12 votes

How many here believe I am truly a murderer

due to my serving honorably in the military? A member, "DDucks" has stated quite unequivocally that he considers me as such. The following was a diatribe, or perhaps it should be called a monologue, they engaged in on a post that seemed to be baiting individuals such as I.
Submitted by dducks on Tue, 04/09/2013 - 10:34. Permalink
Some false assumption you make: 1) You know what culture I was born in or that I adhere to. 2) That I respect any a fraction of the laws 38,000,000 laws we are forced to abide by. 3) That you know my age. 4) That I respect the military, or slums. 5) That I think this Country or its subjects are inherently great.
DDucks goes on to state…So since you lived in the slums and signed up to be a murderer for the collective you are more exceptional or have better arguments on immigration in a libertarian forum? Just to let you know, a true libertarian generally believes that all people should be able to do as they please without infringing on the life, liberty, or property of others.
If this is what members believe individuals such as I truly are then I'll just mosey off and find others who are a bit more receptive to my ideals and who don't have a bankrupt mentality as was demonstrated today. As bad as things are in this nation I'm not about to throw in the towel yet and yes I still believe this nation and it's citizens are inherently great. Check out the OP as well.

Edit.... This site is now approaching a critical mass where self destruction is imminent. To all you self righteous A holes who assumed I served in the Gulf or Afghanistan, I served in the 1970's and refused to join until Nixon was out of office. I served as a Nuclear Propulsion Engineer on, what is colloquially referred to as, a Boomer. Go under for six months and hope the world is still there when you surface. Ply your agendas here all you wish, I no longer have any sense of comradarie or trust with the type of individuals who have demonstrated their mentalities below. Nystrom, this place is in dire need of an enema. It is my most sincere hope that these clowns open their mouths and call the wrong one of us a murderer, but we know that that hope will never come true. God bless the keyboard for the inept.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I try to read what's really

I try to read what's really in the scriptures, instead of making it say what I want it to. I realize that I end up sounding somewhat inconsistent because what I read in the Word isn't all one way or the other.

I try not to cherry pick, but I also can't cite every passage that everyone would consider on the topic.

I'm sorry that I didn't carefully balance my citation of scripture to make it clear that I wasn't taking sides. It appeared that you were leaning one way, so I leaned my response to you the other way, to try to balance your thoughts with mostly scriptures that "seem to say" something different than you were saying.

Is it always wrong to kill? Even in defense of yourself or your children? Some Christians think so (the Amish), and I respect their consistency in not possessing firearms. If the US military was strictly defending the 50 states, it would be easier to equate that to defending innocent people from violence. Because our government invaded Iraq and overthrew the Afghani government without legal declarations of war, is bombing other countries across the Middle East and is threatening war in other countries that aren't an imminent threat to the US, it is too far a stretch for me to call that even remotely a "defense" of innocents, so I oppose "offensive" wars and all the killing done outside of constitutional authorization. I think that Romans 9, if carefully read and applied, backs up the need to obey the "ruling authority", which is the Constitution in our country, since, under the Constitution, the President is only given specific authority, not unlimited authority.

I don't "suggest" things through implication. I try to cite exactly what the Word says and leave it to you to read and understand it. I want you to figure out how seemingly inconsistent scriptures lead you to a completely new idea that breaks you out of the "either/or" extremes that our warped culture has put in our minds.

"Either we obey 'our leaders' to kill on command and revere 'our troops', OR we never touch a gun and work day and night to ban them from the face of the earth". Those are the extremes of either/or that most people around us take sides on, and in the churches they cherry pick scriptures to force one view or the other onto the Word ("conservative churches" one way, "liberal churches" the other).

With you I was pointing out other scriptures, but I didn't mean to infer the extreme that you are assuming I meant.

Both "thou shall not kill" and "Father forgive them" are in the scriptures. Reading them in context helps understand a little more.
If you want to live by the Ten Commandments, take a look at what Jesus interpreted them as in Matthew 5: lusting after a woman was equal to adultery and cursing your neighbor was killing them in your heart. Jesus was explaining what the root of adultery and murder was. If you think you can't kill people under orders from a superior, then don't join the military, and fight politically to make sure that there's no draft to make people join against their will.

