It is very sad that a repeat of the bloody roaring 20’s is underway in the United States.
Weather of not the 911 attacks were self impossed or not: The event has given excuse after excuse to the taking of personal freedoms here in the United States.
When simple money of power could not overcome simple common sense, it is becoming more apparent that physical attacks and murder may be their last effort.
By the way, it is NOT the american people (as niave as they may be) that are perpatrating these acts. It IS a power structure which is worldwide, using the biggest club (the US industrial military complex) to do the most damage to world freedom they can.
The REAL war is not against ‘terrorism’. The REAL war is against FREEDOM…Your’s and Mine.
Loosing civil liberties is an unfortunate bi-product of strengthening the homeland defense.
It is inevitable that Americans will loose some freedoms if authorities are forced to clamp down and scrutinize every sector of society. Hopefully some of the lost privileges can be regained when problems are resolved. In the mean time American freedoms suffers.
Those who advocate against strong offensive measures to protect America and it's interests are either advocating for stronger defensive measures, (which will result in giving up more freedoms)
Or advocating a do nothing or the appeasement approach which will allow certain "organizations" to fester similar to North Korea result.
What should America do in dealing with the war on Militant Islam?
1) strengthen offensives
2) strengthen defense
3) bake cupcakes for militants?
What should America do in dealing with the war on Militant Islam?
1) strengthen offensives
2) strengthen defense
3) bake cupcakes for militants?
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by MMike: *
Loosing civil liberties is an unfortunate bi-product of strengthening the homeland defense.
It is inevitable that Americans will loose some freedoms if authorities are forced to clamp down and scrutinize every sector of society. Hopefully some of the lost privileges can be regained when problems are resolved. In the mean time American freedoms suffers.
Those who advocate against strong offensive measures to protect America and it's interests are either advocating for stronger defensive measures, (which will result in giving up more freedoms)
Or advocating a do nothing or the appeasement approach which will allow certain "organizations" to fester similar to North Korea result.
What should America do in dealing with the war on Militant Islam?
1) strengthen offensives
2) strengthen defense
3) bake cupcakes for militants?
[/QUOTE]
I have a great idea. Stop using the excuse that we are the only one's who have enough intelligence to have the bomb. We are not. In fact, if you look at the actions of the United States in the last 25 years, you would have to agree that this country should not have the bomb either.
By the way, who made the United States the boss, anyway? I don't agree with lots of things lots of people do, but I agree on this...people of one country do not have the right to tell people of another country how to run their bussiness.
At this point, I would imagine you are getting ready to resite this event or that event in order to make the point that some country or another is a bad risk.
Anyone who has read and qualified the posts here at Gupshup will have to admit that any point you bring up can be countered by another showing that the United States cannot be trusted to be the one who decides.
We do have a United Nations now, for good or bad. Don't let the class bully take away anymore freedoms in the name of peace. What a farce!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by MMike: *
Loosing civil liberties is an unfortunate bi-product of strengthening the homeland defense.
[/QUOTE]
Or, just an excuse as used by a lot of dictatorial governments around the world to increase their control over people's lives, and restrict their freedoms. If it was just about protecting Homeland Defence then the US government would not be so coy about some of the claims it makes about terrorism. But chooses to hide behind 'national security' concerns.