“If a person is affiliated with Al-Qaeda, they can walk unmolested across our borders with that terror nuke this entire war apparatus is intended to stop.”
No relevance to a sleeper cell operating in the U.S. communicating with foreign enemies abroad, which is what this bill deals with. Your red herring has no relevance. The inane leftists flood the conservative sites and oppose all efforts to combat international terrorism. War in Iraq- against it because the southern boarder is not closed. Patriot Act- against it because the southern boarder is not closed. Operations in Afghanistan - against it because the southern boarder is not closed. Terrorist surveillance act - against it because the southern boarder is not closed. All inane pretexts.
Of course it is relevant.
First: When a country is attacked, the very first thing it needs to do is to control its own territory and secure it from the enemy. It is now six years later - longer than the entire duration of World War II - and we have not yet achieved this basic goal. The toll for the failure: 20,000 Americans killed per year. 1 million sex crimes by foreigners on US soil. A trillion dollars from the treasury, mostly - and insanely - in the form of direct subsidies.
Second: The mission is no longer the original mission which did deserve support. The original mission was payback for 9/11. In my opinion, we didn’t give it anywhere near hard enough. The mission is now nation building. But we have our own nation to build - our own, and it’s bursting at the seams. At a now $400 billion account deficit per year and over $9 trillion total public debt (projected, in actuality probably half a trillion per year, and when you factor in Social Security IOUs for which the money does not actually exist, tens of trillions total), not counting unprecedented household debt and the resulting economic fallout, the United States cannot afford to continue to rebuild two other nations. It is time for those nations to take on the responsibility to build themselves, and for our soldiers to do what soldiers are trained to do - kill enemies.
Third: Besides the wide open border, this war policy has a number of peculiar features to it which have no adequate explanation. You can start with the fact that we are acting explicitly under UN authorization, as if granting that we do not have the right to defend ourselves on our own. Half a billion dollars to the Palestinians, this year... untold, unaccounted billions in each year prior for many many years now. Pressuring Israel not to take care of business like they ought and need to do - they are fighting the same enemy, are they not? Our Secretary of State insisting on the sanctity of the Egyptian border. Our continued support of the Muslim entity of Kosovo and other apparently deliberate provocations against the Orthodox nations, potentially extremely valuable allies, ones who have fought our enemies before. $2 billion per year in military support to Egypt. The openly submissive posture to Saudi Arabia. Increased immigration from Islamic nations. Failure to respond to Iran’s repeated, open acts of war after being caught red-handed too many times to count. Favoring Pakistan over India, who knows the ravages of our enemy as well as anyone. A Muslim woman in hijab performing security checks on behalf of the US government. Another Muslim in a high policy position in the Defense Department - apparently quite a radical one. Permission of open treason by the major news media. The jaw-dropping flop of a war propaganda effort. The failure to even acknowledge that the doctrine of Islam is the problem - violating a cardinal rule of war.
Fourth: Our overall defense posture is nonsensical for the world of 2008. Why do we want to be on the firing line in Korea? Isn’t it time, 50 years later, that the South Koreans defended themselves? And the Germans and the French as well? What is the point of NATO? We sink enormous resources into defending them, and not only are they arrogant and ungrateful, but they have the gall to draw down their own forces while we do it. If we are really going to fight a long war against Islam, it is very much in our interest for those powers to have the independent ability to defend themselves. If you’ve been watching the demographics numbers, you know they will need it... and soon.
To sum this up - inconsistencies and clear errors in both strategic and tactical policy, its interminable duration and the Wilsonian philosophy which forms its origin, as well as the high cost and intangible returns, in the context of a nation deeply in debt and entering financial crisis, make me of the firm opinion that the policy is strongly against the vital interests of the nation.
If you read all that, thanks for your time.