Jesus also said a lot about judging someone else, right there in the next chapter. No one knows all things and can righteously judge another person for joining the military. I don't like the adoration of Chris Kyle and other soldiers that goes on in many Christian circles that I've been around. I try to point out to them the scriptures that show Jesus' opposition to violence and worldly governments.

Remember that the Bible isn't a rule book that tells you exactly what action is right and wrong in every situation. The Word is worthless as a guide without submitting to God, following Jesus in a daily relationship, being led by the Holy Spirit into all truth, and seeking wisdom that God can show you through the scriptures. The Word isn't a legal formula that will make every person and human relationship healthy, apart from submission to a real relationship with God through Jesus by the Spirit.

Many people prefer a formula or a rule book, rather than being accountable to the living God. That's exactly what the Israelites were doing throughout the Old Testament, rejecting God while trying to keep the Ten Commandments and the extrapolations of them by Moses in the Law. God can open up the wisdom of the scriptures to you, IF you submit to him daily and ask for him to give you the wisdom that you need today. Following what He shows you to do today is how you learn wisdom. Talking about situations that you've never been in and looking for the legal formula in the words of the Bible is merely theory and no one really learns wisdom that way, just theories that are useless in real life.

I don't mean to preach to you, but I wanted to let you know that what you're seeking is the God of the Bible, not merely a code of conduct from the legally deciphered words of the book. I want you to find more wisdom than I have so far. I can't even write a comment message clearly in less than a thousand words to explain one simple thing; I haven't cornered the market on wisdom by any stretch of imagination and never will.

Peace to you my friend, not as the world gives, but a deep and abiding peace that passes understanding, to guard your heart and mind in Christ Jesus.

woa heavy stuff mate

Generally I am not a huge bible banger, but if you ask me i am a christian.

The original question was a legal one. Am I a murderer? Hence using the bible in a legal code of conduct sense.

again if i have to explain context in every comment like its an original post then I think I will no longer comment here.

Don't know what your presuppositions are her with me, but most of what you just wrote was explaining to me that you were just trolling me to "balance" my perspective. I don't find that very productive.

Again the OP's inquiry was a legal one, so I gave a philosophically legal answer. Hopefully the lord gives you the wisdom to understand this sort of concept and me the patience to figure out WTF I did to get you thinking so frigging out of context.


It is not my place to judge another individual, especially another veteran. I was not duped by the system into joining. I intentionally joined the last remnant of our organized militia system that has survived the unfortunate 1903 Militia Act, the National Guard. I wanted to be a productive civilian most of the time and a volunteer soldier part time. I have always been strongly against deployment of the national guard oversees. At this point in time, it has become nothing more than a reserve force supporting the standing federal army. I strongly dislike what has happened to OUR militia.

When somebody thanks me for my service, it makes me sad. It makes me sad because what they are *really* saying is, "Thank you for doing what I would not do". If a fellow veteran says this to me, it is different.

Militia service is the DUTY of every able bodied free person. It is why we have the second amendment. Having a bunch of untrained civilians running around solo with weapons was not the original intent. That was the compromise that enabled the 1903 Militia Act to dismantle the militia. The SCOTUS has had a tough time trying to determine what relevance the 2nd amendment really has in a post-militia America.

Americans became rather lazy and decided they had more pressing things to spend time on rather than militia service. Militia service in the late 1800s had the same appeal for most Americans as jury duty does today. The mood was ripe for the centralizers to finally be rid of this thorn in their side.

Perhaps the people would also like to be liberated of ever having to perform jury duty again? What if jury duty became volunteer like the military is now?

I do not regret my time in the guard. I learned a great deal and the knowledge and experience that enriched me personally was always a major motivation for me to join in the first place.

Do you know enlistment is a contract? If you join a national guard unit, there are still a number of legal differences versus putting yourself completely at the mercy of the federal standing army. One of them is that you can enlist into a particular unit. The standing army assigns you wherever it decides and you have no say. As a contract, you can negotiate the terms of your enlistment. Most people just try and get a bunch of bonus money. The state loves that. Fiat costs it nothing. I did something a little more creative. I specified that if the unit I was directly enlisting into were every disbanded, reorganized, or merged into another unit... I would be relieved of my contract obligations. Units are almost *always* reorganized, disbanded, and/or merged into other units when activated for federal foreign adventures. This is because the majority of guard units are at very low percent of total combat strength in terms of numbers. To become combat effective, units must be merged together.

