The Enemy is US in Many Cases

Free Republic | 9/14/2001 | Self

[Rockitz]

The Enemy is US in Many Cases

In the aftermath of these most recent terrorist strikes, it is becoming increasingly important to identify the enemy. This is what President Bush was referring to when he indicated that we were facing a “different kind of enemy.” The enemy is no longer a readily identifiable nation or set of leaders within a nation, but has spread like yeast in dough throughout the world. The enemy includes not only obvious groups of individuals, but various wrong ideas that are being exalted as ideals by “friend” and foe alike. Here’s my cut at the enemies we face with regard to terrorism.

Enemies who are people:

1) Those that would engage in violence against our country and people, i.e. terrorists.
2) Those that would aid and abet those who would engage in violence against our country and people, i.e. foreign governments, wealthy idealists, family and friends of terrorists.
3) Those that would export weapons and other technologies that can be used to generate violence or support those who propagate violence against our country or people, i.e. businessmen.
4) Those that would make it easier through regulation or lack of enforcement to export weapons and other technologies that can be used to generate violence or support those who propagate violence against our country or people, i.e. business, government, security, law enforcement agencies.
5) Those that would seek or promote diplomatic agreements for the sake of diplomacy without achieving true security for our people, i.e. various leaders or organizations both internal and external to our country including those in government, business, religion, media, etc.
6) Those that would seek or promote a judicial solution for the sake of political correctness without reasonable expectation of obtaining true justice or future security for our people, i.e. various leaders or organizations both internal and external to our country including those in government, business, religion, media, etc.
7) Those that would seek or promote peace at any cost, i.e. various leaders or organizations both internal and external to our country including those in government, business, religion, media, etc.
8) Those leaders who are not willing to accept the possibility for civilian or military casualties to exact justice on our enemies, i.e. various leaders or organizations both internal and external to our country including those in government, business, religion, media, etc.
9) Those leaders who are not willing to sacrifice any personal freedoms, rights, conveniences, or individual people for increased security of all, i.e. various leaders or organizations both internal and external to our country including those in government, business, religion, media, etc.

Enemies that are Ideas:

1) Radical Islam or any other faith or cause that promotes holy war or jihad against the US.
2) Tolerance is more important than truth.
3) There is a judicial solution for every crime.
4) All nations or people groups will play fair if given a chance.
5) All nations or people groups are capable of governing themselves.
6) The US must never occupy a country even though the indigenous people have demonstrated that they cannot govern those within their borders.
7) Innocent people must never be killed by the US military.
8) Nothing more than a measured response can be initiated against our enemies.
9) Preemptive strikes on our enemies are not appropriate.
10) The public has the right to know everything that we are doing militarily at any time.
11) The government cannot sacrifice any individuals or any individual rights for the security of the nation. (This is the scary one.)

The freedom we now enjoy hangs in the balance if we are not able to respond appropriately to these enemies. This grand experiment as an open society is going to be severely tested by these events and our response to them. God bless all of our leaders with the wisdom and discernment so that they might deal with the current crisis with thoughtful decisions. The ramifications of their decisions will be felt throughout history.

[Rockitz]

I welcome your critique.

[csvset]

Locally, (Porstsmouth, VA) on Wednesday, neighbors reported that two "Middle Eastern" men moved in to a rental house.

The car had Massachusetts license plates. As it turned out, it was determined that they were illegal immigrants.

I'd have posted a link, but , this has not been published. It was reported via local tv & radio. Very little info was provided. No word as to what the country of origin was, or where they had resided prior to moving in Wednesday night.

[Uncle Fud]

11) The government cannot sacrifice any individuals or any individual rights for the security of the nation. (This is the scary one.)

Yes, it's scary in more ways than one, isn't it?

I am prepared for some restrictions on individual rights, given the following:

1 - the restrictions clearly are effective for their intended purpose and not some silly feel good, zero-tolerance crap. Taking butter knives out of the airport restaurant will save no lives. Likewise, restricting US citizens from using crypto software will have no effect on the overseas terrorist's use.

2 - If we accept restrictions on civil liberties because we are at war, then by God we'd better GO TO WAR, DEFEAT THE ENEMY, and then return to the full exercise of our freedoms just as after the Civil War and WWII.

What I find the "scary" prospect is that we might go on for decades "fighting terrorism" by slowly tightening the surveillance and control of the law abiding within our own borders, because we lack the will to vanquish the guilty within and without.

[DB]

The Constitution must survive intact. Otherwise there is no point.

