Comments on: A Fear-Based Constitution

By: Rob Panico

Rob Panico — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:37:26 +0000

We've been dealing with unconventional warfare for a long long time. The Barbary Pirates were a good example of an early unconventional conflict which challenged our nation. Gathering specific intelligence as to which individuals are a threat to our security should come first. Massive watch lists and big net approaches don't really make us any safer, they just create crummy government jobs and also inconvenience and harass the citizenry. Once we know exactly which individuals mean to do us harm, we contract on a global level with every private entity willing to accept an official congressional Letter of Marque and Reprisal. We place a bounty on the heads of our enemies and allow private contractors to operate as agents of the government under Letter of Marque. That's why Congress was given that power… to deal with small groups of enemies. We're using a sledgehammer to do the job of a screwdriver and the implications are massive public-private war corruption, large scale and unnecessary loss of life, destruction of life sustaining infrastructure, massive mal-investment of large sums of capital, increasing belligerence and dissent of the citzenry, and a disrespect of our national traditions and highest laws. It is arguable we're more fascist than republican at this point according to any objective measure. I know that term is used lightly to describe all kinds of behaviors incorrectly, but I do mean it in the strict political philosophy sense. I like to think we have "friendly fascism" which is not as extreme or dramatic as previous incarnations in the early 20th century. Nonetheless, we're losing our spirit and find ourselves in a massive moral crisis brought about by our monetary system and foreign policy since the end of the second world war.

By: Tad

Tad — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:33:40 +0000

In fact, profiling and a gradual erosion of our Constitution represent a further resolve to STAY in the region, i.e., we're willing to change a little bit of the fundamentals of who we are rather than simply get out of the Middle East. Profiling and rounding people up, etc. mean we're more determined than ever NOT to let Al Qaeda push us out. If the goal is to make us leave the region, it can hardly be considered goods news that we're literally going out of our way to steel ourselves for a long stay.

By: Tad

Tad — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:20:39 +0000

I don't understand your point, Brian.
I agree that radical Islam prospering in the Middle East increases our terrorist threat here. That's the tactic they are using to get us out of the region so they can do their thing. They want us to become so afraid of being killed randomly that we demand our government get out of the Middle East so they'll leave us in peace. But an eroded Constitution doesn't necessarily lead to that goal. Profiling doesn't necessarily take us any closer to wanting out of Midddle Eastern affairs. So where is the logical contradiciton?

By: bcuban

bcuban — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 15:07:32 +0000

Your points while valid standing alone appear to be logically conflicting. If the goal is for Radical Islam to prosper in the Middle East, that by its very nature increases the terrorist threat in the United States. You are trying to connect issues that are very different.

By: Tad

Tad — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:50:38 +0000

Not sure I agree that Al Qaeda wants us to profile and round people up, etc. Although I'm sure they consider any internal reaction a kind of victory, I don't think they really care one way or the other how it affects us except to the extent that it causes us to "mind our own business" and stay completely out of Middle Eastern affairs so they can get their little Islamic nirvana going. I believe their goal is simply to drive us out of the region so that radical Islam can grow and prosper. Of course, we can't stay out, we can't leave Israel completely on its own, and even if we could, radical Islam wouldn't grow and prosper. They deeply underestimate how repulsive they are even to other Muslims, probably because so many of them are afraid to stand up and say something. Now if by some miracle radical Islam did fully take hold in the Middle East, they would eventually set their sights on eliminating us even if we kept to ourselves, since we are infidels. But first things first: their radical viewpoint can't really take hold there as long as we support those who need to be toppled in order to do it. Get us out of the region, topple the existing governments, build a mighty Islamic republic, then spread it throughout the rest of the world. I believe that's the plan. The effect their terror has on us matters only to the extent that it contributes to us getting out of the region, and I'm not sure how an eroded Constitution is necessarily helpful.