If terrorists nuked a US city

[Hayabusa Rider]

This includes traditional and Constitutional protections.

If the Administration said you needed to sacrifice for your own good, what would you be willing to give up?

Complete lost of privacy? Habeas corpus? Legal counsel? Protection against unreasonable search and seizure? Cruel and unusual punishment?

What price for security, real or imagined?

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
This includes traditional and Constitutional protections.

If the Administration said you needed to sacrifice for your own good, what would you be willing to give up?

Complete lost of privacy? Habeas corpus? Legal counsel? Protection against unreasonable search and seizure? Cruel and unusual punishment?

What price for security, real or imagined?

If terorrists nuked a US city the libs would blame the US for not stoppping it rather than blaming the people who did it.

Sultan would blame the US for existing and offending people of the muslim "faith".

Steeplerot would blame our foriegn economic policies and collusion with alien races.

Conjur would have somethign to bash republicans about.




Myself, Given a choice I woudnt give up any rights.

 

None. If they nuked a city it would be the last straw in this stupid game we have been playing with the Middle East however. Guilty, innocent, or not-so-innocent, there would be hell to pay and in the end we would win.

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

I agree, if a nuke really did hit the US, the Middle East would be obliterated. The sad thing is before Bush took office, none of this scenarios was actually plausible in the minds of the American people. In my lifetime, even though I know this won't happen, I'd like to live in a world with peace on its mind, not war.

 

[Klixxer]

I would be doing what i am doing.

You forget that there are many of us from all over the world still fighting and supporting the fight for 9/11 while the US seems to have forgotten that fight, we have not.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: dwell
None. If they nuked a city it would be the last straw in this stupid game we have been playing with the Middle East however. Guilty, innocent, or not-so-innocent, there would be hell to pay and in the end we would win.

Agreed.

It would be the worst possible thing for the Middle East. Also, whoever supplied the weapon would be in for a world of hurt unseen outside of ground zero at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

 

[Infohawk]

I would support massive profiling and monitoring campaigns. Everyone would need to have an ID card, etc... Anyone from suspect organizations (including militias and other right-wing organizations) / countries would be subject to surveillance. Tighter border security...

I think we could already implement some of this stuff (but not as extreme) if we focused the wasted Iraq money on homeland security...

 

[skyking]

Myself, Given a choice I woudnt give up any rights.

Ditto.

Freedom is not "free". My dad and uncles gave blood, sweat and sometimes sanity to fight in the Pacific theatre, last time the U.S. was attacked. Some uncles gave their lives, and all of them are gone now. They'd roll in their graves at giving up what the patriot act did, let alone anything else.
This IS the greatest country and ideal, and it is risky. We can try and legislate safety, but it will never work, and the cowardice will destroy what once was the United States.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: dwell
None. If they nuked a city it would be the last straw in this stupid game we have been playing with the Middle East however. Guilty, innocent, or not-so-innocent, there would be hell to pay and in the end we would win.

Agreed.

It would be the worst possible thing for the Middle East. Also, whoever supplied the weapon would be in for a world of hurt unseen outside of ground zero at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Your assumption is that we would know who did it. In fact it could be done so no one could. It could be a group in Indonesia. Could be most anyone.

That there would be outrage is a given. If not for 9/11, we would never have tolerated an Iraqi war based on such flimsy evidence as put forward.

My point is illustrated by Jose Padilla, a US citizen incarcerated in a manner what would have sparked protests galore. Now, it a needed sacrifice in the minds of many. Considering how little loss of life IN FACT 9/11 caused, what will people be willing to accept as needed if the damage was a thousand times greater?

Their WILL be changes made in the US. The question is what is the general public willing to accept, if they have a real choice at all?

 

[jlmadyson]

Originally posted by: nutxo

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
This includes traditional and Constitutional protections.

If the Administration said you needed to sacrifice for your own good, what would you be willing to give up?

Complete lost of privacy? Habeas corpus? Legal counsel? Protection against unreasonable search and seizure? Cruel and unusual punishment?

What price for security, real or imagined?

If terorrists nuked a US city the libs would blame the US for not stoppping it rather than blaming the people who did it.

Sultan would blame the US for existing and offending people of the muslim "faith".

Steeplerot would blame our foriegn economic policies and collusion with alien races.

Conjur would have somethign to bash republicans about.




Myself, Given a choice I woudnt give up any rights.

Agreed, given a choice I woudn't give up any rights.

 

[Uhtrinity]

If a US city was nuked you wouldn't have to worry about personal freedom as we would be under a state of martial law. I believe the neocons would use it as an oppurtunity to tighten the noose a lot more.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Patriot Act II would look like the right was pandering for votes from the left if this were to happen.

Our economy would grind to a stop, the following depression & world war would effect people much more than the decreased freedoms that would ensue.

On the personal freedom level, many of our current "rights" would be thrown out the window.

National ID's would be introduced, racial profiling would be much more accepted, and I suspect there would be some internment camps set up.

 

[Red Dawn]

I sure wouldn't want to be of Arab decent or Muslim living in the US.

 

[theblackbox]

it depends, will the state be in a red state or a blue state?

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
This includes traditional and Constitutional protections.

If the Administration said you needed to sacrifice for your own good, what would you be willing to give up?

Complete lost of privacy? Habeas corpus? Legal counsel? Protection against unreasonable search and seizure? Cruel and unusual punishment?

What price for security, real or imagined?

I'd give up NOTHING. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. I'd rather die a true American than a serf to the government.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: dwell
None. If they nuked a city it would be the last straw in this stupid game we have been playing with the Middle East however. Guilty, innocent, or not-so-innocent, there would be hell to pay and in the end we would win.

Agreed.

