Yes, I too, worry about what this might do to us. What if the terrorists force us to use multiple nuclear weapons on their moslem homelands? What if internal terrorists force us to round up arabs and moslems in this country at the slightest offense? What if we have to get tough with liberal and libertarian punks who try to inhibit the war effort? We survived the War Between the States and kept our constitutional republic. I think we'll survive this too. But there will be challenges and tough times ahead.
However, this site has become increasingly worse. Since the 9/11 event, members of this forum have become rabid and even dangerous. Some, by posting the address and phone number of a writer whose opinion was not welcome on FR, and then "hoping" that he didnt get hurt. He spoke of peace and a change in govt policy.
I know not all Freepers are like this, but if anyone speaks of peace or changes in US Govt interventionist policies, most members pepper and insult the poster rather than opposing the argument with reasonable logic. This is absurd.
What has happened? During the election crisis, Freepers wanted the truth. They knew the facts. Now it seems everyone wants more bloodshed and war not knowing all the facts even if the facts point to our govt as part of the cause.
I know folks out there are angry. I am too.
Maybe it's time that some of you all out there work towards getting FRs reputation out of the mud. I know of other FReepers out there who have lost interest in FR because of the general "attack" mood. If one didnt know any better, one might confuse this site with some fascist website. I could see a site like this being run by Germans in the 1930's had the internet been available then. Maybe the website name should be changed to FreeDemocracy since the majority opinion is always dictating what's best and right. The individual opinion is suspect.
I'm sure these comments will bring more peppering and personal insults. It's expected here in FR now days.
Some of you should take a look at what you are saying and how you are reacting. It certainly doesnt sound like a liberty loving group sometimes. Thank God some of you arent running this country.
For a moment, I thought this fellow had some credentials.
Do you know that if cats get in to catmip and eat enough of it the will get diarrhea.
Oh yes, the words from the article, like sanctimonious, come to mind.
Odd, how hyperbole is dismissed after contemplating the aftermath of Mass Murder, and the enemy is dismissed silently, and presumably as more or less innocent.
Aside from the fact that the overwhelming discussion here has been civil (yes, angry but civil) and insightful, this clymer picks the worst examples of rage as typical Freeper fare, as has the Democratic Underground. Sort of gives me a clue as to where he's coming from.
Human behavior in the past does have a definite relation to how we behave today; and even more so for the Muslim World. Let's look at the main significance of that as it relates to the total silence in the article about it.
All of the Muslim Middle East countries have been aiding indirectly or supporting directly terrorist activities and training camps all over the place; there may be dozens or hundreds of them.
We have been pretending not to notice so long as it was "not too bad" and didn't affect us directly.
They have pretended to forgive us for the mild criticism we do deliver from time to time, and gladly keep their cartel going to generate the millions the terrorists get indirectly from us.
Yeah, let's talk behavior from the past.
But even more insidiously and perfidiously, the current war has been characterized as non-religious when it is plainly so. The daily proclamations from all Muslim countries to "kill Americans" is not imaginary, and to most literate adults plain enough to see. And the muslim population in the U.S. has been totally silent in providing any aid to fellow citizens in this country even after the Mass Murder.
Most Americans also have no difficulty in assessing the odds of 11 000 000 Muslims in the U.S., with hundreds of terrorists operating among them, and actually getting help and aid and comfort among them, all being totally clueless of the plans of the terrorists and their actual acts of Mass Murder.
So then, let's talk about behavior from the past.
When national survival, and our civil liberties are on the line, you bet, Mr. Elkins, that our current rage at the Mass Murder is based on the crystal clarity that past behavior is very indicative of present and future conscious intent by the Muslim community worldwide!
Oh no, FR is being dissed by an unemployed guy! Oh, the shame.
And the people on his board would no doubt be perfectly at home shilling for Hitler... anything to stay out of war, after all.
. . . i.e., an unemployed panhandler who sleeps in the public library.
It’s not just message posters on the site. The management of FreeRepublic has instituted a "loose lips sink ships" campaign, with new moderators patrolling the forum to delete posts that in their opinion are detrimental to the "war effort."
There are some valid points here, but the comments about FReepers are uncalled for. The only threads being yanked are the ones that provide specific information on military preparations not yet published in press reports.
I for one, am quite concerned about the potential for loss of freedom. Talk of national id cards is frightening, not in the short run, but for the future. If, at some point in the future, the country foolishly elects another Clintonesque administration, I have no doubt this power will be used for evil. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
When our legislators have approval from an angry electorate, much damage to our freedom may be done quickly in the name of security.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
—Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the governor, November 11, 1755
We can count on this terrorism situation resulting in further erosion of the remnants of the US Constitution and BOR.
The author is right, it's happened in every war. Bad thing is, when the war is over we never get it all back.
If I get bored I will post a link to the "Gramm Rudman Commission.....on something to do with homeland defense" (I lost my bookmark)
Regards
J.R.
Will I bother with a rational breakdown?
In this atmosphere, why bother?
You've intentionally mis-characterized this policy.
Rockwellism is an armchair philosophy. The lonely Rockwellite sitting comfortably in his den assumes everyone else is as secure as he is. Unfortunately this hasn't always been true throughout history. There are moments of crisis when action is necessary. The Rockwellite in his barcalounger presumes that if you leave things as they are and do nothing, then nothing will change. This belief is preferable to the conviction of some that they must always be doing or changing things. But some times not to act is to lose everything. Patience and negotiation are advisable, but the patience of a nation isn't infinite and there are moments when it is finally broken. And it isn't just that our government wants power and manufactures crises to get it. There really are people out there who do mean us harm.
Rockwellism traces its roots back to Cobden and other idealistic or utopian 19th century economists. You can see parallel developments in Charles Beard and other turn of the century radicals and in the New Left of the 1960s. The central tenent of Rockwellism is that one's own government is to blame and that with it out of the way things will all run much more smoothly. Another assumption is that nobody wants to get us because we are rich, or free or arrogant.
Sooner or later these assumptions are called radically into question. For Norman Angell and other latter-day Cobdenites, it was 1914. For Beard, Barnes, Nock and their generations it was 1941. For the New Left, it was Afghanistan. For the Rockheads, it is now. Some of these people rose to the challenge, others did not. Neither course -- involvement or isolation -- is a priori right or right in all cases. Sometimes the crisis may not be real. I don't regard WWI as anything we should have got involved in. But I think the crisis and the need for action is real and serious now, as it was in the 40s, and as I thought it was in the 80s.
In any case, I wouldn't assume such moments never happen. Rockwellism really doesn't engage with history or with the present. The guy in the pannelled den with his drink and his bust of L von Mises could be a great person, the salt of the earth, but he doesn't have much of a clue about the real passions and dangers that nations and peoples confront over time.
Note: By "100% or nothing" I'm referring to the attitude of those who take the position that, "you either agree with me totally or you're the enemy." With that kind of attitude, it's no wonder that the libs outflank us.