The conclusions are obvious to any who's intellectually honest.
Yeah. That's what Islamist terrorists think, too. The idea that one must be evil or lying to believe differently is a fantastic way to dehumanize the otherside and justify whatever idiotic method of of opposition you come up with.
However the number of intellectually honest people who come to different conclusions rather belies the claim, which is why those who make it are so often relegated to any consensual societies' extremes, little respected and (until they turn violent) largely ignored.
Therefore we need information on every American and every call that they make. No, warrants aren't good enough anymore. Give it a rest already!
Hey look!
A Strawman!
You stated that there was
NO reason to collect FISA data or share it with other states. I gave you merely two of several very
good reasons to do so. When you are able to either refute those instances or admit that your earlier blanket denial was in error, let me know. Either will require more thought or maturity than you have thus far (sadly) demonstrated in discussing this topic.
Defending everything that the military does, especially warrantless wiretaps and the demolition of the 4th amendment, is pretty tough to call anything but evil.
1. I don't defend everything that the military does.
2. The military does not do warrantless wiretaps of American citizens. That would be a EO1233 violation, and those who did so would go to jail. I have actually seen military personnel, in fact, go to jail precisely for using their training and assets to collect on an AMCIT (in this case a SSgt who caught his wife cheating on him).
3. Calling your opposition evil because they disagree with you remains a childish and frankly
totalitarian tactic. That form of dehumanization has a long, sordid, abusive history.
Seriously, can you criticize anything that the military has done?
Yup. The decision to send home the Iraqi Army with their weapons was atrocious. The decision to let the Shia run wild after the push through Badghdad was incredibly costly. The laxity with which we handled sexual assault complaints in the late 20th century was atrocious and abusive towards our fellow Marines, soldiers, sailers, and airmen. Military leadership is often needlessly timid and willing to abandon their own because of command pressure, political pressure, or the desire to fit in well in Washington. The decision to allow deployed soldiers real-time access to social media has turned (whatever morale benefits) into an OPSEC nightmare, and it is only a matter of time before it costs lives. The military has been painfully slow to accept needed innovation, and that may very well have been responsible for us unnecessarily losing in Vietnam and possibly Afghanistan (and it almost lost Iraq). The military promotes its people by longevity (how long have you been in) at the bottom and middle, and by political connections (who do you know who will vouch for you) at the very top, thus encouraging an exodus of our top talent and the unwise needless promotion of many individuals of middling or sub-par ability beyond their capability to effectively perform. We have a healthcare/pension structure that is eating at our ability to provide a military capability to the nation at cost. The decision to start integrating women into combat units such as the infantry is a political one that is going to have deadly consequences for our young people on the back end.... and our leadership probably either doesn't care, or would care, but feels they have to do so in order to "get along", and so they pretend to themselves that it won't be a problem.
There is a reason why strips such as
Terminal Lance are wildly popular within the military ranks. We are plenty self-critical of the idiocies that come along with working in a branch of the Federal Government.
There's a reason that the US is beligerent toward Iran and not Saudi Arabia, or is Saudi Arabia a-okay with you?
Depends on how you mean A-Okay. Saudi Arabia isn't attempting to shove us out of the Persian Gulf in order to enforce regional hegemony and threaten our economy at will to force geopolitical concessions from us. Saudi Arabia is, however, an incredibly abusive and corrupt regime. Iran is a deliberate state backer of terrorists and paramilitary/covert groups that have killed thousands of Americans, Saudi Arabia is a fitful and sometimes ineffective pursuer of those same groups.
Saudi Arabia is a corrupt kingdom. However, its interest align more with ours and it is a partner nation in trying to maintain stability in the worlds least-stable center of gravity.
I'll remember not to question the almight cpwill next time. He knows everything about security so us minions shouldn't question him. Do you even listen to yourself?
Dude. Have you been paying attention to the hysterics you've brought in here? You're the equivalent of a guy claiming imminent collapse of the global economy who in the next breath offers as an aside that bond prices and yields move together rather than in opposite directions - making Very Very Very Obvious Errors that demonstrate that your analysis isn't fed by anything but groupthink and paranoia. I'm no genius, but it doesn't exactly
take a genius to figure out things like "hey, maybe people who disagree with me think that they are in the right, too."
