Again, your argument is ridiculous. You can't blame me for that. You have stated that a source I proved from the National Endowment for the Humanities is part of a government conspiracy. Your comment is a typical Paulist conspiracy theory.
Also, your argument is wrong as the Founders of the Constitution supported a standing army. Furthermore, your argument is flawed since it has relied heavily upon quoting Jefferson, who was not a founder of the Constitution and was in Europe during the Constitutional Convention.
Madison calling for a standing army before he was president in
the Federalist Papers:
EDSITEment - Lesson Plan
Quote:
Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men.
....
|
Later as President, Madison then went on to build that standing army that he called for to do of all things: conquer Canada, flying right in the face of your claim that the founders "weren't neocon warmongers."
I don't even need to trot out Washington and Hamilton calling for a standing army. The fact above alone destroys your argument (once again).
WEB