Now, I'll start by saying i haven't read the book. The description says all leaders are supremely focused on maintaining power. Given that, how can you possibly argue that the US killing anyone it considers a "bad person" without jurisprudence is a moral act?

That highlights the cognitive dissonance in his post:

>There are a lot of bad people in the world, and quite a fraction of countries are ruled by them. Thugs respond to power.

The US is still a good country, with a good government, but it's ridiculous to assume it immune to the same threats of tyranny as every other nation.

Thanks for the link. I'm sure we all might find more coherence in the barcode on the back than was present within the entirety of your wandering treatise.