If you want to know what I think about the War on Terror. Here are a few quotes that I'll give you and that should give a pretty good idea. "Give me liberty or give me death", "without liberty, there is no security" and I would add vice versa. As a Liberal I believe the number and only role of government is to protect individual freedom and that security had to be part of that. But not at the expense of individual freedom, which has been my main problem with the so called War on Terror. Which more of a real war than the so-called War on Drugs. Because at least in the War on Terror, the United States Government has gone out and is doing everything it can to win this war. But the War on Terror as Vidal Gore once said is not real. Because the War on Terror is really just a phrase, a catch-phrase.
But wars are fought between people and against each other. The Gulf War and the War in Iraq were real wars fought between countries. Not a war against a certain philosophy or ideology. But my main problem with the so-called War on Terror is that its been a war to secure security at all costs. Even at the expense of freedom and constitutional rights. Which is why its doomed to fail because again without freedom there is no security. Democrats biggest problem as well as my biggest problem with President Obama has been when it comes to the so-called War on Terror. That except for Afghanistan and Iraq, its real hard to tell the difference between Barack Obama, whose a man in a lot of ways I like a lot and even love, but to tell him apart between President George W. Bush except for Afghanistan and Iraq, its real difficult to tell the two president's apart.
Both president's support the Patriot Act, actually it was President Obama who extended the Patriot Act after it expired. Which has Fourth Amendment flaws in it, like Uncle Sam being able to checkout what Americans are reading and who they are hanging out with. If they believe, but don't have to prove in a court of law that these people are terrorists, or associate with terrorists. They both support indefinite detention which is the U.S. Government being able to hold terrorists suspects again indefinitely, again if they just suspect them of being associated somehow with the broader War on Terror. But never even have to give these suspects a court date, or hearing. Or treat them with the basic constitutional rights that someone suspected of murdering their spouse, or something.
And then there's warrantless wiretapping, where the U.S. Government can snoop in on people and who they are talking with and associating with. Again if they suspect these people of being associated with violent Islamism. If you think about it, the so-called War on Terror has been a neoconservative dream, or fantasy thats come true to life. Thats now being carried out by someone whose supposed to be a Liberal Democrat and care a lot about things like individual freedom. Especially as they relate to civil liberties. The Far-Right, has to be in love with what they are seeing from President Obama when it comes to these things. Except for Afghanistan and Iraq where they would want the United States to be occupying those countries indefinitely. Which is all the reason I need alone to have big issues with how President Obama has been carrying out this so-called war.
Social Democrats, or the Far-Left flank of the Democratic Party and the Far-Left in general in this country, have issues with President Obama across the board. Even though they backed him in 2008. Expecting he would be some type European Social Democrat ideologically in how he governed. And I could give you a whole list issues of why they don't like him. But economic issues, or his broader foreign policy, hasn't been my issues with President Obama. But with how he's conducted the bogus neoconservative War on Terror.