You must *live* freedom. It is one thing to be a free individual but another entirely to live in a free society. There are things an individual must do to stay free and then duties they have to supporting a free society. A free individual in an unfree society has lots of challenges to say the least. Just look at where we are now.

We need our old militia system back, updated for the 21st century. It should include men AND women. You cannot force people to perform militia duty, which is why it died out and we got what we have today.
It will come back when the community decides that drilling one weekend a month is a duty that must not be forsaken.

A democratic, grass-roots, volunteer militia system brought into existence by a militia board created by an act of the county legislature which is separate from, but works hand in glove with the local elected county sheriff.

And... jury duty. And charitable community service to replace nanny. And hard money. And local democracy in action. And a non-interventionist federal foreign policy. They all go together and we have to start somewhere.

Just like the brave folks of the Free State project who openly carry guns and make other attempts to exercise rights as a way to preserve them, so did I in that spirit, choose militia service with the only available militia option at the time. With all my heart, I hope we adopt a new system which is a true militia of the people system, but it requires massive participation to work.

Nice Perspective

...And one not really expressed here enough.
....Thanks for the insight into militia/nat'l guard/active military.

WW1 & WW2 were bankster's wars, so I can't really agree totally on the
history of Germany written by the banksters.

And the ArchDuke Ferdinand?....just another excuse.
Germany wanted to build the 2nd Transcontinental Railway, in admiration and appreciation of what the USA did....(WE had the very 1st one).
THAT is the REAL reason for WW1...
The Treaty of Versailles was the REAL reason for WW2.
Inasmuch as the War on Terror is what it is, the War To End All Wars was much the same BS.
And NO... I am NOT a Nazi sympathizer, nor a skinhead (LOL!)
Thanks again.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

Let Me Ask This

If a military officer who ranks higher than you do asks you to kill an American citizen, would you obey the order?

Jury Duty

Imagine you are called for jury duty and the zealous county prosecutor asks you to vote to convict the person on trial of murder and render the death penalty. Would you vote to murder your fellow citizen using the court system as a juror?

A juror (unless they are a

A juror (unless they are a mindless drone) has no obligation to obey the county prosecutor, nor must they always obey the judge (if the juror is fully-informed of their authority independent of the judge).

A soldier (so long as they are a soldier) doesn't have authority independent of their superior. They can only leave the military in order to refuse an order, and suffer the consequences of disobedience or being AWOL.

That's the right and noble thing to do when given an immoral order from your superior. If more soldiers would do that, our government would not be nearly as tyrannical and bellicose as it is.

And UNLESS you've Served...

...And actually done that?.....
It's easier said than done.
...and not really a realistic viewpoint....sorry.
Rpanico333's comments below are what one needs to know BEFORE getting
into such a perilous scenario...we should all be so advised.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

There are on average 100,000

There are on average 100,000 guests reading DP on a daily basis. That's not chump change and DP ain't going anywhere. That being said, some issues are more touchy than others. The only opinion of you that matters is that of the Creator.

"The only opinion of you that

"The only opinion of you that matters is that of the Creator."

With due respect and dissent, I don't think that statement is helpful in the least. Bush Jr. says he had the approval of his creator. So do many twisted, ignorant people throughout history as well as today, as it relates to countless atrocities. The real opinion of their creator, if one exists, then, apparently has no bearing on the course of history. All the worse if it does...

Thus, I say the opinion of those who are actually living on this planet today are more important than any creator's, insofar as actions here on this planet are concerned.

Call it a matter of pragmatism if you are religious.

On the other hand, I most certainly am not religious.

So I call it a matter of reality.

So, In Reality...

...You are:
"Outer-Directed" versus "Inner-Directed"??
Bill Clinton was like that...still is..
He projected his "opinions" based upon "polls" ...
...or what he perceived was "popular", not personally arrived at.
A people-pleaser....Religion has nothing to do with it.
Personal responsibility and conviction...
Morals are NOT "Religious Tenets", nor can they be "Legislated".
They ARE "Guides for Life" arrived at by trial and error over generations and observations of societies as a whole.
What worked....what didn't....that's all.

