Politics & Government - 26 June 2006

2006-06-26 20:18:29 · 10 answers · asked by ...... 2 in Government

I have considered SWAT, Police, Secret Service, Spec Ops, and others. Let me know which one I should join. Not to be cocky but I qualifiy for all of them. I just can't decide. I like military, but, SWAT sounds good because you get to go home almost every night. You see some of the problems?? Let me know what you think. Feel free to suggest jobs that I have not listed up here.

2006-06-26 20:11:19 · 8 answers · asked by Red Encryption 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

If I was Bell Helicopter or other copter company I would be so angry at military for disclosing such bogus info. All Apache copters crashed, none shot down. Really?

2006-06-26 20:10:56 · 10 answers · asked by Rod b 3 in Politics

2006-06-26 20:07:24 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Immigration

my husband and i had an argument, it was nothing more than that and now they are trying to say that we laid hands on each other. and plus thats all they heard was a yelling match. do i have to wait til after court on the 7th of july to obtain my police report?

2006-06-26 19:54:28 · 6 answers · asked by Amber 3 in Law & Ethics

problem? They keep asking the same tired questions, which they find in right wing propaganda publications They incite hate and misinformation and have no substance to there claims. Can someone please explain to me why yahoo does nothing about these Neo Nazi's? Surely they dont represent America, please tell me they don't. I guess I live in a bubble, because I dont hear that here on living on the border. Any non racist out there please give me some hope...thanks!

2006-06-26 19:53:41 · 16 answers · asked by D 4 in Immigration

'''''' pls dont say freedom of speech''''''

2006-06-26 19:49:55 · 10 answers · asked by emekadiv 1 in Politics

i have heard that people who are sociopaths cannot be rehabilitated. what about those who have gone to prison and have led a life of crime? are they likely to change?

2006-06-26 19:48:54 · 12 answers · asked by lady 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

What happens is that I dont have a California ID....I mean im legal by all means (im a US citizen) and I only have a school id and my birth certificate, social security ect. Do you think they will let me in just showing those papers and our wedding papers (I still havent changed my last name) he is not going to a penitentary...just to county (local) ...Do you think I need to get a CA id? or can they let me in w/o a legal id? I dont even have a drivers license because im not 18 yet...confused...help!

2006-06-26 19:43:45 · 8 answers · asked by Pretty_LeLii 1 in Government

If God was not real in some aspect why would The Goverment allow the use of In God We Trust it on money ? back in the 60's It was every where particuarly in schools and in the courts. if you swore on the Bible and the Ten Commandments was posted in the hallways! what happened? The hymns we used to sing in Schools on Monday at Assemblies are now forbidden but what is really going on?

2006-06-26 19:30:05 · 14 answers · asked by Sylvia J 2 in Other - Politics & Government

2006-06-26 19:26:15 · 5 answers · asked by simon 1 in Politics

2006-06-26 19:26:02 · 15 answers · asked by sampsonanddelicious 1 in Government

Rank, in order, giving rationale:
Female, Homosexual, Black, Asian, or Athiest?

2006-06-26 19:24:33 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

2006-06-26 19:21:57 · 10 answers · asked by Bondservant 2 in Civic Participation

2006-06-26 19:16:06 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

The jobs for the uneducated will always be there. If we deport all the Mexicans won't we give a better chance to the lower class in our society? Won't deportation create a worker shortage which would drive up demand for workers and the wages?

2006-06-26 19:13:03 · 57 answers · asked by turntable 6 in Immigration

What is the difference (besides magazine) between the $35 year long membership and the $10 associate membership???

2006-06-26 19:12:33 · 3 answers · asked by Whats it to ya? 2 in Law Enforcement & Police

I want to immigrate to Canada, I completely know the rules but decided to hire a lawyer because my first language is not English or French and i don't want to have grammer errors in my application!!! do u recommend hiring an attorney? do u know a good attorney?

any comments is appreciated.

Alex.

