Slashdot Mirror
Sci-Fi Author Peter Watts Beaten, Charged During Border Crossing
JoeGee writes "On December 8th, Canadian sci-fi author Peter Watts, author of the Rifters trilogy and Blindsight, was crossing the US/Canadian border at Port Huron, Michigan when he was involved in an altercation with US Border Patrol agents. According to Watts, he was beaten, left half-naked in a cold cell, and finally dumped on the Canadian side of the border with no coat. A legal consultant from the Electronic Frontier Foundation was successful in helping a civil rights lawyer in Michigan free Watts. Watts faces US charges of assaulting a federal officer. Based on the accounts, one can assume Watts did so by hitting the officer's hand with his face. If convicted, Watts faces two years in a US Federal prison."
They should give the border patrol the Nobel Peace Prize for keeping America safe.
This probably is a horrible abuse of power... but you never know with these things.
To quote Babylon 5:
"Truth is a three-edged sword. One side is your truth, the other side is their truth, and the third side is the truth."
I'd like more information.
I think I'd like to hear both sides of the story before I decide. Everyone who gets into an altercation with any sort of law enforcement officer always claims "I was like so totalllly innocent, dude!"
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I love it (sarcastically) when I hear a guy's only crime was resisting arrest. On what basis was the arrest being made in the first place? Resisting arrest, of course!
It sounds like the facts aren't all in yet, so let's not leap to conclusions. We're hearing the account of Cory Doctorow -- who in his novel "Little Brother" had an obvious axe to grind against Homeland Security and law enforcement, to the point of suggesting "9/11 was an inside job". (Says one of the leaflets dropped by the novel's heroic protesters.) We're also hearing second-hand from Watts and the other people in the car. We're not yet hearing the guards' account. Maybe Doctorow et. al. are completely right, but let's not assume so right off the bat, eh?
The Doctorow account quotes Watts saying that he got out of his car when questioned (mistake #1), then refused the order to get back in (mistake #2). No, of course that doesn't justify a beating. It just suggests we don't have the whole story.
Revive the Constitution.
In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equal to "civil master." - Robert Heinlein
Never understimate the power of human stupidity -Lazarus Long
As a Canadian I will never understand why the US is so eager about its boarder security with Canada.
Take a look at a map of North America, we share a huge boarder. If some one wanted to get across undetected, they would go to Calgary, Edmonton, etc. Buy/Rent a off-road vehicle and just drive in across some open fields. It's not hard to figure out.
Boarder security at major ports of entry just pisses everyone off and hurts trade. The most they are going to catch are some teenagers buying pot and Canadian beer. The only real threat at the CAN/US boarder is people bringing handguns into Canada (where they are illegal) and selling them to Toronto street gangs.
Now they are giving a middle aged white guy a hard time? Please, this security theatre has gone too far.
When an unarmed man alone gets into a fight with multiple armed people, it's a rare case where the unarmed man is the aggressor.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Camping on quad since 1996.
Let's have some intellectual honesty, shall we? GP is obviously not implying that Watts was going to bomb the US. Why would you even say that? It ruins the conversation.
What he is saying is that not all border patrol people are untrustworthy. He is saying you can't just assume the agent is wrong because he is an agent. He is saying it IS a good idea to hear both sides of the story before coming to judgement. Now, I am sure if you had thought about his comment for a while, you would have understood this and wouldn't have resorted to weird tangents.
Now, your underlying point seems to be that Watts is a nice guy, so we should trust him. I don't actually know anything about him other than he is an author, and I've known enough dick-head authors to say that doesn't guarantee that he was on the right side of this situation. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. But if you have a reason to assume that he is, for example if you have personal knowledge of the character of Watts, you should say it instead of coming up with some weird distraction from the conversation.
Qxe4
Now, when a police officer is in a situation like that, he usually likes to have complete control of the situation (understandable, since sometimes they end up dead when things get out of control).
This is a common myth. Police officers are *rarely* killed on the job. And border guards? I'm sure it must happen, but it seems it must be exceptionally rare in their case. But somehow that's given as an excuse when they beat the shit out of someone for *daring* to ask a question.
If he feels like you are trying to take control, things can escalate quickly.
"Take control"? The border guards have fucking guns. More to the point, they beat and imprisoned the guy. Even further, they can press charges against him. What did he do? Asked a question? HOW DARE HE!
It would have been better for our author friend to instead get back in the car.
No, it would have been much, much worse. The worst thing one can do in the face of fascism is to acquiesce. Worst thing for society, specifically. Whether backing down or not was something he should do personally depends on how much he cares about personal liberty and what exactly he did. If all he did was ask a question, I can't see any way in which he should have known better.
Also it's worth noting that in some jurisdictions, assault doesn't have to be physical, it can be verbal. So if you do end up in a similar situation, the best thing is to be calm and acquiescent in the moment, and then sue the hell out of them later.
Shit, in some cases, assault can be a dirty look. But you're right, the best thing to do is be a good little slave and bow to your masters...
