Quote:
Originally Posted by W.E.B. Du Bois
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.
|
Again, this is totally false. You introduced the word "conspiracy." I stated there was a conflict of interest, but went on to clarify that it did not, in and of itself, disqualify the source. I then went on to explain specifically why their information was flawed.
Quote:
|
Also, your argument is wrong as the Founders of the Constitution supported a standing army.
|
Again...
The vast majority of Founding Fathers, and a majority of the most influential Founding Fathers, supported the militia as the primary means of national defense. This majority allowed for the creation of a standing army for emergency situations, but did not intend for it to replace the militia as the primary means of defense. They believed the United States should remain neutral in foreign wars and should use the militia and army for defensive purposes only. They would not support current U.S. foreign policy.
Quote:
|
Furthermore, your argument is flawed since it has relied heavily upon quoting Jefferson,
|
No, my argument hasn't relied on heavy quotes from Jefferson. The secondary quotes were merely to show solidarity between Jefferson's and Madison's views, since they were political allies, good friends, and members of the same political party.
Quote:
Madison calling for a standing army before he was president in the Federalist Papers:
EDSITEment - Lesson Plan
Later as President, Madison then went on to build that standing army
|
This has already been shown to be invalid:
But what were Madison's actions after the war ended? Did he relentlessly pursue a standing army? No.
In fact, he reiterated his support of the militia in his state of the union speech in 1815. He did call for more military schools, which would also potentially be used for training of the militia as well, but he did not want the primary means of defense to be a standing army:
"As an improvement in our military establishment, it will deserve the consideration of Congress whether a corps of invalids might not be so organized and employed as at once to aid in the support of meritorious individuals excluded by age or infirmities from the existing establishment, and to procure to the public the benefit of their stationary services and of their exemplary discipline.
I recommend also an enlargement of the Military Academy already established, and the establishment of others in other sections of the Union; and I can not press too much on the attention of Congress such
a classification and organization of the militia as will most effectually render it the safeguard of a free state. If experience has shewn in the recent splendid achievements of militia the value of this resource for the public defense, it has shewn also the importance of that skill in the use of arms and that familiarity with the essential rules of discipline which can not be expected from the regulations now in force. With this subject is intimately connected the necessity of accommodating the laws in every respect to the great object of enabling the political authority of the Union to employ promptly and effectually the physical power of the Union
in the cases designated by the Constitution."
Link