My Cousin Got Called To Active Duty

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

Sacrifice=3 a : destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else b : something given up or lost <the sacrifices made by parents>

Liberty=1 : the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice
2 a : a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant :

Safety=1 : the condition of being safe from undergoing or causing hurt, injury, or loss

Deserves=: to be worthy of :

Neither=: not either

Meaning that while you can not change things in the form of a revolution,you can take action.In one form or another,I won't pass judgement on the people protesting,because they are acting on their beliefs,as well as are the soldiers that are willing to die for what they believe.But when you start saying the country sucks because you hate the government or because you hate the neo hippies,and doing it from the comfort of your couch while yelling at the T.V. then you are more the problem than either one of these groups.And I also believe that if you doubt that you have freedoms and rights you should at least take a trip some where even as close as the mountains of Mexico,and ask them what they think.The idea of speaking out is becoming more and more a byproduct of a time past,but it is the bases on which this country was founded.
 
It does NOT apply anymore. We've got a hidden enemy that can't be fought with traditional warfare. This is not propaganda. It's funny how no one opposed to military action can offer any sorts of viable solutions to protecting our freedom and safety. To liken this situation to what happened 400 years ago is laughable. That was a dictatorship under the rule of the church. This is a bunch of Islamic extremists willing to go to any lengths to hurt and destroy Americans, the world, and anything they believe in.

To say that Bush is taking away our rights, merely because he wants to control us, is as much propaganda as you're purporting the Bush administration is putting out. He's attempting SOMETHING to weed out the cowards (i.e. terrorists) and make this country safe. How are we going to make it safe? By keeping the lax security we've got nationwide? By letting despots like those in Iraq and Saudi Arabia to continue fueling terrorist interests? I'm OK with extra searches at airports, the detaining of suspicious people and increased police forces if it means I don't have to worry about some guy with a towel on his head blowing up a building or a plane.
 
Originally posted by dohcvtec_accord@Jan 21 2003, 05:55 PM
...It does NOT apply anymore. We've got a hidden enemy ...

It does if you use it in a context that applies today.I'm not talking about the war,I am talking about what it was original for.The people of the United States (or individuals) standing up for what they think is right.Wither it be going to war or fighting back against the government that oppresses them.Basically he was saying that if you don't have the balls to stand up for yourself and your beliefs,than you don't deserve to have the rewards that accompany victory.
Trust me dohcvtec I feel the same way when it comes to the things going on in the states.But the fact is that the security measures being taken are not the right ones.No I don't have another solution,because terrorism is an ideal not a foreign army we can target.You can't fight ideas,or decades of hatred.You can make it harder for them to get around but it is going to take a complete revision of policy to eliminate it.
 
I agree with the potential war. I might be kinda biast, but I think we should hammer down on any nation that would seek to take away or suppres it's peoples rights in the name of god or otherwise. Someone on this thred listed the definition of Liberty as being granted. BULLSHIT!

Remeber this? "All men are created equal. And endowed by there creator with certian inalienable rights. Among those are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness"

That's the real definition of Liberty. Inaleinable & granted by god (and if not, deserved all the same). So fuck Webster!!!! And fuck anybody who would seek to oppress anyone of any nation, may they burn until they submit to Liberty!

Finally, To Saddam I say "Dictate? Does my Dic tate good in yo mouph?"

Note: I may have misquoted the Declaration of Idependence, but then again I didn't write it I just defend it!
 
Originally posted by dohcvtec_accord@Jan 21 2003, 09:55 AM
By letting despots like those in Iraq and Saudi Arabia to continue fueling terrorist interests? I'm OK with extra searches at airports, the detaining of suspicious people and increased police forces if it means I don't have to worry about some guy with a towel on his head blowing up a building or a plane.

When did this become the discussion??? I was discussing the PARTIOT ACT and you throw in war in the middle east? If you want a formal argument or debate, give me a day to read the PARTIOT ACT (or as much of it as I can digest, it is afterall 342 pages in PDF). And I will be back. I suggest you read it as well rather then just blindly sticking up for it.

One more thing. If I hear on more racial slur in this I will lock it, and if it gets unlocked I'll delete it. We all claim to not be racist here but that is exactly what some of you are doing.
 
Originally posted by Silverchild79@Jan 22 2003, 12:42 AM
....Someone on this thred listed the definition of Liberty as being granted. BULLSHIT!....


That was me,and that was only one of two definitions that you qouted.Don't take a text book definition and twist it,read the first one also.

Liberty=1 : the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice
 
Originally posted by ZAC@Jan 21 2003, 12:28 AM
really I work on a farm that had two camels they are a pain in the ass and they're ugly

i still want a pet camel :")
 
I'm not "throwing in the war in the Middle East." It's all related. I'm tired of these lunatics (who all happen to be from the Middle East, what a fuckin coincidence) contantly threatening us and harming us and not having to pay for their actions. I'm glad that Bush had the balls to enact some policies to try to make us safer, as opposed to that fuckhead Clinton who sat back and let the terrorists roam free while he focused on the all-important :rolleyes: economy and getting his dick wet. Boo hoo, too fuckin bad you have to wait a few extra minutes at the airport while someone goes through your bag. If it makes my life safer, I'm all for a few extra hardships in my life - which, by the way, are very small beans compared to what a good deal of other countries face on an everyday basis.

Maybe we should just talk it out with these guys. Convince them to stop bombing innocent people. That'll probably work.
 