"Beyond the blackened skyline, beyond the smoky rain, dreams never turned to ashes up until.........
...Everything CHANGED !!

It really depends..

on what that creator is telling you. I know many people who feel that God "speaks" to them and they do great things for their community. If that is what God is telling them to do, then I say go for it! haha..

and I am not religious either... but spiritual is a label I do not mind.

-Matthew Good

There are many ethical topics to think about.

If you are ordered by an authority figure to kill someone does morality trump that order? What if your rights are taken for not fulfilling said order?

All of that aside, I know many people, including my family, who have served and I would never disrespect them by calling them a murderer. I have friends now that wish to join the military, and I will not shun them or call them hateful names. I do bring up the morality aspect because I think it is important for people to say what they believe is good. I understand the dilemma of being on the front lines and faced with the question of "me or you". I can not sympathize because I have never been faced with the predicament, and hopefully never will.

I respect your service for this country and am not afraid of someone who shows pride in that.

-Matthew Good

Free or Not Free

Bear with me here. A little logic is needed.

It is a false premise to assume everybody who works at the job of solider has a free mind.

It is also a false premise to assume everybody who works at the job of soldier does not have a free mind.

Since some soldiers must have voluntarily chosen to be soldiers while also having a free mind, it would stand to reason that they would exercise that free mind just the same as if they were not wearing a government issued costume. Training and experiences on the job do not close the mind of a free person. Nothing can close the mind of a free person.

On the other hand, if some soldiers do not have free minds, then they will act just like people without government issued costumes who similarly are 'close minded'.

Workers in many professions are faced with moral dilemmas on a daily basis. Whether they compartmentalize their personal mortality based on role or asset themselves as a free minded individual depends on whether they are free minded or not. That is why you have murderous brutes co-existing with Bradley Mannings.

I agree

that those would be false premises.

Would it also be a false premise to assume that a free person cannot revert to a "close minded" form of thinking?

As Ron Paul shows, it is possible for a free minded person to voluntarily chose to be a soldier. He did it to avoid being on the front lines, but how many were so lucky?

You cannot forget about the psychological aspect of military training. We do have racists and religionists in our society, but some of the culture of the army can spread racism to those who were not before racist much more quickly. The officers encourage it from what I hear. The dehumanizing factor mixed with our social tendency towards the herd mentality equals an effective empire soldier.

I have met the murderous brutes you speak of. They were racist and blood thirsty. If I hear such things I always point it back in the direction of humanity and hope they listen.

-Matthew Good

"I respect your service for

"I respect your service for this country and am not afraid of someone who shows pride in that."

Respect his service? Not afraid of someone who shows pride in that? How do those sentiments relate? And please see my earlier comment in this same thread here: http://www.dailypaul.com/281254#comment-3032141

Yes... I read that..

He believes he served honorably, and I respect him for doing what he did with honor. Respect is interesting to me. I tend to give it first, and if needed, revoke it second. It is the way I wish to operate. It allows people to have a constructive conversation. In my experience, people do not like people who are aggressive and rude. If changing hearts and minds is your goal, being rude cannot be in the equation. If this is not your goal, then what is your purpose in the freedom movement?

-Matthew Good

If changing hearts and minds

If changing hearts and minds is your goal, being rude cannot be in the equation.

False. Moreover, "being rude" is subjective in the first place. After all, it is well observed within these cyber-walls that "truth is treason in an empire of lies." That is, truthful observation is often mistaken for "rudeness" by virtue of its unconventional nature.

In addition, when you say "He believes he served honorably, and I respect him for doing what he did with honor," I can't help but think of how accommodating and apologetic you might have been for the worst tyrants in history on the basis of their professed benevolent and honorable intentions.

What a joke.

Grow a pair, and assert something other than what amounts to a surreptitious strategy for influencing others, that you merely pass off under the guise of the label "respect."

You have a point...

If that is how I would judge a person's merits, then why not be accommodating and apologetic for evil tyrants as well? In short, I actually try not to blindly trust just what a person says on face value. I have seen Chessienut's postings every now and then, and based on that, I have decided that he has my respect. We all must place trust in something, so I choose some of my fellow people.