It would be the worst possible thing for the Middle East. Also, whoever supplied the weapon would be in for a world of hurt unseen outside of ground zero at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Your assumption is that we would know who did it. In fact it could be done so no one could. It could be a group in Indonesia. Could be most anyone.

That there would be outrage is a given. If not for 9/11, we would never have tolerated an Iraqi war based on such flimsy evidence as put forward.

My point is illustrated by Jose Padilla, a US citizen incarcerated in a manner what would have sparked protests galore. Now, it a needed sacrifice in the minds of many. Considering how little loss of life IN FACT 9/11 caused, what will people be willing to accept as needed if the damage was a thousand times greater?

Their WILL be changes made in the US. The question is what is the general public willing to accept, if they have a real choice at all?

Not taking responsibility would defeat the purpose of the strike. Someone would claim it (verifiably) and it is likely they will be a ME based group.

You asked what rights I would be willing to give up. My answer is none.

The persons responsible should be hunted down and killed by ANY means at the disposal of the US government.

Whatever nation supplied the weapon should be given a very short window of opportunity to surrender immediately to US forces and hand over all responsible for the sale. Failure to comply should be met with the harshest penalty we are able to dispense.

 

[phillyTIM]

If Terrorists nuked a US City, we'd embelish a holy cataclysm of horror against Bush's Regime in DC and Crawford, TX and kick that man out of this Country.

Sudheer's correct: before Bush's Junta takeover, a terrorist nuke attack against a US city was an imaginary tale. Now, it's reality.

Because of Bush - we live in fear. People need to wake up and realize the ultimate terrorist: George W. Bush & his Regime of cronies.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
If Terrorists nuked a US City, we'd embelish a holy cataclysm of horror against Bush's Regime in DC and Crawford, TX and kick that man out of this Country.

Sudheer's correct: before Bush's Junta takeover, a terrorist nuke attack against a US city was an imaginary tale. Now, it's reality.

Because of Bush - we live in fear. People need to wake up and realize the ultimate terrorist: George W. Bush & his Regime of cronies.

Disclaimer - Before anyone tells this fat fvck to "shut up and move to Canada" I'd like to make one thing clear.

WE DON'T WANT HIM.

Thank you.

- M4H

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
If Terrorists nuked a US City, we'd embelish a holy cataclysm of horror against Bush's Regime in DC and Crawford, TX and kick that man out of this Country.

Sudheer's correct: before Bush's Junta takeover, a terrorist nuke attack against a US city was an imaginary tale. Now, it's reality.

Because of Bush - we live in fear. People need to wake up and realize the ultimate terrorist: George W. Bush & his Regime of cronies.

Disclaimer - Before anyone tells this fat fvck to "shut up and move to Canada" I'd like to make one thing clear.

WE DON'T WANT HIM.

Thank you.

- M4H

LOL...

The sad thing is that he really seems to believe it...

 

[phillyTIM]

Just because I have a different opinion, doesn't mean I'm wrong...or right. Because you have a different opinion, neither are you right or wrong.

Not everyone has to blindly praise your Bush-lover.

There are obviously other people around here, and off-line, with similar viewpoints. Let the nation be heard - not with what Bush and you so-called patriots want to hear.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
This includes traditional and Constitutional protections.

If the Administration said you needed to sacrifice for your own good, what would you be willing to give up?

Complete lost of privacy? Habeas corpus? Legal counsel? Protection against unreasonable search and seizure? Cruel and unusual punishment?

What price for security, real or imagined?

The imagined tradeoff between security and privacy is a false dichotomy.

The government already has the power to search and surveil as needed, but there's an important check on that ability: the search warrant. These checks and balances are essential limitations of government power enshrined in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights to protect the security of Americans.

However, there are tradeoffs in security, such as the fact that we have a limited amount of time and money to invest in security. All the proposals that erose privacy are aimed at increasing the amount of raw data, but we already have more data than we can analyze. When you're looking for a needle in a haystack, the solution is not to build to a bigger haystack. We need more intelligence applied to intelligence gathering, instead of more technology and less privacy.

Unchecked police and military power is a security threat at least as great as the threat of unchecked terrorism. There's no point in giving up security in one area for supposedly better security in the other.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Just because I have a different opinion, doesn't mean I'm wrong...or right. Because you have a different opinion, neither are you right or wrong.

Not everyone has to blindly praise your Bush-lover.

Remember the bipartisan effect 9-11 had?

If there were a nuke triggered on US soil, multiply that bipartisan honeymoon by 1000 & you'd have some slight idea of what our government morph into.

 

[phillyTIM]

well i'm not promoting that a nuke be dealt to a City here...I'm saying that Bush has caused us to live in fear now, and the terrorists are close to, if not already, winning - and we should look at who caused this to happen: yes - bushdork himself
Your edit was not quick enough, enjoy your time off.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Just because I have a different opinion, doesn't mean I'm wrong...or right. Because you have a different opinion, neither are you right or wrong.

Not everyone has to blindly praise your Bush-lover.

There are obviously other people around here, and off-line, with similar viewpoints. Let the nation be heard - not with what Bush and you so-called patriots want to hear.

The point isn't that you're "right" or "wrong" - its that snivelling little pussies like you are eventually told to "move to Canada" - and I want to avoid that. Move to the Middle East if you're all horned up for a Jihad against Bush. Like it or lump it, he's your president.

- M4H

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Infohawk
I would support massive profiling and monitoring campaigns. Everyone would need to have an ID card, etc... Anyone from suspect organizations (including militias and other right-wing organizations) / countries would be subject to surveillance. Tighter border security...

:thumbsup:

I think we could already implement some of this stuff (but not as extreme) if we focused the wasted Iraq money on homeland security...

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: