Discussion:
Freedom for Security?
(too old to reply)
Nate
2004-02-05 23:37:31 UTC
Permalink
Making a war on terror elects people on the right of the political spectrum.
Creating a war on drugs elects people on the right of the political
spectrum. But the question that we need to ask isn't, "Are conservatives
tougher than liberals?" The question we need to ask is, "Is this war
winnable with security?" And the short answer is, it's not winnable with
security, and that is self evident. All you have to do is back away from
the emotionalism of this issue and take a look at Israel.



Are they tough on terrorism? Every time there's a bombing, they retaliate.
They've bombed Syria recently. They go into the Gaza and they go into the
West Bank and they blow up the homes of the young men and women who engage
in suicide bombings. Every time there's a suicide attack, every time there'
s a terrorist attack, and these attacks are terrorist attacks - they're
attacks on civilians. Ever time, they retaliate.



In front of every building in Israel, there is an armed guard with a machine
gun. Everyone who gets on a bus is watched by every person on that bus.
You can go nowhere in Israel without being checked. Israel is creating a
police state to solve their problems with security. Has it worked? Would
you want to live in Israel today? Do you think Israel, for all its
security, is safer today than it was twenty years ago? If you do, I've got
a bridge I'd like to sell you in Brooklyn.



Security isn't the answer to this problem. Look at the United States. We
can increase security to the point that we have betrayed the principles this
country was founded on, but we can't stop terrorism without installing, for
all practical purposes, a Stalinist dictatorship. Benjamin Franklin once
said, "They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety,
deserve neither liberty nor safety."



It can't be stopped. Every major building in the United States is a width
of a sidewalk away from somebody who wants to rent a truck from Ryder and
start going to places like Home Depot and buying fifty-pound sacs of
nitrogen fertilizer. That's what Timothy McVeigh did. You've only got to
buy twenty bags of fertilizer to have a bomb the size Timothy McVeigh used
to blow up the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma. Could you drive that
truck up next to a big building without being stopped? Could you drive it
across the sidewalk without being stopped? Could you lock up the truck and
walk away from it without being stopped? I think you could. And that's if
you're not a suicide bomber. If you wanted to live and do it you could get
away with it.
--
http://www.gentlemanjim.net/
Jim Austin
2004-05-17 07:34:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nate
Making a war on terror elects people on the right of the political spectrum.
Creating a war on drugs elects people on the right of the political
spectrum.
That's because those on the right of the political spectrum range from
a weak, wimpy response to terrorism to out and out sympathy for
terrorists.
Post by Nate
But the question that we need to ask isn't, "Are conservatives
tougher than liberals?"
To which the answer would be a resounding "Yes."
Post by Nate
The question we need to ask is, "Is this war winnable with security?"
Does Nate consider the war more winnable with insecurity?
Post by Nate
And the short answer is, it's not winnable with security, and that is
self evident. All you have to do is back away from
the emotionalism of this issue and take a look at Israel.
Are they tough on terrorism? Every time there's a bombing, they retaliate.
They've bombed Syria recently. They go into the Gaza and they go into the
West Bank and they blow up the homes of the young men and women who engage
in suicide bombings. Every time there's a suicide attack, every time there'
s a terrorist attack, and these attacks are terrorist attacks - they're
attacks on civilians. Ever time, they retaliate.
Nate would prefer that terrorists be able to strike with impunity
without resistance, opposition or retaliation.
Post by Nate
In front of every building in Israel, there is an armed guard with a machine
gun. Everyone who gets on a bus is watched by every person on that bus.
You can go nowhere in Israel without being checked. Israel is creating a
police state to solve their problems with security. Has it worked? Would
you want to live in Israel today? Do you think Israel, for all its
security, is safer today than it was twenty years ago? If you do, I've got
a bridge I'd like to sell you in Brooklyn.
Actually, the big increase in terrorism in Israel began with their
negotiations with the Palestinians.
Post by Nate
Security isn't the answer to this problem.
Nate thinks insecurity is the answer.
Post by Nate
Look at the United States. We can increase security to the point that
we have betrayed the principles this country was founded on,...
This country was not founded on pacifism.
Post by Nate
...but we can't stop terrorism without installing, for all practical purposes,
a Stalinist dictatorship.
Actually, a Stalinist dictatorship is precisely what leftists in this
country want.
Post by Nate
Benjamin Franklin once said, "They that give up essential liberty
to obtain temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Franklin was talking about those who wanted to surrender their liberty
to those who threatened our safety, which is precisely what Nate wants
us to do.
Post by Nate
It can't be stopped. Every major building in the United States is a width
of a sidewalk away from somebody who wants to rent a truck from Ryder and
start going to places like Home Depot and buying fifty-pound sacs of
nitrogen fertilizer. That's what Timothy McVeigh did. You've only got to
buy twenty bags of fertilizer to have a bomb the size Timothy McVeigh used
to blow up the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma. Could you drive that
truck up next to a big building without being stopped? Could you drive it
across the sidewalk without being stopped? Could you lock up the truck and
walk away from it without being stopped? I think you could. And that's if
you're not a suicide bomber. If you wanted to live and do it you could get
away with it.
Actually, it can be stopped. U.S. is threatened by state sponsored
terrorism. That means that nations, particularly in the Middle East
fund terrorist organizations, providing them with weapons, training
bases, etc. The U.S. has stomped on two of such nations, but
international terrorists still get funding from Iran, Syria, Saudi
Arabia, etc.

Loading...