The idea of someone being rude is subjective. Most people also dislike many of the same things. I am sure most people, if they do not believe they are murderers, hate being called as such. That is not a reason to keep from calling someone a murderer, but we can all agree that there are some who kill people that do not deserve the title. ie.. people who were caught in the Vietnam War because of our "need" to keep the dominoes from collapsing into the hands of Communism. It was really a life or death situation for our soldiers.

Another thing most people forget is that truth can be as subjective as being rude. After all, it is all trying to be figured out in the mind.

So I suppose my question is, do you think calling someone names like "phucking blind stupidity" is being rude?

-Matthew Good


I found this site and wanted to share.
Does God Approve of War?
This is a little long but I thought this was a good read in a time such as this.....

A Nation at WarIn a time of uncertainty and the global threat of terror, Christians must ask the bold question, "Does God favor war?"

Ecclesiastes 3:8 states that there is a "time for war and a time for peace." In these times of warfare, we often ask, "How should we respond? What should be our attitude?" We will find biblical answers for these questions when we explore the ultimate issue: What does the Word of God say about warfare?

When a nation goes to war, God's people need to fully understand their heavenly Father's viewpoint about this matter. Naturally, God is not excited about war. He does not enjoy bloodshed and vengeance. However, He is dealing with a world of people who have a fallen nature-sinful, wicked and vile. Romans 3:10-11,15-17 describes mankind without God: "…there is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God. . . . Their feet are swift to shed blood, destruction and misery are in their paths, and the path of peace they have not known."


"A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace."
Ecclesiastes 3:8 (KJV)

"Even before you begin your attack,while your plans are ripening like grapes,the Lord will cut off your new growth with pruning shears.
He will snip off and discard your spreading branches."
Isaiah 18:5 (NIV)

"For I know the plans I have for you,” says the Lord. “They are plans for good and not for disaster, to give you a future and a hope."
Jeremiah 29:11 (NLT)

"Nation will go to war against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in many parts of the world, as well as famines. But this is only the first of the birth pains, with more to come."
Mark 13:8 (NLT)

"For waging war you need guidance, and for victory many advisers."
Proverbs 24:26 (NIV)

"For the LORD your God is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory."
Deuteronomy 20:4 (NIV)

"The horse is made ready for the day of battle, but victory rests with the LORD."
Proverbs 21:31 (NIV)

"But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."
1 Corinthians 15:57 (NIV)

I hope this helps and God Bless!

Why do you have several Old

Why do you have several Old Testament quotes and only 2 from the New Testament (including the one, "He gives us the victory...", which could have as much to do with war as it does with winning a dispute with your next-door neighbor)?

Merely citing random, out of context verses from the Old Testament doesn't help at all with the New Testament reality that we've been in for the past 2,000 years. Does anyone who made that website know anything about the difference between the old covenant and the new covenant; that the law came through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ; how Jesus explains the summarized essence of the Law and the Prophets (which means the entire Old Testament)and is Himself the fulfillment of the law?

The Old Testament verses you quote here are mostly from the historical books that tell what happened at a specific time and place for a specific reason, while there are plenty of New Testament verses, especially principles that Jesus taught, that are meant to help people know the principles to apply to whatever situation we find ourselves in now.

Mathew 5 and 6 is a good place to start to understand what the roots of murder, lust and greed are, and therefore, how to make sure you're not falling into any of those sins. Study the red-letter words of Jesus and you'll understand more about morality than any amount of random word searches through the Old Testament. Romans 1-15 is for people who are ready to graduate into applying the Christian worldview to politics, international relations and our relationship with temporal, human governments. Then, and only then, can you comfortably dare to morally navigate the harsh and brutal, pre-grace and truth, world of the Old Testament.

The list you got from that website reminds me of the shallow, simplistic verses that a committee I was on came up with for the 2005 National Day of Prayer. God forgive me for not questioning that mindless display of Christian arrogance and ignorance.


How would anyone know you better than you know yourself to say that?

From a moral perspective, the military is there as an aggressive force with the goal of posturing, threatening, scaring, demoralizing and killing anyone who opposes our lifestyle and culture. Not to mention making money off poor kids from bad neighborhoods. It's why I never joined. I accept others and think that the majority of people on this planet are good. Not to be blown up for flags, honor, medals, bragging rights, boosting my ego, hero stories to tell my grand kids and the lack of diplomatic ability by our leaders. If our military was purely defensive I would have a different opinion.

