Pudge and i recently had somewhat of an argument over politics. at the end of which he/she felt it was best to mark me as foe. i still have left pudge as a 'friend' and am not going to re-evaluate that any time soon. basically i replied to someone in pudge's je, after which pudge replied to me and refuted several of my statements. pudge's rebuttals fall within, and are in alignment with, his world-view as a republican. I questioned the bush's administration, stating various things which i did not approve of: I fail to see how post 9/11 policies are better for America. We have lost freedoms, increased national debt, stretched our military thin, and our military is in serious need of better equipment. Not to mention: in all likelyhood we are just as succeptible to attack as before 9/11. The terrorists attacks on 9/11 were probably a long time coming and we were going to have some attacks happen eventually, what we are doing now as a result is in-excusable. Not only is our social security system in trouble, so will our veterans programs be. Our federal government is writing checks that our butts can't cash. The next few years of petroleum stability are not better because of our war on terrorism either. src Basically the cost of this extra 'security' is too much! Pudge doesn't think our military is stretched thin, but John McCain does. It is interesting that the person(bmetzler (12546)) I replied to didn't reply to me.
It is my belief that it cannot be proven that we are safer now. Sure steps are in place that are likely to prevent further attacks of certain nature, but the likelyhood and possibility of future attacks remain the same. This is not a bad thing or a good thing, it is just reality. I don't want the government to be allowed warrantless wire-tapping for 'national security'. I will say, that given all the evidence most of the decisions made are probably not bad decisions, but as citizens we must question our government. The current executive branch (though they're not the only ones with blame), is showing habits that indicate that it doesn't like to share information with the people; this is not good.
For an example about the government hiding information one example is Wen Ho Lee's book My Country Versus Me. The short of it is that had the FBI released evidence in a timely manner, the later allegations would have been harder to fabricate. An interview from 1982 (i think) was kept private, later 'lost, and they had to 'reconstruct' it to fall within their view that he was a spy. He was not a spy, and they ruined his reputation. Had that earlier interview been made public they would have had a much harder time trying to prove his guilt. They also would have had no reason to jail him indefinitely before his trial -or not allowed him to post bail. This is something that I feel very strongly about, but apparently this and past administrations felt that privacy is more important than knowledge. I wonder if parallels can be made to cryptography algorithms being more secure with more eyes (and how our nation is not more secure, just kept in the dark when evidence is not shared with the people)?
Anyways, i'm sorry that Pudge had to foe me but maybe it's for the best. being called dishonest is something i am not ok with. if i am in error i will apologize, but i'm not going to try to argue with someone who thinks they're always right.