GrayCat

    So, for you, God is the Republican Party, and it is the responsibility and right of moral Republicans to rule others and imprison or execute them if they break moral Republican laws.

    By the way, it would be interesting to hear about your direct line to God to KNOW what He would and wound not want “legalized.”

    Who among human beings do you believe is qualified and has the God-given right to rule the rest of humanity?

    Do you actually read God’s Word, the Bible at all?! You’ve never addressed one single Scripture passage. You only mention the Republican Party. Why is that?

  • GrayCat

    Please explain exactly how — with references, please — libertarianism is cultic, much less a religion, much less based on hatred.

    How is the first principle of libertarianism, the non-aggression principle, that no one has a right to start violence against anyone else, an expression of hatred, and not founded on Christ’s own words?

    Please give examples of exactly how libertarians hate all Republicans.

    Please give examples of the “anything” you claim libertarians support, say, and do.

    Please make sure whatever examples you give meet the actual definition of libertarianism, and not your own deficient and slanderous ideas.

    Please take the time to read “The Proper Origin of Rights” and “The Libertarian Theology of Freedom,” right here on this site. All it takes is a click.

  • Carpenter

    when did I say I was a Republican?

    I’m just not a Libertarian or a Democrat/Commie because of their relationships with things that are Evil in the sight of the Lord. Libertarianism and Liberalism both promote perversion and depravity in the name of freedom. They are both non-Christian religions or cults.

    Why do I mention the Republican Party? Because it is the FOCUS of all Libertarian hatred. Libertarians HATE the Republicans just as much as the Liberals in the Media do. In fact they often work together to SLANDER Christians in the Republican Party. Sorry but that is just a fact. That is what Libertarians do.

  • Carpenter, you’re a crappy Christian. Libertarians hate liars and love freedom.

  • Laci

    @carpenter troll alert!

  • GrayCat

    If you read what I wrote a little more carefully, you will find I nowhere said you are a Republican. Yah?

    If you actually read more, and were more honest and less afraid of everything, you would know that your statement that the Republican Party is the “FOCUS” of libertarians is just pure false testimony from you.

    Actually, libertarians don’t much like ANY political parties, for the simple fact that libertarians don’t believe any mere human being is qualified or has any right to rule their fellows, and rob from them and call it “taxes,” and make war, which is a mere political euphemism designed to obscure criminality. Human rule is anti-

    You’d know this if you actually did some reading (the Internet is a God-given treasure trove of facts and truth — mostly all free!).

    Try. Use your God-given brain. Learn.

  • GrayCat

    It would be refreshing if you would actually cite specific references to prove your accusations. How about just start with the last paragraph?

  • David

    I agree with the message here, but if it really costed a single dollar to free the Syrian people, would you really refuse to do it? I’d donate that dollar myself, no need to tax for it, lol.
    Of course, we don’t “Spread freedom” by spending a dollar and shedding a drop of blood, we kill thousands and destroy our freedom at home in order to do so. There’s nothing “Humanitarian” about it. There’s nothing “Humanitarian” about any war. Government is by nature unable to act in a humanitarian way.

  • David

    Hope my legitimate question won’t get lost.
    I should furthermore state that I don’t agree with humanitarian wars. Saying you agree with humanitarian wars is kind of like saying an anarchist fascist wouldn’t be so bad. Its not that it would be, its that it quite literally can’t exist and so everything else is irrelevant. Even if it were possible, I wouldn’t advocate forcible taxation to pay for it. That’s still immoral, and two wrongs don’t = one right.
    But if it could really be solved with a “Single dollar of US taxpayer money” and no other lives or liberties being lost, I’d pay that dollar. I don’t see why anyone wouldn’t in that highly theoretical case.

  • David

    I’d actually tend to agree that God isn’t a libertarian. God is God. He doesn’t have to follow any political philosophy, he defines right and wrong, and at the end, he’s going to judge. When he judges, he won’t be using the NAP, he’ll be using the Biblical standard.
    However, as far as how CHRISTIANS are supposed to live Biblically, we aren’t called to be God. We can’t, and we have no right to. We are called to “Live at peace with all men.” Seems libertarian to me, at least broadly speaking.

  • David

    Who says Libertarian Christians have to like Rand?