Whats more of a threat to U.S national security : Liberals, Conservatives, Terrorists, or Hollywood?

Question

It can be directly or indirectly. Who ever argues their point the best will get 10 points.

Answer 1

When people talk about National Security, they may mean any of a number of things besides the actual definition, which is the "public policy of maintaining the integrity and survival of the nation-state through the use of economic, military and political power and the exercise of diplomacy, in times of peace and war".... so let's define our terms, broadly, by what people frequently mean when they say it:
National Security is either 1. how safe the citizens of our country FEEL, or 2. how safe the citizens actually ARE, or 3. it is the secrets that the Government wishes to keep in order to continue its efforts to keep the citizens (feeling) safe. We'll cover all the bases and call them NS1, NS2, and NS3. Lets take them one at a time.

THREATS TO NS1: How safe citizens FEEL
Hollywood? Big threat, because the movies make terrorism and the like seem so much more likely than it actually is that people feel a much greater threat than actually exists.

Terrorists? Big threat, because no matter how unlikely an actual terrorist attack is, people perceive the chances as being much higher. The point of terrorism is TERROR. Yes, they succeeded.

Conservatives? Big threat, because their job is to make people aware of how dangerous our situation is; "We could be attacked any moment and must be prepared" (See 'Terrorists').

Liberals? Big threat, because they make people who perceive the threat of terrorism high afraid that Liberals will reduce their security even further by eroding secrecy about the governments efforts to stop terrorists.

THREATS TO NS2: How safe citizens actually ARE

Hollywood? Zero threat. Are you kidding? La-La Land is about FICTION. If you mean 'Documentary Filmmakers', then: still Zero. Documentarians only show what is out there. If it's out there, it's not very secure, is it? If you mean socially aware films dealing with current political climate, the answer is still zero (see 'Liberals' immediately below).

Terrorists: very very small. A threat to innocents abroad? Much greater. Compare the number of terrorist acts in other countries compared with ours. London, Ireland, Israel, Afghanistan, the Philippines... We in the US are extremely safe in comparative terms.

Conservatives: Big threat. By supporting the President's ongoing alienation of otherwise neutral countries and unchecked aggression in the Mideast, they only encourage the hatred of our country and creation of more terrorists.

Liberals: Zero. They are unlikely to have any net effect against the power-locked republican stronghold protecting the government's efforts.

Finally, THREATS TO NS3: secrets that the Government wishes to keep in order to continue its efforts to (ostensibly) keep the citizens (feeling) safe

Hollywood: Zero. (See NS2)

Terrorists: Very very small. Terrorists are not likely to announce to the public any state secrets they learn. However, acting on them (should they actually find any)... see NS2.

Conservatives: Zero. They are the ones working hard to create and keep the secrets.

Liberals: Very high. They are the ones working to expose the secrets they perceive as threats to personal liberty and privacy, which conservatives perceive as threats to their secrets e.g. "National Security".

I hope this answers your question, in broad terms.

Answer 2

The Bush Administration - true, very true! Why? It is because of the suicidal foreign policy of the Bush Administration which is promoting hatred towards Americans all over the world, and people who otherwise like America and want to visit US at least once are no longer interested in doing so!

Read what a 12-year student from Far East had to say about America:

"There are a thousand places I want to go to but there is only one place that I never want to visit, and that's America. You want to know why? Well, I had the awful experience with Americans. One time, I saw some Americans having trouble with finding their way to a tourist place. I helped them with the bus, and as we're on the same bus, we had a nice chat together. That's when I learnt that they're Americans. Then when the Americans got off the bus, I looked in my bag, my purse was gone! Ever since, I hated Americans, because they're nothing but nasty thieves!"

So, the threat is from within, from the White House and that threat has already set a fear in the minds of millions of Americans! As the saying of one of the past presidents goes, if one has to fear about something, it is the fear itself! So, the White House, the Homeland Security, FBA and so on should stop spreading the 'fear' in the name of fighting terrorism!

Answer 3

Anyone who would rather "kick ***" than try to understand and solve a problem is a threat to our national security (not to mention personal security). Anyone who would prefer to kill anyone labeled "terrorist" before they really know if the label fits it a threat.

Right now, I'd say more "conservatives" fit that bill.

But, all in all, I think liberal and conservative labels aren't a good way to understand the view of *most* people. Usually people have some views that are both liberal and conservative.

Answer 4

The Terrorists, obviously. They are always trying to find a new way to strike us, and when they fail to carry the attack out, a new group of terrorists, wether they be Al -Quida opratives or sympathizers, begin planning a new attack. Eventually they will succede again, even if the attack has to be small. However, I feel that Hollywood can also contribute to threating our national security. Terrorists can get ideas for new attacks from things that take place in Hollywood movies.

