4 ms·

How has the United States protected its people in the past, what, 30 years? They couldn't protect the World Trade Centers from a couple of cult members stealin

How has the United States protected its people in the past, what, 30 years? They couldn't protect the World Trade Centers from a couple of cult members stealing planes. They couldn't protect us from the water problems in Flint, MI. They barely gave aid during Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters. They let children die in schools every year, the biggest one Uvalde, TX. By all means let's see the truth, but from my vantage point, America is not capable (or interested in) protecting her people.

shadowgovt 3y ago
Only one of those is something that foreigners did to the people of the US on its own soil, and that's narrowly what those who are afraid of another 9/11 are willing to give up significant freedoms to escape. Americans feel much less existentially threatened by messes they make in their own backyards and things they do to themselves. I believe what you're vocalizing is a younger-generation mindset (one that didn't feel the whiplash of 9/10 being a day everyone felt safe in their beds and 9/12 being a day nobody did). That younger mindset is one that I'm only too eager to see become the dominant mindset in American politics.
- pjmorris 3y ago
  From an older generation, we have: 'Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed' Governments are responsible for more than protection for foreign threats. I think the remaining items on the GP's list are legitimate in light of Jefferson's words.
- nobody9999 3y ago
  >I believe what you're vocalizing is a younger-generation mindset (one that didn't feel the whiplash of 9/10 being a day everyone felt safe in their beds and 9/12 being a day nobody did). That younger mindset is one that I'm only too eager to see become the dominant mindset in American politics. As an American who was in his mid-thirties on 9/11, I have to disagree with your assertion about 9/10 vs. 9/11. I was (especially as a native New Yorker who worked across the street[0] from the World Trade Center for several years prior to 9/11, and provided IT support and services to several companies impacted by the events of 9/11) appalled and angry at the death and destruction wrought by those bloodthirsty scum. However, I applauded the decision to not only rebuild WTC, but to build an even bigger building than the ones that came down. When challenged on that opinion (with the idea that it was just painting an even bigger target on a new building), my thought was that 'freedom isn't safe, and to ensure liberty risks are necessary.' As such, I was disgusted with the Patriot Act[1] and the various other surveillance mechanisms and security theater (cf. the TSA[2]) implemented after 9/11. I think that many folks felt a loss of control (control which they never actually had) and sought out means to regain that feeling of control. One friend refused to fly after 9/11, not because she believed that driving 1000 or 1500 miles rather than flying was actually safer (she knew the statistics as well as I did), but because she felt more in control in doing so. And that's dumb, especially when it comes to making laws. I wish more of my fellow Americans understood that. As traumatic as 9/11 was for me (I still avoid the WTC whenever possible, not because I'm afraid, but because it's still painful to think about 22 years later), I believe that a free and open society is important enough to accept some risk to preserve it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_Vesey_Street https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_Vesey_Street [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Admini...
cbsmith 3y ago
Over 30 years, and you could name five things. That's not the bad track record you think it is.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  One would have to live under a rock to assume the five that I listed were the only failures. I'd be here for a while if we were taking a real score. Can we name as many successes, or is empty and pithy antagonism our flavor today?
  - cbsmith 3y ago
    The successes generally don't register. The "didn't have a disaster" scenario doesn't tend too get much attention... let alone statistical victories like, "decreased rate of cervical cancer". Hell, unemployment going down decreases mortality rates... My point was that it's not a persuasive argument. Even if you made a laundry list of failures, you have no baseline to compare against.
    - zlg_codes 3y ago
      A simple baseline would be competency. I would compare the Twin towers falling to them not falling, for example. Can we not point to some kind of success this country's made, in unambiguous terms? Have we eradicated any diseases? Some sort of government action that has a clear cause and effect? Statistics are too prone to manipulation and classification mismatching. For example, you don't count as unemployed in the US stats unless you're actively looking for work. Someone who's given up the search is not counted. Methodology counts immensely for statistics, and those choices will change the numbers. We could counter the shooting angle with the number of mass shootings stopped. That's something we can work with. I've only seen one in recent memory and I'm not sure if it was this year or last year.
      - xboxnolifes 3y ago
        > I would compare the Twin towers falling to them not falling, for example. That's effectively saying that no amount of failure is acceptable.

