Patriotism, Do you know what it is?

[Dually]

"patriotism \Pa"tri*ot*ism\, n. [Cf. F. patriotisme.] Love of country; devotion to the welfare of one's country; the virtues and actions of a patriot; the passion which inspires one to serve one's country. --Berkley.


Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc."

Well the virtues are different for each country so what are ours, you should think about them. Has the U.S. acted in accordance of our nation's virtues in this crisis?

My opinion is no the US Government hasn't acted as a patriot and is in fact committing treason to the Constitution by failing to protect the citizens in the past, present, and future.

I think the NSA, CIA, FBI, Clinton and others should be held crimionaly acountable for committing Treason. They knew Usama bin Laden committed past terrorist acts on citizens and on American soil (Embassys are U.S. soil). They only punished him to the point that the media backed off, not to remove the threat.

Whatever means neccasary should be used to remove the threat whether it be in terms of aid or bombings and war. However the government should pick one and carry it until the threat is removed forever.

 

[Pentbomb]

It is unfortunate that it sometimes takes an attack like that on 9/11 to jump start policy making. Prior to that, discussions on international security focused on the China threat and the utility of NMD. A threat reassessment has already taken place, obviously a bit late.

With that, I believe Bush is effectively dealing with the situation. ?The path is hard and long,? and requires a multi-tiered approach. What exactly do you believe isn?t working? Do you think we should go with an all out ground assault? Do you favor nuclear strikes?

Pentbomb

 

[Lucky]

So bush should be held criminally responsible too, right? I mean, he didnt do anything to stop it either...

 

[StageLeft]

You think the government should be held at least in part criminally responsible for the acts that were caused?

That is like me sueing the police if my wife is shot because "They knew that criminals in this city were armed".

Yes the gov't knew about threats. And yes they were working on it. The CIA was definitely making an effort. I am sure that their efforts stopped some attempts in the past - in fact I know this for a _fact_. Can they stop all of them? Of course not. Just as no reasonable police force in the world can bring a city's crime level to zero, so too can the CIA and US Gov't not possibly stop terrorism. I think its a gross statement saying they should be held accountable for treason because of 9/11!

However the government should pick one and carry it until the threat is removed forever Terrorism will never be totally removed from the world. It has always been a threat and always will be. It can only be tempered.

 

[gopunk]

hindsight is 20/20, very few people could have predicted such an atrocity would occur.

furthermore, you have no proof that they did not act in the best interest of this nation. you don't know that had they taken an alternate course of action, the results would not have been even more horrendous than what took place.

 

[rudder]

I think the NSA, CIA, FBI, Clinton and others should be held crimionaly acountable for committing Treason

Clinton, yes. NSA, CIA, FBI I don't think so.

Imagine if your boss told you to write a 10 page report in word format and printed on a laserjet, only he gives you just a pen and paper and you could not leave your cubicle. Then he holds you responsible for not getting it done. Our security agencies have been gutted for years by the Clinton administration. I wish I could find the link the the Tom Clancy essay because that said it best.

 

[Rogue]

To answer your original question, yes, I do. Patriotism is saluting the flag when in uniform. Patriotism is placing your hand over your heart when you're not. Patriotism is paying homage to those that came before you for the sacrifices they made for the freedom you enjoy today. Patriotism is knowing how to fly your nation's flag properly. Patriotism is something I don't show openly so as to flaunt it or patronize it. Patriotism is something that not everyone knows or can understand. Those things are what patriotism is to me. Patriotism is not blaming some predecesors for something they could not have known would happen.

PS - Why in the hell am I not a Golden Member yet, despite making more posts than other's with that title? :|

Fixed.

AnandTech Moderator

Also, I think that there should be a "Military Member" or a "Camouflage Member" for those in the services. Just a thought.....

 

[LethalWolfe]

<< I think the NSA, CIA, FBI, Clinton and others should be held crimionaly acountable for committing Treason

Clinton, yes. NSA, CIA, FBI I don't think so.

Imagine if your boss told you to write a 10 page report in word format and printed on a laserjet, only he gives you just a pen and paper and you could not leave your cubicle. Then he holds you responsible for not getting it done. Our security agencies have been gutted for years by the Clinton administration. I wish I could find the link the the Tom Clancy essay because that said it best. >>



My sentiments exactly.


Lethal

EDIT Tom Clancy essay You can do a search of the Opinionjournal site to find more of his essays. Just type "Tom Clancy" into the search field

 

[Zenmervolt]

<<They knew Usama bin Laden committed past terrorist acts on citizens and on American soil (Embassys are U.S. soil).>>

I am willing to bet that you knew this too. Does this mean that you hold yourself criminally responsible too because you did not take any effort to incite action on the part of the government? Your argument, when carried out fully, is clearly absurd. Also, since you like definitions, "treason" is the "betrayal of one's country to an enemy" according to my copy of Webster's. This makes it quite impossible to, as you say, "committ treason to the Constitution". Terrorist acts are committed against citizens, not on them. Finally, while you had your dictionary open, you should have looked up how to spell "criminally" and "necessary".

Zenmervolt

 

[Ferocious]

Click.

 

[LethalWolfe]

<< Click. >>



Clinton, in regards to terrorism, was all show and no go. What was his great plan after terrorist attacks? Lob a few cruise missles so he could say "Look, I did something." Even though everyone knew that launching the missles wasn't going to accomplish anything and was just for show.


Lethal

 

[Pepsi90919]

<< Patriotism, Do you know what it is? >>

Annoying.

 

[shifrbv]

Clinton, in regards to terrorism, was all show and no go. What was his great plan after terrorist attacks? Lob a few cruise missles so he could say "Look, I did something." Even though everyone knew that launching the missles wasn't going to accomplish anything and was just for show.

I don't really think Clinton can be entirely to blame for this. Previous administrations encountered the same types of issues yet did nothing. Reagan let a bunch of marines die in the middle east and did nothing about it. The US has a long history of president's who were very good at "passing the buck" when it comes to terrorism and dealing with the middle east. That's why it's still with us today and getting closer than ever.

 

[hungrypete]

This line of thinking would eventually result in the execution of anyone who has ever voted. No one is responsible but those who planned and executed the attack. Attempting to blame more people is pointless. We need to destroy powerful terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda and Hamas, and then work towards homeland safety while monitoring groups across the world for unusual activity. We shouldn't waste our time pointing fingers, just fix the problem and get back to life.

 

[mastertech01]

shifrbv, I think Khadafi would beg to differ with you in regards to Reagan... after those bombings on his regime little or nothing has been heard from him since.

 

[shifrbv]

mastertech - He did bomb Khadafi, but there were other instances afterwards in which marines were killed and nothing was done. There was a PBS documentary about the US track record on terrorism which appeared shortly after September 11. After Khadafi, the US basically did nothing else (this included the remainder of Reagan's term) even though the attacks against US military and property continued. I think during Reagan's term 200 marines were killed and the US didn't even retaliate. Even covert CIA attempts all failed. After I got done watching that, I had the feeling that the war on terrorism was going to be similar to the war on drugs. Alot of effort with very little results to show for it.

 

[jjones]

dually, your logic is beyond absurd.

 

[mastertech01]

shifrbv
You make some good points, but remember that during the Reagan and Bush SR Admins there were many other issues to deal with.. COld War with the fall of the Berlin wall, Faulklin Islands war, Panama, Invasion of Grenada, Desert shield and Desert Storm... sheesh I guess we cant do it all. All this and dealing with restructuring our ecomomy and internal affairs.

 

[shifrbv]

Mastertech - I do think ideally that during Clinton's term would have been the time to act. But I wonder why no one in the government was really concerned about anything other than Monicagate or any of the other scandals. I don't think it can all be blamed upon the President. Congress equally played a part in it.

Even after the embassies were attacked and Clinton started bombing, Congress said it was only to draw attention away from the scandals. I wonder why no one in Congress seemed concerned about those terrorist acts or even took them more seriously than their own personal agendas here at home.