Quote:
Originally Posted by ranxer
-reduction in respect etc. worldwide
|
Hardly. We never had any respect anyway.
Quote:
-a huge dept of lies to maintain
|
...which only liberals seem to care about.
Quote:
-monster presence to maintain that is still a gamble with many lives and violates many rules of a just society
|
What do you consider a "just society?" I ascribe to the Nozickian believe that justice goes with entitlement. In any case, is maintaining a presence in foreign countries bad for national security? It's not like our armed forces are running thin here.
Not bad for national security.
Quote:
-involves many of our family members, coworkers etc. that
are being exposed to the hell of war. not to mention innocents and unwilling combatants.
|
You join the army to fight. Anyway, it's not bad for national security.
Quote:
-an increase in number of enemies, (defending what they see as attacks on thier homeland
|
Probably, but that will not offset the gains in security. It's more about how much money terrorist organizations have than how much people at this point.
Quote:
-a repeat of pre-emptive military imperialism that only the U.S. is allowed to do. reaffirming the notion that war solves problems etc
|
War does solve problems. Especially when you have a huge military. Again, not bad for national security.
Quote:
these long term problems created by the bush administration have driven a new spurt in a security police state economy but the cost will be coming in for many years. plus, part of this economic 'recovery' is a borrowing on the future that may backfire.
|
Not bad for national security.