3 ms·
...the security of the nation itself. Nothing more or less. "Nothing more or less" sounds so precise, but "the security of the nation" is (like "national secur
by Lagged2Death 13y ago
...the security of the nation itself. Nothing more or less.
"Nothing more or less" sounds so precise, but "the security of the nation" is (like "national security") so vague as to be virtually meaningless without elaboration. "National security" is often abused to mean pretty much whatever the speaker wants it to mean. But it has always been very much about the continued existence and authority of the government.
"National security" as a concept and term didn't exist in the Civil War, but the main threat to "national security" at the time was the attempted secession of several states, which, had it succeeded, would have dramatically altered the power, authority, and nature of the US government.
- mpyne 13y ago> which, had it succeeded, would have dramatically altered the power, authority, and nature of the US government. But it would not have altered the existence of that government. It would, on the other hand, have threatened the republican form of government which the Constitution requires the government to provide for its citizens in Article IV. Of course, I was speaking of actual invasion anyways, not mere secession.