Terror in Turkey

[Benton]

(06-30-2016, 01:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ...and the terrorists referenced in this thread were immigrants.  

...from Russia. You're suggesting restricting immigration from the Middle East.

I'm not sure what I'm missing there.

If we're in a conflict with people from the geographic region of England — and had attacks on us from people living in nearby Ireland —  would we impose immigration restrictions on people from Australia?

Quote:I've stated before that I disagree with the mentality that we "already have it here, so why try to stop it from coming here."

I guess what I'm not understanding is, we're already doing a good job of stopping it from coming here. What we're struggling with is stopping it from starting here. If most of the major attacks have been from U.S. citizens, why are some people saying the problem is immigration? If one 1-of-12 attacks is by an immigrant, is our best use of resources fixing 1 attack, or 11?

Quote:There may soon come a time where we have to choose between liberties and securities. It just depends on which one you are in more favor of.


I'll pose the same question: What is your plan?

We made that choice. The Patriot Act, and all that followed. I disagreed with it then, and I disagree with similar ideas that to keep people safe, you have to assume everyone is out to overthrow America.

As far as my plan, it's the same as I've advocated for years. The military upper management has been in place since Bush, and many of the more influential guys since Reagan. They need to be replaced. There's too much abuse. It's shrunk our head count every year (just about) since WWII while increasing how much we spend. It's basically a well armed logistics service that benefits a handful of companies.

Once we've got a competent military command, they'll start utilizing the data from our intelligence community. Which is usually pretty accurate, but by the time it goes through the chain of command and across a few desks, it gets tweaked to support what the current direction of CentComm wants,  which is determined by military command (basically, you've got military leadership telling itself what to tell itself).

On top of that, just expanding our intelligence network, as opposed to expanding the bureaucracy that slows it down. That way when we do have a suspect, they can track down whether it's legitimate or not, instead of a name setting in a file for years while it waits for a followup.