shadowgovt 3y ago

Only one of those is something that foreigners did to the people of the US on its own soil, and that's narrowly what those who are afraid of another 9/11 are willing to give up significant freedoms to escape. Americans feel much less existentially threatened by messes they make in their own backyards and things they do to themselves. I believe what you're vocalizing is a younger-generation mindset (one that didn't feel the whiplash of 9/10 being a day everyone felt safe in their beds and 9/12 being a day nobody did). That younger mindset is one that I'm only too eager to see become the dominant mindset in American politics.

pjmorris 3y ago
From an older generation, we have: 'Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed' Governments are responsible for more than protection for foreign threats. I think the remaining items on the GP's list are legitimate in light of Jefferson's words.
nobody9999 3y ago
>I believe what you're vocalizing is a younger-generation mindset (one that didn't feel the whiplash of 9/10 being a day everyone felt safe in their beds and 9/12 being a day nobody did). That younger mindset is one that I'm only too eager to see become the dominant mindset in American politics. As an American who was in his mid-thirties on 9/11, I have to disagree with your assertion about 9/10 vs. 9/11. I was (especially as a native New Yorker who worked across the street[0] from the World Trade Center for several years prior to 9/11, and provided IT support and services to several companies impacted by the events of 9/11) appalled and angry at the death and destruction wrought by those bloodthirsty scum. However, I applauded the decision to not only rebuild WTC, but to build an even bigger building than the ones that came down. When challenged on that opinion (with the idea that it was just painting an even bigger target on a new building), my thought was that 'freedom isn't safe, and to ensure liberty risks are necessary.' As such, I was disgusted with the Patriot Act[1] and the various other surveillance mechanisms and security theater (cf. the TSA[2]) implemented after 9/11. I think that many folks felt a loss of control (control which they never actually had) and sought out means to regain that feeling of control. One friend refused to fly after 9/11, not because she believed that driving 1000 or 1500 miles rather than flying was actually safer (she knew the statistics as well as I did), but because she felt more in control in doing so. And that's dumb, especially when it comes to making laws. I wish more of my fellow Americans understood that. As traumatic as 9/11 was for me (I still avoid the WTC whenever possible, not because I'm afraid, but because it's still painful to think about 22 years later), I believe that a free and open society is important enough to accept some risk to preserve it. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_Vesey_Street https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200_Vesey_Street [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_Security_Admini...

cbsmith 3y ago

Over 30 years, and you could name five things. That's not the bad track record you think it is.

zlg_codes 3y ago
One would have to live under a rock to assume the five that I listed were the only failures. I'd be here for a while if we were taking a real score. Can we name as many successes, or is empty and pithy antagonism our flavor today?
- cbsmith 3y ago
  The successes generally don't register. The "didn't have a disaster" scenario doesn't tend too get much attention... let alone statistical victories like, "decreased rate of cervical cancer". Hell, unemployment going down decreases mortality rates... My point was that it's not a persuasive argument. Even if you made a laundry list of failures, you have no baseline to compare against.
  - zlg_codes 3y ago
    A simple baseline would be competency. I would compare the Twin towers falling to them not falling, for example. Can we not point to some kind of success this country's made, in unambiguous terms? Have we eradicated any diseases? Some sort of government action that has a clear cause and effect? Statistics are too prone to manipulation and classification mismatching. For example, you don't count as unemployed in the US stats unless you're actively looking for work. Someone who's given up the search is not counted. Methodology counts immensely for statistics, and those choices will change the numbers. We could counter the shooting angle with the number of mass shootings stopped. That's something we can work with. I've only seen one in recent memory and I'm not sure if it was this year or last year.
    - xboxnolifes 3y ago
      > I would compare the Twin towers falling to them not falling, for example. That's effectively saying that no amount of failure is acceptable.