Lan

The US Navy certainly makes all others look like child's play, but considering the ASBM. Americas navy has been rendered useless in the face of modern technology. mutli billion dollar machines are now only effective against those who can't produce this. Of course, when it comes to world powers like Russia, China and the US, I highly doubt any of these nations would be able to effectively invade the other. It would all come down to ICBMs, hacking and other forms of solitary warfare. Which would be MAD. Both the US and China can shoot down satellites, and I'm willing to bet those would be the first targets in war between the two, so who knows? But it would be a nightmare on both sides.

And libertarian still means the same exact thing it did when it was created. The fact that libertarian socialism is still quite popular clearly indicates the meaning of the word has not changed. If it has, how exactly has it changed? Perhaps you need to review this page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism

Why not? It could be a party. BYOWMD.

No, I read it. I was just informing you that your assumption is wrong. Up still means up doesn't it? Or does it mean down these days? Damn kids.

Nobody invaded the US because they actually can't. Not because it's pointless.

I concur. I find the idea of being nuked at my size quite fabulous.

Our newspaper is real news from KR, sir.

I concur. Having boobs is great.

He's weaker than two women.... I hate you....

Rand Paul was WAY better.

No

Why? Are all lives not valuable? Are you actually saying the life of a soldier is more valuable than any other? They should be legal across the board. As Clades pointed out, they can potentially preserve a humans life. What's wrong with that? Even if you're these guys: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZg4mcYkIwU Who cares? If I have enough money I can go get my car fully armored to fully stop even AK rounds. Not only that, but getting shot while wearing armor, from what I hear, still applies enough force to break ribs and cause serious damage to the point that if you get shot, whether you're alive or not hardly matters. You're probably too !@#$ed up to be effective at killing anything anyway. I see nothing wrong with the preserving life when possible, regardless of who it is.

What it doesn't take into consideration is the war, American society at the time, nor does it provide what is being defined as murder. Countless factors are not taken into account in simple graphs, only one simple statistic. Which is why they are meaningless without a proper and full argument. Graphs without explanation, argument or sustenance are just that.

Why should they be illegal?