Civil Liberties vs. National Security

FROM WORLD LEADER TO “SPINELESS REACTIONARIES”

by OPOVV, ©2014

What has changed in America’s foreign policy since it aggressive stance during World War II to defeat the enemy?

(Oct. 30, 2014) — Cutting to the chase, had America continued to have been as proactive and as smart as she was during World War II, or, to be truthful about it, had America continued to have been a little less messed-up than her enemies, we wouldn’t be in the dire straits that we are today.

It’s not a shame to take the blame, to take responsibility for one’s mistakes, but to continue to hide, camouflage, and lie about being forced to play “catch-up” by making up excuses for spying on your neighbors is not going to cut it.

At one time Pearl Harbor taught us that a ship in a harbor is a sitting duck, a prime target, so extreme protective measures should be in place whenever a ship is in port. So much for the USS Cole.

Breaking the Germans’ secret code gave us an edge that can’t be denied. Amassing overwhelming firepower at the right time and the right place at Midway was the beginning of the end for Japan.

But since then we’ve lost the edge from going after the bad guys to just sitting-b ck and letting events unfold that dictate our actions. Wrong philosophy to win wars. “Stormin’ Norman” was an exception, but even he was stopped in his tracks when he said, “We can be in Baghdad in 24 hours,” and that was the last anybody heard of it. President Bush the Elder decided following orders from Riyadh was more important than getting rid of Saddam Hussein.

So our so-called well-funded intelligence-gathering agencies (that are supposed to protect the citizens of our country) don’t have a track record that they can be proud of. How come Iran is progressing with her nuclear bomb program when, in fact, she should’ve been bombed back into the Stone Age by now?

How come ALL the oil coming out of Iraq hasn’t been paid to the USA for liberating them from the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein and his psycho sons? It’s a little too late to be thinking that now.

We haven’t learned one darn thing foreign policy-wise. We always back the wrong people; we backed the Mujahideen fighting the Russians, and they become the Taliban; we support the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt; we backed al-Qaeda in Libya; and we armed ISIS in Syria, and now we’re thinking of giving weapons to yet another Muslim group, the Kurds, in Northern Iraq.

And while all this is going down we’re still giving the Saudis and other OPEC nations billions for oil that we can do without. We give hundreds of millions of dollars to Islamic countries whose Muslims would like nothing better than to kill everyone in the Great Satan (America). We haven’t learned one darn thing, have we?

Our foreign policy is nothing but a broken record and people are still whining about Edward Snowden.

Get over it, people: the fault lies within ourselves, and not people who show us up for what we really are: spineless reactionaries backing the enemy, be they the Chinese or Islam.

Attacking civil liberties on the pretext of national security just brings attention to our failure to go after the bad guys on their turf at our convenience, which is the half-second after we determine that they either are a threat or may become a threat.

Our foreign policy of today is lost, but it doesn’t have to continue to get worse. We can revamp our foreign policy so that it benefits us and not our enemies. We can become energy self-sufficient, and we must become proactive no matter how large or minuscule the threat may be.

But first we must protect our borders and deport those who are here illegally and wish to do us harm. Such action may not be “politically correct,” but it is a political necessity.

Semper Fi

OPOVV

One Response to "Civil Liberties vs. National Security"

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.