What if Iraq becomes a democracy but votes in people that oppose the U.S. (possibly even harboring terrorists)?
What if we get hit with a major terrorist attack, even a biological or chemical attack which requires the use of our armed forces here (this might be likely with smallpox)?
What if we get hit with another major terrorist attack, do we start really stripping away our civil liberties. Should guns be the first thing to go?
Just some things to contemplate. You can add your own or elaborate on what I’ve written (or ignore it all together).
[quote]KevinKovach wrote:
What if Iraq becomes a democracy but votes in people that oppose the U.S. (possibly even harboring terrorists)? [/quote]
This is entirely possible. The question is what those leaders will do. Just being anti-American is nothing to worry about, otherwise we would have to worry about France.
Why would it require our armed forces? 911 didn?t. While this is possible, and I really hope it isn?t, once it gets out you will see trucks popping up and inoculating everyone within a certain distance fro the event. The rest of the country may also get the vaccine, but not as quickly. They are prepared for this.
The worst thing to worry about would be 2 or 3 suitcase nukes going off at the same time in major metropolitan areas. I assume they don?t have this ability only because it hasn?t happened yet. (I have heard something about there being a complex encryption to make these things work, and while they might have one, it is unlikely they have broken the encryption.
It is only speculation, but I don?t see the country taking away any rights. Terrorists hit and run. We would be more serious about the war on terror then after 911. The left would be hit hard by this politically, as the country would move strongly to the right.
We would probably become more aggressive about dealing with terrorists, and if the UN didn?t back us after such an event, it probably would become a defunct organization after we would pull out because of political pressure.
Unless the UN decides not to mess with a really pissed off America.
This is why were are in Iraq, even though some cannot see that, assuming the only terrorist organization is Al-Qaeda. But that is not accurate. If we don?t deal with this stuff now, we will have to deal with it later, and I often wonder how powerful these groups may have become.
Mage I agree with a lot of the stuff you said. I’m glad you didn’t dodge my first question and say that it was impossible for Iraq to become anti american.
About the troop being needed here. The only situation that I can see that happening with would be smallpox or a similar disease (anthrax doesn’t transmit the same way so that would be different). While we do have plans for a bioterrorism attack I wouldn’t say that they are fool proof or even likely to save a majority of the people. A disease like smallpox can transmit very fast and public health officials are going to be making sick people stay at home and not go to the hospital (Public Health officials also have the legal right to do this). I really don’t see people being to happy about just sitting in their house waiting to see if they die or make it through. If a disease outbreak was widespread enough (multistate) I think it’s pretty logical that our military might be needed.
Well if they harbor terrorists then we will most likely take action against them. If they don’t they are safe. In this day and age you do not want to side with terrorists and have an address we can hit.
As to an attack in the US that requires the military to step in…it has already happened. After 911 the US Air Force flew combat air patrols over NY for weeks. Fully armed and visible to the city. On 9/11 a convoy of NY National Guard made it’s way to the WTC site. Again fully armed. We were all glad to see them. They provided vital logistics and a great deal of peace of mind for the residents of the area.
As to your question of “guns being the first to go” why would you say that?
I don’t believe society will sink into lawlessness. On the contrary this country rallies in times of emergency. Guns provide protestion against individual criminal acts in this country and I think would be a vital deterrent in times of national emergency.
I cannot see guns being taken away here. That is practically impossible. How do they go about finding them all? There are already people hiding their guns, just in case. Others would start hiding their guns if the government started taking them.
One of the reasons America is not invaded is because they would be outgunned by teenagers.
I said guns only because the people that I know that overwhelmingly support the patriot act are gun enthusiests.
I don’t think guns should be taken away, but I thought it might make people think more about taking away rights if they are taking away rights that you care about.