politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Oh for fucks sake they never were! Talking about it like this is letting Republicans re-write fucking history!! Talking about it like this is letting them dictate what taking security seriously means which is how we got in this fucking mess to begin with!
Was starting two forever wars in the middle east good for the US's security or Europe's for that matter?
Not to mention 9/11 literally fucking happened because the Bush admin ignored clear warnings. (What's that called, a security lapse? Rumsfeld called it a failure of imagination. I call it a failure to fucking read.)
The Afghanistan/Iraq wars in particular are an inflection point in the overall change in wider public opinion about the US government, especially worldwide. It's when the US's soft power began to falter and we became known as Team America World Police. It spearheaded disillusionment in the populace which has allowed right wing demagoguery take over in USA and Europe.
Was the TSA ever even really about security? At this point if a terrorist wanted to cause mass havoc and kill many people, they'd just have to set off a bomb while standing in line waiting for security. There's been two decades of research into the TSA that shows it is all security theater and a stealth jobs program for the Bush administration.
They were never the party of national security, back to Reagan trading weapons for hostages.
EDIT: I remember computer scientists worried about the vote being insecure in 2004 and they were dismissed by "the party of national security." While the CEO of Diebold was quoted as "We're dedicated to bringing the President the vote in November."
So fucking sick of these anti-research anti-science fucks being treated as competent about fucking anything.
Don't forget that Ronnie Raygun likely was involved in fucking up Carter getting hostages released. And then there was Iran/Contra....the qons don't GAF about American security and I'm not sure they ever have. Funneling money to their defense contractor boyfriends does not equal "national security". If anything, it destabilizes things.
Exactly, every time you turn around these guys were always ignoring evidence-based-anything. What they mean about "Law and order" is beating the shit out of innocent people and pinning charges on them. What they mean about "national security" is bombing the fuck out of wherever they can steal resources from. It's why Trump brought up Greenland and Panama Canal, strategic resource allocation.
The only thing they know to utilize is violence and domination. They're not clever fucking people, they're just ruthless.
That the Republican Party did little or nothing for national security is pretty well-known. But they did have a reputation for talking about it a lot and making it a key part of their campaign strategy and their picks for security secretary and defence secretary have traditionally been Rufus Scrimgeour types who would at least put on a strong act. That rhetoric has been noticeably absent this last election cycle and their pick for defence secretary is noticeably eyebrow-raising in this regard as well.