Originally Posted by Albinonewt

Do any of you consider Al Gore to be a fear monger?

If the answer is no then welcome to partisan hypocripsy. (Except Troianji, he would have to have said yes to be a hypocrite)

Originally Posted by VoiceofReason

If the US doesn't stand against evil and for the rights of all people to live in a free society with their liberties and rights protected who will?

Originally Posted by prrriiide

The same people that are paying for it now...

up front:



In the long run:



As long as our leaders keep playing the fear card, the terrorists win. Their objective is not to take over our country. It isn't to come here and rape our women and take our children away for inculcation. It isn't to make us all face east and pray several times a day.

Their objective is to spread fear. To spread fear in such a way that we disrupt our daily lives and chase boogey-men with illegal wiretaps and forfeited freedoms.

The best way to deal with them is to target their means through international banking agreements. To target their leadership with precision military action. To target their patrons by becoming energy independent. And to live our lives as we always have, under the freedoms so many of our forefathers died to preserve over the years. By allowing our leaders to play the fear card, we leave the field of battle before putting up a fight.

Originally Posted by LiveAndLetDie

I'll take a Cold War over a Hot one any day.

Originally Posted by FRYandBENDER

I agree Presluc, but I would take it a step further. Playing the fear card is just about all our political class knows how to do. You must be afraid of the terrorist, we will take away some of your rights to protect you. You must be afraid of global warming, we will take away some of your rights to protect you. You must be afraid of this, you must be afraid of that. It is all a bunch of dishonest bull shit that they use to scare us into voting for them. The funny thing is that I believe the thing your average American citizen is afraid of is having the complete degree of freedom that they were intended to have. That is why so many look to and beg the government to take part in their lives.

Originally Posted by Troianii

This is ridicilous and it is a partisan attempt to portray one party as the fear party. Republicans are advocating bringing our military back to it's propr strength, this is a fear card? What about the Democrats in trying to make sure that you have a government check when you retire, afraid you'll starve when you're old? What about the Democrats playing the medicare fear card, afraid you won't be able to pay for your prescriptions? What about the Democrats playing the tax card, afraid you will have to pay minimal taxes and the rich will get away with paying half of their income? What about the Democrats playing the fear card on universal health care, afraid that you won't want to pay for health insurance and no one's going to force you to? What about the Democrats playing the (outdated) Bush card, afraid that he's going to get elected again? What about the Democrats playing the fear card in Iraq, afraid that anyone who didn't volunteer is going to go to Iraq? And don't even talk to me about the joke that is the global warming fear card. Kids in our schools are brainwashed with pictures of the Empire State Building up to it's ears in water, with a number like "2020" put in the corner.

The Democrats are playing the fear cards, it's just that Democrats don't have partisan opposition to the Democratic party.

Originally Posted by LiveAndLetDie

This whole "Politics of Fear" ideology, perpetuated by the Republicans, really pisses me off.

The number of active duty personnel currently serving in the military is just under 1.5 million, with about the same number in the reserves. These numbers have remained pretty steady even as far back as the first Gulf War when I served. Has anything really changed threat wise that would demand an increase in force level or military spending? No. If anything, Nation level threats have decreased. Have the tactics of terror changed, sure. But our military is not and should never be the first line of defense against domestic terror. This is the job of the FBI.

Even if our military was twice the size that it is today, back in 2001, what exactly would have changed on 9/11? Nothing. But would anything have been different had we instead spent the kind of money we are currently dropping on the war in Iraq on Intelligence, FBI Agents on the street and even local law enforcement. You bet. Over 3,000 New Yorkers and over 3,000 US service men and women might still be with us today.

The only reason to spend more on the military than we already have is to prepare an offensive force. Again, not something I want to think about. As it is we already spend more on our military than the rest of the world spends on theirs, combined. Nearly 10 times more than the runner up, China.
Military Spending

Originally Posted by MountainMike

Anyone remember the old Dominoe Theory that got us into the Vietnam War? All you have to do is cut and paste mid 60's propaganda and remove "commie" with "terrorist." The format is exactly the same: there is a boogyman hiding under every rock and behind every BUSH. Be afraid.

Originally Posted by Shiva_TD

The "proper strenght" would be a military dedicated to the defense of the sovereignty of the United States and not a military of imperialism, aggression, and interventionism. With that criteria the military could and should be cut by at least two-thirds.

Only a nation hell bent upon imposing US imperialism could justify the size of our current military or of making it even larger.

Originally Posted by Albinonewt

Do any of you consider Al Gore to be a fear monger?

If the answer is no then welcome to partisan hypocripsy. (Except Troianji, he would have to have said yes to be a hypocrite)