Tom, you rock! What a great interview.

Loved the interview. Tom rocks as always.

I'm predicting Adam Kokesh returns the favor by providing his own heartfelt advice for happiness and fun. :) Maybe he'll even send you some stuff from SilkRoad.

hi tom

I am an israeli citizen, what do you think the israeli goverment should do about iran? is it ok to try stop someone from developing nukes while he threatens to "wipe you off the map"?

Ahmadinejad DID NOT threaten to "wipe Israel off the map.":

http://youtu.be/4mScWWtRfGQ

And he's not in charge of the military.

Not really. There are diplomatic options. Government's should try them. People are so easily persuaded by what should amount to a last resort option. Even retrospectively, they extol the so-called freedoms borne out of wars, which are known to have been based on dubious circumstances. Think sanctions, treaties and imperialism.

Considering the distortions created in the middle east; interventions that allow recipients of U.S. largesse to act with impunity, could you justify an attack on Iran in retrospect, or would it appear utterly irresponsible once you acquired a little more than prima facie evidence?
Maybe it's useless mentioning the imposition in the mid-east that Israel is, which has led to much bloodshed over the years, but if you believe pre-emptively attacking Iran is in your best interests, then I would suggest doing it alone, without a cent from the U.S., which complicates matters much further.
That's my opinion anyway.

Isreal is a criminal terror-state which did 9/11, like they attacked the USS Liberty, stole the land fm Palestinians and mass-murdered the people, which mass-murder continues today. Isreal SHOULD BE WIPED OFF THE MAP, indubitably.

This is the last insane remark allowed from you.

Took way too long on this one, Tom.

Go fuck urself, scum

Because I don't want to massacre an entire country. Nice manners. You reflect your insane views well.

Act like a punk, be treated like one, comrade--u're no diff. fm the establishment captured by zionists and their Fed COUNTERFEIT scam. And if there's something "insane," then u need to make an argument, (a) what's insane, and (b) why.

Note massacre-ing an "entire country" is something aside fm letting them know appropriate sentiment. Zionists, et al., are murderers whose ancestors murdered Christ, as they hate truth, etc., according to Gosp. JOHN 8:44.

I suppose your dignified behavior is a reflection of the civilization you profess to defend?

Unfortunately, that kind of anti-semitic response is quit common in libertarian forums. It just demonstrates whay we have to deal with in the middle east.

Stoping iran from getting nukes is not a "pre-crime", that weapon is clearly not for self defence, like the israeli wepon is, Iran goal is to build a muslim jihadist empire, not to live peacefully with it's neighbours.

There are eve som Ron Paul supporters in Israel, and people who are inspired
by his views on economic and social freedom. But like I said, this guy
often sounds crazy by stating that the only problem with the world is
USA intervention. what about Iran intervention, Syria or all other
terror supporting countries?

Ron Paul didn't say the only problem is u.s. intervention. It is not the job to be world policeman or best friends to everyone. The best position is neutrality. If Israel feels threatened let them take on Iran. They are not the 51st state of America.

"Sounds crazy"--says the zionist liar, ho ho ho. "USA intervention" is simply enforcement of Fed COUNTERFEITING scam behind UN and "Agenda-21" genocide.

Syria has just lately been bombed by terror-state Israeli murderers supporting their al qaeda terrorist allies, using depleted uranium in the bombs, of course.

The reason they act like this is because of these paranoid conspiracy theories that seems to have captured people's minds these days. I know people like that myself. Although the ones I know idiotically think its the Vatican behind every evil act.

Don't get me wrong I frankly want nothing to do with Israel. I mean, it's not like it's the 51st state. They shouldn't get any US taxpayer aid and neither should anyone else.

Ho ho--zionist just blithely follows one set of lies w. another--typical.

I'm Christian soldier who upholds TRUTH, foremost Christian ideal (Gosp. JOHN 14:6), against zionist murderers intent upon genocide of "Agenda-21"--haven't u hrd about this?

This is serious business, don't u think?--and they're already well underway for mass-murder, merely doing it by slow-kill methods, presently, according to our good friend, Alexei Jones (InfoWars.com)--by means of poison fluoride in water supplies for most of the nation, still; toxic vaccines; poisoned food additives, like aspartame; poison GMO foods; "Chem-trail" geo-engineering and poisoning of ground-soil; forced drugging of the population, 20% of school-kids, 20% of females; and radiation-poisoning as is happening to population of US west coast, reflected in radically increased thyroid problems in new-borns.

