How come Republicans always talk up the Homeland Security game?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
One quibble with your post, it is the Republicans talking up "Fascism" now in a totally incorrect and obviously politically pandering way. Fear the Islamic fascists! Give up your freedoms and be afraid because a strike will happen by the Fascists. Beware the fascists
No argument there...I dont particularly care for the rhetoric coming out of the Bush camp...first it was the Axis of Evil...then the War on Terror...now the war against fascism...all of these are attempts to evoke a moral connection to the justifications for America fighting during WW2.

However, it is interesting to note that the aspirations for some of these Islamic fundamentalist leaders parallels what many would consider a textbook fascist state.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Agreed, no need for a pissing match. That'd be severely arrogant of us anyways - other than carefully reading what's provided as second-hand material and making personal analyses based on it, we are all far from experts.

I just don't see an alternative to what the Bush Administration is doing overseas. Our nations can't forego keeping armed forces in the Middle East; bemoan it or not, oil is absolutely vital to our self-interest and security. And even if a pullout occurred, would this really blunt terrorist range? If you believe Osama Bin Laden, maybe... I tend not to (frankly, I've had too much first-hand experience with the Muslim community both in the West and overseas to believe it'd stop there). In any case, the nations doing the dirtiest work in the Middle East need none of our help to brutally repress their populaces. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria - what exactly is the West complicit in doing here? Their ills are not our fault, though their leaders throw that out there as a useful scapegoating tactic. That pretty much leaves the option of going in and reforming nations ourselves. An ugly option to be sure, but the best of a host of bad options.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I have to commend you for your honesty yllus,

But why not cut to the chase and say we need the oil and are stealing it---and avoid all the hypocracy.

I will point out we did the same thing in Iran---by creating and supporting the Shah---and now they hate our guts.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: Ldir
It is called hypocrisy. They do not care about making America safer. They care about keeping Americans afraid. Fearful people are compliant to authority. Fearful people vote to maintain the status quo.
That about covers it.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
I tend to think we pay a respectable price for the oil. We just make really, really sure that nobody messes with the supply line. :p We're selfish in keeping that supply rolling in absolute terms, as any one of us would be individually selfish about keeping the supply of oxygen going to our bodies. That selfish urge to self-preservation admitted, we do pay a respectable price for the oil.

Sort of a uniquely American thing to do, if you look at history. Certainly I don't imagine Russia, China, or even Britain or France would, in the U.S.'s place, would be above demanding a rock-bottom price for the commodity.