What you are going through is the one thing the recruitment office didn't tell you for a reason. Most of the homeless on the streets are also (in majority) vets. There isn't any real honor in joining like the TV commercials show. That's all fantasy.

It's A Moral Quandary

It's a moral quandary. On the one hand liberty stresses the individual ergo it also stresses individual responsibility. So you can't truly believe in liberty if you believe in socializing responsibility of individual actions.

So here we have a soldier who chose to serve in the military. He knew what he was signing up for, didn't he? But did he really? Is there not some inevitability when we put these kids through a never-ending indoctrination mill from shortly after birth? Doesn't that also count for something? Isn't it amazing anyone wakes up from that deep level indoctrination?

So give credit where credit is due. Many people come to liberty after being on the other side of line. As long as they are awake to that fact and will now make an effort to ensure others don't meet the same fate, why would you want to alienate that person? Why?

More stupidity from the Daily Paul berating this guy.

"In reality, the Constitution itself is incapable of achieving what we would like in limiting government power, no matter how well written."

~ Ron Paul, End the Fed

More stupidity from the Daily

"More stupidity from the Daily Paul berating this guy."

Stupidity from the Daily Paul? Berating this guy? That's quite the twofold, sweeping statement.

If I may, I think it would be preferable, in the interest both of productive conversation as well as the individualistic nature of the liberty movement, if, rather than sweeping accusations, you'd respond specifically to those who you think are involved in propagating such stupidity and unjust berating of the OP.

Wouldn't you agree?

I am not going to

sit here and call you sir, you made a choice to serve and potentially kill, not I. You made a mistake of not doing enough research, because if you would have you wouldn't have joined. Knowing what you know now I can see you prolly wouldn't serve the servants, but to sit here and cry like a little girl about people calling you a murderer because you associated with murderers doesn't make us wrong or stupid. You say your sick of people like me trashing you well I am sick of people like you thinking you did something honorable. War is disgusting and it is natural for a person educated in such manners to be disgusted by the likes of those who served, I think it is dumb you served, I think it's retarded you referred to someone serving the military as someone not infringing on the rights of those slain by your swords. What you participated in is preposterous, it is evil in every since of the word that people imply exists but really doesn't. Good people do good things, and are proud of the great things they do for others, you are proud of yourself for things you did for selfish reasons. One day you will realize everything you did there is regrettable, your here, so your awake, but you still got a lot of waking up to do brotha.

You just got PAULED!

First of all....Thanks for your service.

It is appreciated.

Second, I agree that "This site is now approaching a critical mass where self destruction is imminent."
"this place is in dire need of an enema."

but I don't have the optimistic view you do. Things are just too far gone. Wish I felt differently.

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
Friedrich Nietzsche

"Thanks for your

"Thanks for your service."

Stupidest thing I've ever heard people say, and they say it all the time.

What service are you thanking him for? Do you personally know all of what his "service" actually entailed? Then why the phuck are you thanking him for it before asking?

What if he was involved in MK Ultra? Would you still be thankful for his service?

What if he was involved in the chemical experiments on unwitting St Louis residents? Would you still be thankful for his service?

What if he was involved in the wanton murder of foreigners on behalf of the state, which had nothing to do with protecting your freedom or anything close to it? Would you still be thankful for his service?

What phucking blind stupidity is this ignorant reflex to "thank" military members for their "service."

It would be one thing if you asked about it and received sufficient details to make the judgment. That's clearly not the case.

Propaganda as it pertains to military is powerful. You are perfect evidence of this fact.

Turn your brain back on.

If you pay taxes....

You are an accessory to murder.

Really? Even though tax

Really? Even though tax dollars are fungible, you can track the ones you pay, to the penny, to specific acts carried out by the state? And even more specifically, if you don't pay taxes, which results in having your assets seized against your will anyway, which go to fund that same specific act by the state, you're magically relieved of your moral responsibility? Even though your assets predictably funded the same act by the state?

Or can we just all assume that your oversimplification here is absurd?

I'm gonna go with that last option.

Taxes only pay the interest on the principle.

We borrow the money we waste on war and government.

Free includes debt-free!