I agree. I found the US-Canada border in particular to be the home of the most unimpressive border guards I have seen, though to be honest, Homeland Security personnel in general are unimpressive. Rude, nasty, undereducated and morally/ethically small people abound in those uniforms. Not a fucking 'welcome home' to be heard from this bunch.
I come from a family full of cops, I work daily with actual combatant US soldiers and have immense respect for them, but seeing these Homeland Security pricks from their various ill-run agencies acting as officers of the United States makes me want to vomit. The whole organization needs to be deconstructed and re-imagined in some kind of intelligent form.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
But I fail to see what Obama has done to earn a Nobel peace prize.
He made the Norwegian leftists on the Nobel committee wet with the anticipation of what he might do?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
So now you've read one side of the story.
but -- assuming the accuracy of Watts' story --
And that's why finding out the other side of the story is important. It keeps you from making assumptions.
Because they only way to make the cops become something other than corrupt power-mongering jerks is to stand up, make a fuss, get noticed, and have someone above those cops do something about it. Which takes public outcry and attention.
If everyone rolls over, it no longer matters if what they are doing is wrong: They got away with it. With a cop, you have the chance you might be able to make a change by standing up to them. (At least in a country where the government is still concerned with public opinion.)
'Sensible' is a curse word.
No, it would have been much, much worse. The worst thing one can do in the face of fascism is to acquiesce. Worst thing for society, specifically
Dude, if you want to fight for your civil liberties by putting yourself in front of a police baton, where it makes little difference, go ahead. As for me, I'll fight for what I care about in the courts and at the ballot box, where it can actually make a difference. You may consider that being a slave, but that's ok because I consider your method just dumb.
Qxe4
So, you are pretty much admitting that we now live in tyranny? Honestly, how is it acceptable for the police to lock someone in jail simply for refusing to obey a command?
Palm trees and 8
Overly officious US border agents, the "Guantanamo halo effect" (ie. there is no rule of law)and the general unfriendliness at the border have caused me to cease visiting the US. I can say that I am far from the only Canadian I know that now refuses to cross the border.
I don't buy there, travel there, spend there, or .... even do business there.
I'm hoping that with the Obama administration I (and others) will become a little more comfortable and eventually travel through/to the US, but I'm far from the only Canadian that feels this way. Pity .... the US in general are great neighbors and great people.
As for me, I'll fight for what I care about in the courts and at the ballot box, where it can actually make a difference.
Those make almost no difference. The courts don't matter because it would be your word against the word of a couple sworn upholders of the law (who of course would have erased any recordings that you might try to have subpoenaed). The ballot box doesn't matter because don't blame me I voted for Kodos.
What does make a difference is getting people in general to actually give a damn. So you get things like the organized civil disobedience of the civil rights movement, where demonstrations of what's wrong are forced into the public's awareness. This in turn leads to a chance that someone decent (at least with regard to that one item) might appear on the ballot and actually have a chance of getting elected, and that those running for reelection will have to at least act like they care so they have less risk of getting kicked out.
"I'm not saying that tapping an officer on the shoulder is assault,"
Good, because legally it is battery.
"it probably isn't a good ideal to initiate physical contact by surprising them with a tap on the shoulder from behind when they might have a (quite reasonable) expectation of being attacked."
Sure, I can agree with that. Do not touch police officers, ever.
"Also, cursing at an officer isn't assault but why be a jerk?"
We have the right to be jerks, that's why. Failing to exercise our rights means that we will eventually lose them.
"Cops have a difficult job"
So do plenty of other people. What makes police officers special is that they can legally hold a person against that person's will; this is a dangerous right to grant anyone, of course, so we have all kinds of laws protecting innocent people from cops.
"in my experience are pretty friendly even under adverse conditions."
Some cops are friendly and firmly believe in protecting the public, whom they serve. However, we no longer live in a world where the police only arrest dangerous people. There are too many laws on the books, and it is now difficult to be a law abiding citizen. Police officers are paid overtime regardless of whether or not they were clocking those extra hours interrogating a real criminal. DAs and other public, political figures want to look "tough on crime," and put pressure on the police to be more aggressive; and of course, appearing to be "part of the war on terror" is all to appealing to police departments.
Again, we grant the police the right to do things that would be illegal for the rest of us. We must be extremely careful about giving out such a right, and remain on the alert for any possible abuses.
Palm trees and 8
He got the prize just for not being Bush It's how he was elected, and now it got him another win.
If the committee were sane, they should have waited until Obama actually ended the wars, unless the New World Order is going all 1984 on us and telling us that "War is Peace".
p.s. I'm diggin' your +1 troll, man.
Strange... this would almost lead someone to conclude that these border patrol agents are some sort of collection of individuals whose behavior might vary.
Nah, that is just silly.
I'm not saying that tapping an officer on the shoulder is assault, but it probably isn't a good ideal to initiate physical contact by surprising them with a tap on the shoulder from behind when they might have a (quite reasonable) expectation of being attacked.
So you're saying treat them like vicious feral dogs.
I am not a crackpot.