2006-06-26 19:11:46 · 2 answers · asked by Dr. Vhdl 1 in Immigration

this has always bothered me and relatively recent episode of comedy central's the colbert report has prompted me to ask this question. why is it that right wingers constantly cry about government control. i could never understand this as it those very same people that support such liberty constraining issues as an anti-gay marraige amendment and the FCC's crusade against "indecency", NSA wire tapping. things like these are what flexes the muscles of big government by way of denying our basic freedoms and choices. i guess their idea of freedom is being able to have as many guns possible (not that i have anything against guns) and pointing them in the direction of all who disagree. alright, before you conservatives submit your angry answers for the cheap shot, know that all i really want to know is your reasoning. i am open to both left and right interpretation on this matter

p.s.: apparently i love parentheticals. just wanted to say that. i know i'm lame.

2006-06-26 19:11:12 · 5 answers · asked by Reza 3 in Other - Politics & Government

Name the group or person or people.

2006-06-26 19:09:39 · 12 answers · asked by Oliver D 1 in Other - Politics & Government

2006-06-26 19:09:12 · 6 answers · asked by bgreve1 2 in Law & Ethics

resources to become self sustaining, simply copy the infrastructure systems implemented in America and become great nations?

2006-06-26 19:07:31 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Government

2006-06-26 19:07:25 · 11 answers · asked by LaPalma 2 in Immigration

2006-06-26 18:59:58 · 11 answers · asked by simon 1 in Politics

What would make out politicians honest in thier work? i think that if senators and congressmen had a spending limit, and a bank-cap (bank account maximum funds limit) it'd deture bribing.. also, why not tap and record thier every communication and movement? does anybody agree that if we took money out of politics it would help make politics more honest? and how could we do this?

2006-06-26 18:58:16 · 9 answers · asked by Shrimpkiss 3 in Other - Politics & Government

While Israel has never acknowledged it has nuclear weapons of its own, Israeli and foreign experts believe it possesses 100-200 nuclear devices and has the capability to deliver them via American-made F-15 and F-16 warplanes and the Jericho II missile, based on a prototype Israel developed with France in the 1960s.

The ability to deliver nuclear weapons from submarines would significantly enhance Israel's reported nuclear deterrent, by shielding the launch platform from all but the most sophisticated countermeasures. According to the Times story, Israel would use Dolphin class diesel-powered submarines acquired from Germany to launch the nuclear-armed Harpoon missiles. Israel has three such submarines in its arsenal.

A report Sunday in the German weekly Der Spiegel said Israel had identified six sites where Iran was allegedly developing nuclear weapons, most believed to be inland. Der Spiegel reported that Israel's Mossad intelligence agency was developing a plan to attack the alleged nuclear weapons sites in Iran. Iran acknowledges that it has a nuclear development program, but says it is designed only to generate electricity.

2006-06-26 18:57:04 · 8 answers · asked by The Patriot 1 in Government

2006-06-26 18:52:42 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2006-06-26 18:52:35 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Government

"Neocons" believe that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire. Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action.

Most neocons believe that the US has allowed dangers to gather by not spending enough on defense and not confronting threats aggressively enough. One such threat, they contend, was Saddam Hussein and his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 1991 Gulf War, neocons relentlessly advocated Mr. Hussein's ouster.

Most neocons share unwavering support for Israel, which they see as crucial to US military sufficiency in a volatile region. They also see Israel as a key outpost of democracy in a region ruled by despots. Believing that authoritarianism and theocracy have allowed anti-Americanism to flourish in the Middle East, neocons advocate the democratic transformation of the region, starting with Iraq. They also believe the US is unnecessarily hampered by multilateral institutions, which they do not trust to effectively neutralize threats to global security.

What are the roots of neoconservative beliefs?
The original neocons were a small group of mostly Jewish liberal intellectuals who, in the 1960s and 70s, grew disenchanted with what they saw as the American left's social excesses and reluctance to spend adequately on defense. Many of these neocons worked in the 1970s for Democratic Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a staunch anti-communist. By the 1980s, most neocons had become Republicans, finding in President Ronald Reagan an avenue for their aggressive approach of confronting the Soviet Union with bold rhetoric and steep hikes in military spending. After the Soviet Union's fall, the neocons decried what they saw as American complacency. In the 1990s, they warned of the dangers of reducing both America's defense spending and its role in the world.

Unlike their predecessors, most younger neocons never experienced being left of center. They've always been "Reagan" Republicans.

What is the difference between a neoconservative and a conservative?

