Observations

It appears to me our current national security policy is more dependent on the incompetence of our enemies than it is on the competence of our leaders.

Advertisements

13 Responses to Observations

  1. Bettawrekonize says:

    Hey, it’s working so far 🙂

    Anyways, it’s not like Bush or the republicans did any better. I’m not defending the democrats either, but to say that the republicans have done better is also untrue.

  2. jackhudson says:

    9/11 notwithstanding we have had more domestic terror attacks since 2009 then we had since 2001. I would say something has gone wrong with our national security policy.

  3. Bettawrekonize says:

    and that’s despite all the policies that Bush put in place that were supposed to stop all this. The department of homeland security and the patriot act seem to have done little to fix anything.

  4. Bettawrekonize says:

    and lets not forget about the shoe bomber and there are a couple other ones I can’t remember off the top of my head.

    No offense, but republicans are not being constructive and haven’t been constructive lately, even though they do have some good points to make, their delivery and finger pointing and extreme over reactive rhetoric against anyone on anything any chance they get simply isn’t getting them anywhere in the political arena. They need to act more civil, they have some good points but their delivery isn’t convincing anyone of anything. It’s partly why democrats are, by and large, getting elected over republicans lately and the democrats themselves are doing some things I don’t like either (actually, as you already know, I don’t like either party. I’m libertarian).

  5. jackhudson says:

    and that’s despite all the policies that Bush put in place that were supposed to stop all this. The department of homeland security and the patriot act seem to have done little to fix anything.

    Policies are only as good as the officials carrying them out. Unfortunately, the current administration seems more concerned about the tea partiers saying unpleasant things then they are about Islamists actually trying to kill us.

    No offense, but republicans are not being constructive and haven’t been constructive lately, even though they do have some good points to make, their delivery and finger pointing and extreme over reactive rhetoric against anyone on anything any chance they get simply isn’t getting them anywhere in the political arena. They need to act more civil, they have some good points but their delivery isn’t convincing anyone of anything. It’s partly why democrats are, by and large, getting elected over republicans lately and the democrats themselves are doing some things I don’t like either (actually, as you already know, I don’t like either party. I’m libertarian).

    No offense taken.

    While I think the Republicans have done plenty wrong (which explains why they were ousted from office to begin with – they were becoming indistinguishable from Democrats in many respects) I would disagree that Democrats are getting elected over Republicans lately – in fact there have been a number of Republican upsets in the last few elections, and a number of Democrats are retiring from office because they are facing virtually insurmountable re-election battles. Unless the Republicans do something to totally blow it (always a possibility), they may very well return to power in Congress come November.

  6. Bettawrekonize says:

    “Unless the Republicans do something to totally blow it (always a possibility), they may very well return to power in Congress come November.”

    I think we need a healthy balance between the two, but I also think we need more libertarians in office to address issues of civil and individual freedoms (something BOTH parties seem to be lacking). and to address our absurd intellectual property laws (sorry for being off topic) and add balance to that mix, I would like some pirate partisans in office as well.

  7. jackhudson says:

    I would be curious to see how you would describe what an optimum libertarian is like on the issues?

  8. Bettawrekonize says:

    As far as national security goes I don’t really know (I have some thoughts but I don’t think we can ever come to a foolproof solution). but I don’t want our freedoms taken away in the name of national security because, to some extent, that makes us no better than those we are trying to suppress. and I don’t really think an authoritarian nation that takes away our freedoms in the name of national security really works.

    but in terms of civil liberties and whatnot, I am not just referring to issues that pertain to national security. For instance, I don’t know if you’ve glanced at my red yeast rice and health thread under the conspiracy section of crosswalk or my FDA and health thread, but these people do a lot to take away our health freedoms and often times do so at the influence of big pharmaceutical, chemical/pesticide, and agricultural (ie: Monsanto) corporations. Yet they allow smoking, alcohol, etc.. which have very little medicinal value and are far worse than many of the natural herbs they do outlaw (and many of the pharma drugs they legalize are also worse and often less effective at treating illnesses). Often times, as in the case of Marijuana and Ephedra, the FDA would ban an herb or ban variations of an herb that have certain compounds under the pretext that those compounds are harmful, but then they’ll turn around and allow pharmaceutical corporations to patent and sell those very same/similar compounds in synthetic form. Stevia was banned as a sweetener, despite the fact that there is no evidence that it’s harmful (and I’ve read the studies) and the FDA allows it to be sold as a dietary supplement provided that the seller does not make any claims as to what it does, but Coke/Pepsi got approval for a patent of one of its components that it can sell as Truvia/Purvia (Rebaudioside A). The whole thing is frankly a scam.

    Personal responsibility is OK when it comes to cigarette smoking but it’s not OK when it comes to dictating which medicine you can have. That’s just one example of the civil liberties I am referring to. Really has little to do with national security and often times the laws aren’t even intended for the public benefit.

  9. Dan says:

    I’m thinking that a libertarian who runs as on a republican ticket, calls himself a conservative, and talks like a libertarian would have a good chance of being elected.

  10. jackhudson says:

    Isn’t that sort of what Ron Paul is?

    It would seem to me that the whole idea of a small or smaller government is an essentially libertarian ideal.

  11. Bettawrekonize says:

    In any given situation, who’s going to be able to respond to the situation the quickest? Those who are in close proximity to situation/bomb/threat. I think a system that teaches everyone how to identify and respond to potentially dangerous situations for their own safety and the safety of those around them would be an improvement over what we currently have.

    Just like cars have horns to warn others of ones presence to avoid an accident, I think perhaps cars can have a built in button that you can press, perhaps on your radio, and talk to a microphone which will communicate with other cars in close proximity in case of a potential emergency. We can have standards regarding what to look for, when it can and can’t be used (ie: not for chatting), etc.. Will it solve the problem? Probably not. Will it help? It could. Will it cost money? I don’t see a solution that won’t.

    Airplanes often have big screens that people can watch. Perhaps having a video at the beginning of each flight informing passengers what to look for in an airplane, when boarding an airplane, in an airport, etc… and how to respond.

    Perhaps 911 can have a text messaging alert center where people can try and secretly send emergency text messages in dangerous situations to authorities and text messaging to this alert center can be enabled all throughout a flight and everywhere?

    These ideas are just some brainstorming ideas, nothing concrete, but I think getting everyone more involved and giving everyone the communication tools to warn authorities and each other and the knowledge about to look for and how to respond is a good idea.

  12. Bettawrekonize says:

    about what to look for *

  13. Bettawrekonize says:

    Also, it’s practically impossible for the government to watch everything all at once, even if you had cameras everywhere you need someone to actually watch all that footage which requires tons of manpower. That’s why we have 911, so that everyone can act as the eyes of the government and help direct authorities towards various emergencies. The citizens sort of act as the intelligence for the authorities. Imagine if we just had cameras everywhere and no one ever called 911 under the pretext that authorities watching those cameras should automatically spot emergencies and so no one needs to call 911. It would be a disaster. The same thing applies here.

    We kinda need a system like that, where citizens know what to look for in terms of terrorists and they know how to get themselves and others around them out of danger and when to contact authorities and when not to. Kinda like when you’re young, you are taught when to call 911 (in case of an emergency), what does and what doesn’t constitute an emergency, etc… Same thing here, we should systematically be taught what to look for, how to respond, and when to contact authorities and when not to.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: