President's Policies Don't Seem to Efficiently Accomplish His Anti-terror Goals
The president recently listed on Thursday Sept 7 2006 ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060907-2.html ), re the "War on Terror", his goal, the US actions to date, things that now and in the past have gone wrong with the US anti-terror program, what the "enemy" now and in the past has been doing, and what the US must do in the future.
One gets the impression that the President is convinced that his USA need not be prepared for any threat originating from outside of the Islamic world, as if once the Islamic world is by force democratized and moderat-ized, every boy and girl on earth will thereafter live in perfect peace.
Yet in attempting to dramatize the danger he sees in the form of "radical imperialistic Islamists", the President has compared such "Islamists" to non-Islamic historical bad boys such as Hitler and Stalin.
If Hitler and Stalin were indeed as bad as these "terrorist" Muslims, the reasonable thing for the USA to do would be to gird itself for not just Muslim, brown skinned threats, but also for White, Stalinist, and Nazi type threats.
Yet the President's policy as of now, appears to be to throw all available resources at the current threat he sees from the "Muslim terrorists" and to forget about having resources available in the future to deal with the entire panorama of potential dangers running from Muslim extremists to the Nazi and Stalinist types he compares such Muslim extremists to.
A national economy like the USA economy running on trillions of dollars borrowed by the public and private sectors, borrowed money which circulates from hand to hand in the US economy as a result of which one dollar borrowed from abroad can produce twenty dollars in income for several different persons in the economy, is not an economy which in the future will be able to have the resources on hand needed to handle possible threats to the nation's security.
The President says that we have made all these improvements in domestic security to forestall future re-occurrences of 911 type events. He says that however he is not sure that these improvements if in place would have stopped 911 from happening. At the same time he has not taken active steps to bring the borders of his nation under control. If the President feels that he is not sure that the domestic security improvements he has made would have prevented a 911, then why doesn't he act to secure his nation's borders? Does this make sense?
If the security of the USA is worth all the time and energy and money and blood sweat and tears that the USA has put into its "War on Terror", and we are still not at a point where we can say for sure the improvements would have prevented 911, then how can the USA not put a little time energy and money into securing its borders?
The President talks about how we have put into place all of these spying gadgets and personnel to spy on immigrants into the USA so as to prevent them from committing terrorist acts. Does the President really believe that would-be terrorists would allow themselves to get caught by all of this surveillance? All they have to do is read the President's speeches at the White House website, in order to get an idea of all the surveillance that they are now subject to.
What good is surveillance against a wary terrorist who has slipped in across the border, whose presence in the USA is not even a known fact? What good is airport security, when it comes to preventing attacks on targets that are not as fat and juicy and obvious as airports?
@2006 David Virgil Hobbs
One gets the impression that the President is convinced that his USA need not be prepared for any threat originating from outside of the Islamic world, as if once the Islamic world is by force democratized and moderat-ized, every boy and girl on earth will thereafter live in perfect peace.
Yet in attempting to dramatize the danger he sees in the form of "radical imperialistic Islamists", the President has compared such "Islamists" to non-Islamic historical bad boys such as Hitler and Stalin.
If Hitler and Stalin were indeed as bad as these "terrorist" Muslims, the reasonable thing for the USA to do would be to gird itself for not just Muslim, brown skinned threats, but also for White, Stalinist, and Nazi type threats.
Yet the President's policy as of now, appears to be to throw all available resources at the current threat he sees from the "Muslim terrorists" and to forget about having resources available in the future to deal with the entire panorama of potential dangers running from Muslim extremists to the Nazi and Stalinist types he compares such Muslim extremists to.
A national economy like the USA economy running on trillions of dollars borrowed by the public and private sectors, borrowed money which circulates from hand to hand in the US economy as a result of which one dollar borrowed from abroad can produce twenty dollars in income for several different persons in the economy, is not an economy which in the future will be able to have the resources on hand needed to handle possible threats to the nation's security.
The President says that we have made all these improvements in domestic security to forestall future re-occurrences of 911 type events. He says that however he is not sure that these improvements if in place would have stopped 911 from happening. At the same time he has not taken active steps to bring the borders of his nation under control. If the President feels that he is not sure that the domestic security improvements he has made would have prevented a 911, then why doesn't he act to secure his nation's borders? Does this make sense?
If the security of the USA is worth all the time and energy and money and blood sweat and tears that the USA has put into its "War on Terror", and we are still not at a point where we can say for sure the improvements would have prevented 911, then how can the USA not put a little time energy and money into securing its borders?
The President talks about how we have put into place all of these spying gadgets and personnel to spy on immigrants into the USA so as to prevent them from committing terrorist acts. Does the President really believe that would-be terrorists would allow themselves to get caught by all of this surveillance? All they have to do is read the President's speeches at the White House website, in order to get an idea of all the surveillance that they are now subject to.
What good is surveillance against a wary terrorist who has slipped in across the border, whose presence in the USA is not even a known fact? What good is airport security, when it comes to preventing attacks on targets that are not as fat and juicy and obvious as airports?
@2006 David Virgil Hobbs
posted by David Virgil at 2:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home