in the us during wartime we would expect to find ....?

Question

more limitations upon freedom of speech than in peacetime,no limitations upon freedom of speech at all,or the complete suspension of freedom of speech

Answer 1

Looking back, this war has seen far fewer restrictions. No Arabs are in camps like Japanese were during WWII, Arabs are far less monitored than were Germans in WWI, no one has suspended habeas corpus like during the civil war, noone has has food and horses taken as happened daily during the Revolutionary war.

We never give the man credit. All of the above actions are well within the president's rights. He trusts us.

Answer 2

In case of a war, like a massive attack, worse than 9/11/01, There will be more limitations upon Freedom of Speech than in peacetime, not a complete suspension of speech.

Answer 3

The only way to limit freedom of speech would be to suspend the Constitution. Unless there is a military coup and all legislative, judicial and executive personnel are assassinated or imprisoned, that's not going to happen. A military coup wouldn't work due to the massive amounts of weapons among the populace (let's hear it for the right to bear arms!). So there will be no limitations on freedom of speech other than what we impose on each other, shouting down opposing opinions, demonstrations and counter-demonstrations and so on.

Answer 4

Historically, it was only during the American Civil War, that there was a law limiting freedom of speech. The Sedition Act. Lincoln found it necessary to legislate this act because so many people were speaking ill of both him and the war effort that very few people were signing up to fight. Lincoln was a Republican.
In WW II, the campaign slogan of "Lose Lips Sink Ships" was instituted to remind people that along with said freedom comes responsibility and cost. The news media operated with a sense of self imposed sensorship. Had the media then operated with the same "Morals and Ethics" of today's media, we would all be speaking German.
The AP News Service makes it a point to continually remind people what the war in Iraq has cost in lives. 3,000 military dead in 3 years. They do this weekly. In WW II, General Patton drove the U.S. 3d Army across France in '44. His average monthly death rate in a good month was 1,300. During 08Nov - 07Dec44, he averaged a loss of 812 men per day. Had the news media reported this, the U.S. citizenry would probably not have stomached such losses and would have pressured Washington to let the Germans have France. Today's news media operates on the extreme premise that "The People Have a Right To Know." Our current government does not impose the Sedition Act and allows people to speak freely without concern for cost -- and when you consider that the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq and the "President" of Iran both commended the American people for having voted into office the Democrats in the November elections, you HAVE to believe that the enemies of this nation really do pay attention to what we say and do. The seditous speech of some of our politicians and the people who follow them only give aid and comfort to the enemy and the cost is more lives lost All in the name of "Freedom of Speech.".

Answer 5

Legally, no more limits on free speech than in peacetime. I would expect some "social" limits however. There are things that most Americans would find unacceptable during wartime.

Answer 6

Just because your country is at war, does not mean that your right to speak freely about said war should be revoked. There should never be limitations on freedom of speech, especially during war time. BUT I do think all the partisan bickering makes our country look weak in the eyes of the world.

Answer 7

I would not say we should have limitations on our freedom of speec. However, people shoud not be stupid enough to threaten to bomb, etc and expect not to be taken more seriously.
And i do not believe burning our American Flag is freedom of speech. Many men and women have died for our freedom and to keep that flag flying high.

Answer 8

Historically more limitations upon freedom of speech. I get your point, and I agree, but you aren't going to convince anyone.

Answer 9

It depends.

If you're asking a Conservative, they will tell you that there should be no limitations on Freedom of Speech, during wartime or peace.

If you're asking a Liberal, they'll tell you that Freedom of Speech is limited to only saying nice things to one another, unless you're talking about Conservatives, in which you can say whatever you want, as long as it's not nice.

Answer 10

Definitely more limitations. During a time of war the citizenry must make sacrifices. Some of those are to civil liberties. At least in our country we get them back when the crisis is over. Unless a liberal democrat is in power.