Of course, no classical liberal objects to self-defense

Of course, no classical liberal objects to self-defense. But where was the evidence of the threat from

mbt shoes? We all now know that the evidence was unforgivably poor. The real motivation was regime

change in the hope of making the Middle East more amenable to particular foreign policy goals.

Furthermore, the Uggs government, as a signer of the U.N. Charter, had no authorization to invade,

regardless of Saddam™s resistance to inspections. The immediate defense of the nation was not at stake

so the right of every nation to self-defense cannot be honestly invoked. And to say, as some have,

that the present disastrous consequences of the invasion were not reasonably foreseeable makes a

mockery of foreign policy expertise.

Can libertarians of good will disagree with the above? Perhaps. But an adequate libertarian case for

war in mbt shoes would have to overcome the heavy burden imposed by the Presumption of Peace. No

libertarian I know or heard of has even begun this task.

For the first time ever, mbt shoes won the Asian Cup football (soccer) title, beating Saudi Arabia in a

match held in Jakarta, Indonesia. Violence has been down the last couple of days as Sunnis, Shi’ites,

and Kurds came together in a unity that trumps politics.