...for those who think maintaining our current foreign policy is necessary to defend the nation against Islamic terrorists:
What's the ONLY delivery system they have for deploying WMD against us here at home?
Basically, in order to get one--and the personnel over here to exploit it, they merely need to take advantage of our non-existent border and port security, and our criminally negligent immigration "controls".
That's the foreign policy you think will keep us safest? Really?
Friday, January 25, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I don't know if this post was directed to me or those like me, but I'm not for the status quo in foreign policy or domestic security.
Greatly improving border security and immigration security (two different things), are no-brainers, given the current state of things.
Cutting off aid to hostile countries, becoming energy independent, maintaining a consistent foreign policy that rewards those who help us and punishes those who seek to do us harm.
Look at Pakistan. Should we abandon all intelligence and military relations/aid with them because they're their own country who is in the midst of a crisis? I would say the risk outweighs the benefit of non-involvement.
Should the extremists take over, we're in trouble. The extremists don't need to fly a nuke over here to weaken us, all they need is the bargaining power of a nuke. Cut off aid and intelligence and we're bargaining blind.
Cut off intelligence and relations with those in power now* and we're bargaining blind.
*That's what I meant to say.
Trade with all nations; entangling alliances with none. Getting away from that has caused so much heartache and death.
Post a Comment