Liberals first applied the "neo" prefix to their comrades who broke ranks to become more conservative in the 1960s and 70s. The defectors remained more liberal on some domestic policy issues. But foreign policy stands have always defined neoconservatism. Where other conservatives favored détente and containment of the Soviet Union, neocons pushed direct confrontation, which became their raison d'etre during the 1970s and 80s.

Today, both conservatives and neocons favor a robust US military. But most conservatives express greater reservations about military intervention and so-called nation building. Neocons share no such reluctance. The post 9/11-campaigns against regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate that the neocons are not afraid to force regime change and reshape hostile states in the American image. Neocons believe the US must do to whatever it takes to end state-supported terrorism. For most, this means an aggressive push for democracy in the Middle East. Even after 9/11, many other conservatives, particularly in the isolationist wing, view this as an overzealous dream with nightmarish consequences.

How have neoconservatives influenced US foreign policy?

Finding a kindred spirit in President Reagan, neocons greatly influenced US foreign policy in the 1980s.

But in the 1990s, neocon cries failed to spur much action. Outside of Reaganite think tanks and Israel's right-wing Likud Party, their calls for regime change in Iraq were deemed provocative and extremist by the political mainstream. With a few notable exceptions, such as President Bill Clinton's decision to launch isolated strikes at suspected terrorist targets in Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, their talk of preemptive military action was largely dismissed as overkill.

Despite being muted by a president who called for restraint and humility in foreign affairs, neocons used the 1990s to hone their message and craft their blueprint for American power. Their forward thinking and long-time ties to Republican circles helped many neocons win key posts in the Bush administration.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 moved much of the Bush administration closer than ever to neoconservative foreign policy. Only days after 9/11, one of the top neoconservative think tanks in Washington, the Project for a New American Century, wrote an open letter to President Bush calling for regime change in Iraq. Before long, Bush, who campaigned in 2000 against nation building and excessive military intervention overseas, also began calling for regime change in Iraq. In a highly significant nod to neocon influence, Bush chose the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) as the venue for a key February 2003 speech in which he declared that a US victory in Iraq "could begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace." AEI – the de facto headquarters for neconservative policy – had been calling for democratization of the Arab world for more than a decade.

What does a neoconservative dream world look like?

Neocons envision a world in which the United States is the unchallenged superpower, immune to threats. They believe that the US has a responsibility to act as a "benevolent global hegemon." In this capacity, the US would maintain an empire of sorts by helping to create democratic, economically liberal governments in place of "failed states" or oppressive regimes they deem threatening to the US or its interests. In the neocon dream world the entire Middle East would be democratized in the belief that this would eliminate a prime breeding ground for terrorists. This approach, they claim, is not only best for the US; it is best for the world. In their view, the world can only achieve peace through strong US leadership backed with credible force, not weak treaties to be disrespected by tyrants.

Any regime that is outwardly hostile to the US and could pose a threat would be confronted aggressively, not "appeased" or merely contained. The US military would be reconfigured around the world to allow for greater flexibility and quicker deployment to hot spots in the Middle East, as well as Central and Southeast Asia. The US would spend more on defense, particularly for high-tech, precision weaponry that could be used in preemptive strikes. It would work through multilateral institutions such as the United Nations when possible, but must never be constrained from acting in its best interests whenever necessary

2006-06-26 18:47:11 · 4 answers · asked by The Patriot 1 in Government

Amnesty was given in 1984 or '85. The (then) INS expected and used the number of 650,000 - 700,000 applicants for amnesty to get approval for it.
They received over 6.5 million requests for amnesty!
Our government is talking about bypassing the laws again in another illegal 'amnesty' because the estimates are that we have 7-12 million illegals again in our country!
Is this not like allowing thieves that steal cars the free and legal title to the vehicle, if they are able to keep the car long enough and never got caught for the crime?
How can rewarding the criminal with exactly what they wanted to get THROUGH their illegal act, deter others from commiting the very same crime?
It seems to me that this would only serve to MOTIVATE others to commit crimes.
The amount of illegals that received amnesty in the early 80's was almost EXACTLY equal to unemployment rate of that time. Coincidence?
With companies sending American jobs to Mexico, how can we allow them to take what remains?

2006-06-26 18:44:45 · 7 answers · asked by athorgarak 4 in Immigration