[meenie]

The biggest problem we have at the present time is making people aware that this is a war within our country. Even the Congress and President act as though we are engaging some foreign power only. We go after nations harboring terrorists, we go after Bin Laden, and the list goes on and on.

DAMMIT the war is here! It isn't in Afghanistan or the Middle East. Our people are exposed to attack here just the same as the people in different foreign countries that are hotbeds of terrorists. We are supposed to go attack any country that harbors terrorists to exact revenge for what was done here.

Well, we better bomb the hell out of Daytona Beach, some of our own air bases that have trained these pilots from the Middle East. Britain would be a good target, they have about every Muslim organization in the world with offices there.

In short, these terrorists have been allowed to go to every country in the world because our governments were so interested in furthering the global business interests and international governance that they ignored any security interests.

Even yesterday in Bush's remarks, he still wants authority to negotiate the trade of the Americas. What in the hell do we want more open borders for when we aren't even policing the ones we have now? This is insanity for our security. Do we ignore the loss of thousands of lives and go on with business as usual pretending that nothing has happened?

THIS COUNTRY HAS NO NATIONAL SECURITY. It is damned well time that we start working on some. We need to round up the aliens that are here illegaly and send them hone. We need to bring our troops home and get our own borders protected. We need the cooperation of every citizen that has knowledge of any suspicious acting individuals to alert the authorities and make a national plea for their help.

We don't need any more infringement on our liberties in order to accomplish this. We definitely don't need any more attempts to disarm the public which the socialists have been promoting. It's time we get down to a wartime footing and protect the people that are remaining before there is more loss of life to terrorism.

[Bob Burnett]

Under the Enemies who are People you might want to consider national governmental leadership who because of influence peddling are lobbied into becoming tools for foreign powers. Such leadership should imbroil their country in foreign disputes only to protect their vital self-interests. People who allow their national interest to be jerked around only to benefit the selfish self interests of lobby groups are enemies who are people.

If we need to be hated by billions of Muslims to protect our vital interests (like oil) then so be it. But why invite such widespread hatred against us when we really don't have a dog in these other people's disputes?

We must think with our heads and not with our hearts. It's foolish and risky to mindlessly tie ourselves to foreign countries who have religious and racial differences not only because they are irreconciable, but because they don't involve us except perhaps sentimentally and even then to a very small minority.

[Interesting Times]

[virgil]

I agree. The attackers made much use of our own facility, apparatus, services, etc. But if there is a foreign country out there who gave safe quarter to these savages, we should turn that country into a sheet of glass. I also think the government should be careful about curbing the rights and freedoms of american citizens. Don't think for a minute that liberal politicians have given up there game. They will push to abolish the 2nd amendment, they could use this disaster to push america into a totalitarian regime.

a lot of money is being pumped into NY. A lot aid from NGOs is going there. Keep in mind most people who live in Manhattan are not poor. None of the companies in the WTC are poor. A lot of the people in NY have no realization of life in the rest of America. They see themselves as cosmopolitan, but in some ways they are isolated and have a myopic view of the rest of America. Who lives in NY? Bill Clinton. Who is a Senator? Hilliary Clinton. What did Hiliary Clinton say a couple days ago? "New York is America".

[Rockitz]

Interesting- I had these guys in mind when I wrote this.

[Rockitz]

2 - If we accept restrictions on civil liberties because we are at war, then by God we'd better GO TO WAR, DEFEAT THE ENEMY, and then return to the full exercise of our freedoms just as after the Civil War and WWII.

Amen.

[Interesting Times]

Interesting- I had these guys in mind when I wrote this.

I heard you loud and clear -- nice article.

[Rockitz]

Any restrictions must be temporary until such time as the enemy is exterminated.

[newwahoo]

"What I find the "scary" prospect is that we might go on for decades "fighting terrorism" by slowly tightening the surveillance and control of the law abiding within our own borders, because we lack the will to vanquish the guilty within and without"

Bump. Unfortunately, its the path of least resistance as it won't "offend" anyone or "hurt innocents".

[Mmmike]

Bttt.

[DB]

That is good in theory, and in theory I would agree. Unfortunately, the restriction rarely go away once in place. Much of the income tax came into being as a "war tax". It did not go away after the war. There are many other examples as well. I think the Constitution must stand unless marshal law is declared (because it must). When marshal law is rescinded, all violations go with it.

[Rockitz]

Agreed. That was the temporary aspect to which I was referring. I sent this to the president in an e-mail with some minor mods. I'm sure he's already well aware of all of these enemies.