Originally posted by dohcvtec_accord@Jan 22 2003, 09:10 AM
I'm not "throwing in the war in the Middle East." It's all related. I'm tired of these lunatics (who all happen to be from the Middle East, what a fuckin coincidence) contantly threatening us and harming us and not having to pay for their actions. I'm glad that Bush had the balls to enact some policies to try to make us safer, as opposed to that fuckhead Clinton who sat back and let the terrorists roam free while he focused on the all-important :rolleyes: economy and getting his dick wet. Boo hoo, too fuckin bad you have to wait a few extra minutes at the airport while someone goes through your bag. If it makes my life safer, I'm all for a few extra hardships in my life - which, by the way, are very small beans compared to what a good deal of other countries face on an everyday basis.

Maybe we should just talk it out with these guys. Convince them to stop bombing innocent people. That'll probably work.

It has nothing to do with the PARTIOT ACT, which if you bothered to read and understand what I wrote, is the center of what I am talking about. I have no problem waiting a few extra minutes at the airport, you missed the point entirely. My problems with the PARTIOT ACT are as follows:
1. The government has the right to detain a person if they are suspected of cooperating with a "terrorist" without bringin formal charges against them. Violates the 5th and 6th amendments.
2. The government has the right to sieze any funds they suspect belong to a "terrorist" without obtaining a warrent. Violates the 4th amendment.
3. The government has the right to sieze any property or equipment belonging to a "terrorist" whether or not it was used in any method of terror. Again violates the 4th amendment.
4. The government has setup a program where every foriegn student must register with the FBI and with INS and submit to monitoring by said agencies.

If you would like to discuss the possible war then we can start a new thread and do so there.
 
Do a google search for patriot act, there are several. The one I use is in PDF form and it is huge 349 pages.
 
Well, as I said before, this is a new situation without any precedents for action. I don't know if what capacity the Patriot Act will be used or has been used. I don't think the government will be using it to detain someone whom they believe has a very weak link to terrorism.

I know it's a rash and forceful set of laws. However, I don't think we have the luxury of sitting back and taking our time deciding what should be done to protect the American people. And I think Bush and his administration know this. The Twin Towers and Pentagon could happen again very soon, and some very drastic measures needed to be taken (and continue to be needed) to prevent them from happening again.
 
Things like this always need to be thought out. Granted they don't need to be pork barrelled like they usually are on Capitol Hill :). Rash action with out thought leads to overreaction as it did in this case. I also do not know if or how this act has been used in the cases I mentioned before but what scares me is that it was passed with an overwhelming majority. Not very many of our representatives spoke out against it. Critism by the public has also been small. The kind of inattentivness towards the government is scary, it gives them the power to do what ever they want. Much of the PATRIOT ACT is Unconstitutional and I can't understand why it hasn't been challenged as such. Yes action needs to be taken to prevent the events from occurring again, but I think that removal of our Constitutional Rights is the wrong action. Those rights are what makes it great to live in the US. Without them this country would be no better than anyothers.
 
It's pretty obvious that the reason it was passed to overwhelmingly was that thousands of our citizens had just been killed, and we were anxious to prevent it from happening in the near future. There wasn't time for criticism or debate. I think that we'll see a revision or revisions to the Act sometime soon, because it will be challenged. What needs to happen, though, is alternatives to the drastic measures outlined in the Act need to be brought to the table.

Did you mean pork barrelling or filibustering? :D
 
I think I meant pigeon holing, but I'd have to check. :)

I do not oppose stiffer penalties for terrorists that are convicted through our established methods (arraigned, and a trial with a jury of their peers). That is within the Constitution and is justifiable IMO. Make law enforcement use the channels that have been setup and working for over 200 years now. Make them obtain a warrant, make them formally charge and try a prisoner. Don't force foriegn students and immigrants to register with the FBI. I have no problem with the INS turning someone away due to a criminal background, but we have no right to pursue people that have done nothing wrong. These are the best I can offer off the top of my head. I would have to think some more about it.
 
Originally posted by dohcvtec_accord@Jan 22 2003, 07:42 PM
Well, as I said before, this is a new situation without any precedents for action. I don't know if what capacity the Patriot Act will be used or has been used. I don't think the government will be using it to detain someone whom they believe has a very weak link to terrorism...

...drastic measures needed to be taken (and continue to be needed) to prevent them from happening again...

During the "war on drugs" many people fell victim to the very same search and seizures,detenment,"probable cause" freezing of assets.

Drastic measures,against Americas own is not the only answer.Since I have seen voilent crime first hand (been shot twice),I realize there is always a element of danger in the world.To step up the process on the American public is not acceptable.
 
Originally posted by 92b16vx+Jan 22 2003, 02:21 AM-->
Silverchild79
@Jan 22 2003, 12:42 AM
....Someone on this thred listed the definition of Liberty as being granted.  BULLSHIT!....


That was me,and that was only one of two definitions that you qouted.Don't take a text book definition and twist it,read the first one also.

Liberty=1 : the quality or state of being free: a : the power to do as one pleases b : freedom from physical restraint c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e : the power of choice

I read the first def, I was blasting the second one. And it wasn't anything against you, rather the 2nd definition of liberty.
 
Cool,I got you,but us being military should know about weekend "liberty",and that is how I was looking at that definition.I didn't want to discount it though due to being fair.
 
Back
Top