Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kabar
The ability to project power and a global presence are part of the means of protecting our vital national interests.

True...but that rationale, in the absence of any moderating influence, could be used to justify troops in every country, if we had them.

What prevents your construction of 'vital national interests' from leading us straight to some dystopic future in a century or so?

My point is that your list of vital national interests is too short. It doesn't include things like privacy rights, limited taxation, federalism, and any number of due-process rights that help ensure that this government of the people remains both by the people and for the people.

Given the choice to live in an absolutely secure country where I am a subject rather than a citizen, I decline. No thank you. I'd rather take some danger with my freedom, thanks, and help fight the good fight against terrorism as a free man.

128 posted on 09/12/2007 12:30:07 PM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: Oberon
True...but that rationale, in the absence of any moderating influence, could be used to justify troops in every country, if we had them.

Silly statement. We don't need or want troops in every country.

What prevents your construction of 'vital national interests' from leading us straight to some dystopic future in a century or so?

We are a democratic republic. The public will will determine our national course thru our political institutions and representative government. The US is a force for good in this world and I don't see that changing any time soon.

My point is that your list of vital national interests is too short. It doesn't include things like privacy rights, limited taxation, federalism, and any number of due-process rights that help ensure that this government of the people remains both by the people and for the people.

I am using vital national interests in the conventional sense, i.e., as it applies to our foreign policy.

Given the choice to live in an absolutely secure country where I am a subject rather than a citizen, I decline. No thank you. I'd rather take some danger with my freedom, thanks, and help fight the good fight against terrorism as a free man.<

Phony strawman. We aren't choosing between absolute security and absolute freedom. Again, life is painted in shades of grays not black and white. You are accepting limitations on your freedom now starting with the concept of government. Without government, you would be in a state of nature where life would be "nasty, brutish, and short." I want our officials to have the tools they need to protect this nation from a very real, existential threat. The Constitution isn't a suicide pact. And frankly, the Patriot Act has little or no impact on the vast majority of our ciitzens.

132 posted on 09/12/2007 2:01:59 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson