41–50 of 53 posts
while the education budget is less then 70 billions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Ed...
The US is regularly on top of the OECD for spending per student in school. The idea that it doesn't spend much on education is one of those bad memes that never goes away.
[1] http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_education_spending_20...
This is exactly what terrorists want: the impact of a terrorist act is, in the end, measured in money much more than in lives. They are not going to kill that many people in the end, what they want is to make people afraid and pervert all the freedom in a country. Because what they hate is our freedom, do not forget it. EDIT: BTW, being wrong (if I am) is a cause for downvotes? Grow up, you people.
The terrorists do not want to see the U.S. turn into a police state. The terrorists do not hate our freedoms. The terrorists -- and specifically I'm talking about al-Qaeda and related groups -- want "atrocities against Muslims" to end, they want support for Israel to end, they want U.S. presence in the Middle East to end.[1] Terror sects aren't B-movie villains. [1]: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/military/july-…
Now, maybe if we started bombing Israel to demonstrate our sincerity...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, and before that was communists. I wonder what's next.
I'm curious what you believe about the Boston bombing and 9/11. Do you think the threat of Islamic terrorism is fabricated? I'm also curious what you think about American communism. American communists were instrumental in getting the Soviet Union the Bomb, thereby bring the world to the brink of destruction. They also leaked information from the top levels of government during WWII, helping to deliver millions to th…
As for WWII it wasn't Russian spies that allows the USSR's land grab, it was combination of rubbish negotiation and political wrangling within the allies.
This article by Walter Russell Mead says a massive intelligence effort is an necessary corollary of Obama's position that the Global War on Terror is over, that we can return to a 9/10 mindset: http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2013/06/06/public... : Key bits: " From the day he took office, President Obama has sought to defuse the war and decrease public concern about it.... "It is in many ways an excellent…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, and before that was communists. I wonder what's next.
I'm curious what you believe about the Boston bombing and 9/11. Do you think the threat of Islamic terrorism is fabricated? I'm also curious what you think about American communism. American communists were instrumental in getting the Soviet Union the Bomb, thereby bring the world to the brink of destruction. They also leaked information from the top levels of government during WWII, helping to deliver millions to th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious what you believe about the Boston bombing and 9/11. Do you think the threat of Islamic terrorism is fabricated? I'm also curious what you think about American communism. American communists were instrumental in getting the Soviet Union the Bomb, thereby bring the world to the brink of destruction. They also leaked information from the top levels of government during WWII, helping to deliver millions to th…
There will always be threats. That is not the problem. The problem is the Us vs Them attitude that causes overreaction to a relatively small number of deaths while larger dangers go unnoticed. You endure road accidents and gun deaths every day. Why do you think you can't endure Islamic terrorism?
Therefore, why is our reaction to Islamic terrorism an out of line overreaction? I mean, any more than our vehicle safety one, or at least as that can be argued as an overreaction?
If, or more likely when, it gets to the point of nukes slagging our cities, I don't think the word "endure" will even vaguely apply. I would also hate to tell my friends who lost friends in 9/11 that that was something simply to be "endured", with obviously lots more to come.
Ask yourself if your desires are realistic. Would the American people allow such to pass? Would not a suppression of the reaction to attacks result in worse reactions when we finally do? It can be argued that our tolerance and "enduring" of al-Qaeda's attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Attacks) that killed over 300 prior to 9/11 allowed the latter to occur, with our resulting "overreaction".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There will always be threats. That is not the problem. The problem is the Us vs Them attitude that causes overreaction to a relatively small number of deaths while larger dangers go unnoticed. You endure road accidents and gun deaths every day. Why do you think you can't endure Islamic terrorism?
You're ignoring that we spend a great deal of treasure and effort in minimizing road accidents and "gun deaths", and with quite a bit of success in both as measured in just that, especially when adjusted for population increase. We're spending so much ordinary people can't afford new cars (OK, there are environmental costs as well, and the $1,000? for a 5 mph bumper isn't for safety, really), and the current generati…
Look, I'm not saying don't act. Sometimes military action is the best option. Just keep your eyes open. Sometimes invading countries that want to be left alone, or increased authoritarianism at home isn't the best idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're ignoring that we spend a great deal of treasure and effort in minimizing road accidents and "gun deaths", and with quite a bit of success in both as measured in just that, especially when adjusted for population increase. We're spending so much ordinary people can't afford new cars (OK, there are environmental costs as well, and the $1,000? for a 5 mph bumper isn't for safety, really), and the current generati…
Do you have friends who lost friends in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars? What do you tell them? The wars made us less safe. What do you tell your kids who have to pay for them? Look, I'm not saying don't act. Sometimes military action is the best option. Just keep your eyes open. Sometimes invading countries that want to be left alone, or increased authoritarianism at home isn't the best idea.
We disagree on whether these wars "made us safer", and I'll also note the effort to quarantine Saddam (the no-fly zone et. al.) prior to the 2nd war wasn't cheap, in lives or treasure.
If the Taliban controlling Afghanistan at the time "wanted to be left alone", they could have delivered Osama and company to us as we demanded. To the extent they weren't complicit and supporting al-Qaeda, they violated Niven's Law 1b: "Never stand next to someone who is throwing shit at an armed man."
And I think the peoples of Iran and Kuwait would find it extremely curious to describe Iraq under Saddam as a country "that wanted to be left alone".