Answer 5

Conservatives - which includes democrats. Here's why

Before Bush terrorists were a minimal threat to the US. Even with 9/11 there was really only a couple of very extremist terrorist groups "out to get" america. Once 9/11 happened bush had to be seen to do something - cue the invasion of Afghanistan. This annoyed muslim countries - but the Taleban wasn't well liked by anyone, so this popular war wasn't vastly damaging to anyone except Afghans. The Iraq war however is probably the single biggest recruiter for Al qaeda and other terrorist organisations, who are now blinded by americas faults in Iraq. From just about no terrorists we now have quite a few. Though still not enough to seriously worry about - has there been another attack in America since 9/11? No. Funny - seeing as there are supposed to be terrorists in every street...

However - Bush's personal war (yes it is personal - there were none of the promised WMDs) in Iraq, simply because he had a grudge against Hussein for his attempted assasination of Bush snr, with the added benefit of giving his conservative cronies in Haliburton multi billion dollar construction projects. So net benefits - Conservative Haliburton make loads of money, Conservative Bushes regain their honour. Net losses (to america) - Soldiers get killed (because many soldiers are from poor families, and the poor are usually democrat it could be said that liberals lost here)

Because of the war in Iraq - and Bush's refusal to stop the slaughter in Lebanon America's opinion in the world has been severely reduced. From a disgruntled Arab world in 2000 Bush and his neocon pals have seen that the middle East now utterly dispises america, and many more people become radical. This can be seen in the election in Iran of an anti-american hardliner - instead of the more moderate not-quite-so-anti-american candidate.

The neocons are responsible also for sending american soldiers overseas to be killed. This isn't good for american moral - especially as Iraq is drasticly worse than it was when the invasion happened, even if their dictator IS gone. Another Vietnam anyone?

The conservatives are not only dangerous for the world in a military sense - they are also signing the world's death-by-asphyxiation warrant. Many conservatives don't believe in global warming, despite screaming evidence to the contrary - because it isn't in the interests of big buisiness to worry about anyone but their shareholders. I'm not saying the democrats would be much better - because they're pretty conservative themselves - but the only way to stop global warming is to take DRASTIC action NOW. It might already be too late.

Answer 6

Americans.

Answer 7

The biggest threat to U.S. national security is currently a lack of action on the part of the American people(not politicians but the everyday citizen) to educate themselves on the dangers posed by out of control politicians.

There is currently a LONG line of violations of the United States Constitution by those who call themselves Public Servants, however seldom is there any backlash against actions taken that are designed to erode freedoms that were once thought to be inviolable.

The longest running of these attacks is on the 2nd amendment(Right to keep and bear arms). At last count there are over 23000 laws on the books regarding firearm ownership and crimes committed using firearms yet the trend is tighter and tighter regulation of firearms and lack of harsh punishment for those who commit crimes.

The next would be attacks on freedom of speech(not language but speech). The 1st amendment was not intended to grant the right of speaking whatever language you wanted, but was intended for protection against government oppression of those who would speak out against it.

Next would be attacks on the 4th and 5th amendments. No longer is your silence or refusal to allow a search considered to be constitutionally protected. You can be held in contempt of court for invoking the 5th amendment and you can be jailed over it. With the current war on terror, you no longer have the freedom to communicate with whoever you wish without the fear some trigger word or words will have your communications tapped, your belongings and properties searched without your knowledge/consent.

It has been recently ruled that it is neither unlawful nor unconstitutional to require you to submit to having your vehichle searched by a drug dog should the police feel like it. You are not considered to have been inconvenienced or a victim.

It is also currently legal for police to check your documents(d/l insurance registration) at roadblocks where they are supposedly looking only for drunk drivers.

All these actions have been allowed to come about by politicians from both parties having the confidence they will not be held accountable by an american public that has grown complacent.

Answer 8

Liberals? I suppose to our youth .. but not to our National Security.

I think the obvious choice here are the terrorists.. then again.. I'm still a firm believer in all of the 9/11 Conspiracy Theories..

http://www.loosechange911.com


so go figure.

Answer 9

Tie between liberals and terrorists. Terrorists for the obvious reasons, and liberals because they won't do anything about the terrorists, who I already explained. Good question.

Answer 10

in order.
Liberals (destruction of every moral ideaology whether based in religion or not).
Hollywood (militant arm of the liberals, not in conventional warfare but in ideaological warfare)
Conservatives (robbing the country blind)
Terrorists (strap on ied's and a dirty bomb)