These type of posters really should be perma-banned from posting here.

I plan to, but have been on the road, and it's annoying to deal with this stuff on a smartphone.

Please don't, Tom, this guy is basically a charicature of himself, I love it.

Heck, maybe he's just a teenager trolling.

The cowardly suck-up sticking-up for the truth, ho ho ho

See, there are some crazy people in this world who think it's bad manners to come to someone else's site and start using foul language. It's even worse manners to suggest that another country be wiped off the map, with all that entails in terms of dead bodies. Sure, you meant that only in some allegorical sense. Sure. That's why you were so careful to make that clear in your initial post.

Oh, and anyone who disagrees with you is a Zionist stooge, probably getting a check from the state of Israel itself.

Will you convert anyone to your point of view by acting this way? Probably not. If you do, they will doubtless be just as civilized -- and just as oblivious to their own savagery -- as you are.

Good job Tom for putting apollonian in his place. He showed how childish he was by coming on here and using profanity.

The guy isn't a libertarian and I bet he doesn't believe what he's writing. He dislikes libertarians and wants to smear us by associating us with conspiracy theorists and anti-Semites. I understand that as a historically marginalized group, and as a result of our philosophy, libertarians are hesitant to declare that kooks who come around us are indeed kooks. Some of this no doubt stems from our treatment at the hand of the National Review crowd during their purge of the conservative movement, but the cause of liberty has no use for 911 truthers, anti-Semites (though we should most assuredly welcome honest reasonable and forceful critiques of Israel) and the like. I don't want to suggest that we have thought police or anything, but there are some rather fuzzily defined bounds of what qualifies as rational discourse and I think we should be better about defining where those bounds are and making damn sure that those who can't operate within those bounds can't be lumped in with us.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's really Mark Potak. And you're right, we can act reasonable and criticize the u.n. and agenda 21 without getting anti-Semitic.

The US -- and Israeli -- intelligence consensus is that Iran is not
currently developing a nuclear weapon and has not yet made a decision to
do so; and the IAEA concurs. Nor is there any reason to believe that
the mullahs who hold the real reins of power in Tehran would rush to
national suicide, even if they *did* acquire a nuke. Like most states,
the one centered in Tehran is principally concerned with staying alive
and in power. And lobbing an atomic bomb at *heavily nuclear-armed* and
US-allied Israel, either directly or by terrorist proxy, would *not* be
conducive to such a goal.

Indeed, a Persian nuke, were one to
be created, would mostly be intended as a deterrent against US-Israeli
attack -- something which Iran currently has every reason to fear.
After all, don't both of these allied countries threaten to attack Iran
on a regular basis? And their threats can hardly be regarded as empty.
For one of them, whose military bases pepper the region, has already
invaded two countries on Iran's borders. And the other (perhaps with
the assistance and certainly with the approbation of its ally) has
brazenly assassinated nuclear scientists within Iran proper. Further,
at least one of them -- and likely both-- have provided support and
funding to brutal anti-Tehran terrorist organizations such as Jundallah
and MeK. And both have been the driving forces behind a cruel and
counterproductive international sanctions regime whose principal victims
have been and will continue to be Iranian civilians. Also, don't forget that these nations, along with sundry allied and client states, are currently making a bloody example of Iran's ally Syria, mostly via Sunni Islamist proxies (though that may soon change, if Israel's recent bombing raids into that nation are any indication).

As for
what "the Israeli government should do": IF they're *truly* concerned
about Iran possessing a nuclear weapon and desire the *most efficient*
and *least bloody* way of preventing such an eventuality -- and are not
just using this so-called "existential threat" as a pretext for
furthering their own geopolitical ambitions and checking the current and
potential competition --, they should: 1.) tone down the sword
rattling; 2.) cease carrying out and instigating terrorism against Iran;
3.) urge the US to back off from Iran and perhaps from regional affairs in general; 4.) push for a general easing of
sanctions; and 5.) try the untried: *bona fide* diplomacy.

One
doesn't have to love the creeps who currently rule in Tehran to see
that said creeps are not strangers to rational self-interest -- and,
further, that seriously seeking a modus vivendi with an old
and well-established regional presence (i.e., Iran/Persia) is far
preferable to madly stacking fuel and readying matches for a
conflagration which may leave even Israel and the US badly burned. And living with Iran, whether it has nuclear arms or no, ought to be even easier for the US, as it
has no *real* national interests in the region, and would therefore be
best served by a policy of judicious neutrality.