Everybody in the services industry has a difficult job, and we all have bad days or come across obnoxious people we have to deal with. However I don't expect a waitress to spit in somebody's food, for a computer technician to hide kiddie porn on a drive whilst 'fixing' it, or a policeman to abuse and torture civilians by tasers or in this case pepper spray and fists.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
First up, I've witnessed and had described by retired police officers occasions when an officer elected to go medieval on a citizen who was being only mildly disagreeable, or didn't immediately understand what the officer wanted, so I can well imagine Mr. Watts was unreasonably roughed up, and hit with trumped up charges.
That said, based on the information in TFA's links, as a practical, like-to-avoid-getting-my-ass-handed-to-me matter, I might question Mr. Watts' evident lack of "street smarts". I'm just a mid-aged, college-educated white boy who for the most part stayed out of trouble. But, even I have heard and read enough to know that:
Unfortunately, Mr. Watts may not have had any previous experiences that would prep him for the possibility that getting out of the queue at a border crossing wasn't the best plan. I hope his only lasting consequences are a bruised body and ego.
Luke, help me take this mask off
Or more accurately, assaulting an officer means trying to defend yourself from aggressive police.
I can't speak about this particular case, but there is always in regards to hierarchical organizations, especially military and law-enforcement, people draw into its ranks seeking authority and respect. To such a mentality any slight against their authority is in itself a crime worthy of physical punishment. And anyone from within their own ranks that dare speak up are themselves criminals and traitors; often such whistle-blowers are effectively committing career-suicide.
Unfortunately proving that law enforcers used excessive force is almost practically impossible, unless the incident were clearly recorded, or the victim is an obvious cripple of such a nature and appearance that it instils immediate feelings of sympathy in most people (read: media). For the rest of the citizenry the best they can hope for is to have the charges dropped. Peter Watts will, in my opinion, probably find himself banned from visiting the US for quite some time to come; regardless of how badly he might have been mistreated.
The Long Now Foundation
Also you push other countries around to remove the same rights from their citizens. See drug laws and the most recent thing being IP laws with ACTA being pushed by Americans to take away my right to play the DVD I purchased on my computer and my right to make personal copies of stuff and lend stuff to you to make personal copies.
I'm as much against the stupid War on Some Drugs, ACTA, ridiculous IP laws, etc. as the next Slashdotter, but as an American, I think you citizens of other countries need to take responsibility for your own governments' actions and stop blaming ours. Just because our crappy government is asking yours to pass these stupid laws doesn't mean you have to; you are all sovereign nations, and you can pass or not pass any laws you choose. Just as our crappy government is our fault and our responsibility (we're the citizens and the voters), your crappy governments are your own fault and responsibility. If you don't like your government passing these crappy America-backed laws, then fix your government! Elect new officials!
There are some countries out there with enough balls to tell our government to shove it when they try to convince them to pass certain laws, such as Netherlands where pot is mostly legal, or China where they carry out all kinds of human rights abuses that our government complains about (though that certainly seems like the pot calling the kettle black). Maybe the rest of you guys can learn from these countries.
Honestly, if I make a choice and do something stupid, it's my own fault. If Bob tells me I should do something stupid, and I do it, whose fault is that? It's not Bob's fault primarily, it's mine for being stupid enough to listen to him. People (and governments by extension) are responsible for their own actions. You can't go around blaming others for your own choices, even if they advised you.
While I appreciate your effort to make good discussion please spare us the babble and provide some facts please.
What exactly would you consider being in jail for "political reasons"? By the sounds of it you're considering laws (read legal reasons) that you disagree with invalid and therefore political.
Laws passed that "take away rights" are taken at the request of the public, where a majority exists that agrees. This is usually due to one's "right" infringing on another's. For example. I have the right to free speech, but my neighbor also has the right to live without me blaring derogatory remarks through his window all day. So it's illegal. What you mean by "fundamental" is unclear to me.
Your statement about the "police state" that I live in leads me to believe you see anarchy as a better solution. The USA is no more so than any other government and if you are opposed to all those then I challenge you to show me a functioning, no, successful Anarchy that has been able to accomplish the things that our current world economy has in the fields of collaborative research and scientific advancement. If the governments of our world were not paying the way for research who would? Don't you dare say the people because they barely pay taxes for it when required by them. There is a reason our world has evolved to be the way it is.
Seeing drug laws. Seeing IP laws. Not all pushed by "Americans". Nothing about IP is fundamentally American even. It's a capitalist necessity. The USA was not the first capitalist nation. Although I do not agree with the ACTA or most IP law, I think without a decent source your argument is not valid.
Charges of selling seeds where legit... And in YOUR country too. In fact the raid, according to the article, was only at the REQUEST of the US DEA. It's definitely illegal in the USA and our officials have every right to go after him considering he's probably responsible for many seeds in America. If your government didn't agree they should have left him alone. Congrats. You're a small minority of people who don't have the pull to get things done. Personally, I wish this whole war on MJ would end. I see it more as a waste of tax money, but what do I know.
And why would you need to tase someone who is face down on the ground and under control ? Tasing is the new way to beat-up without leaving massive bruises. Really it does relieve the itch of trigger happy cops. When taser showed up they where supposed to be the last line of defense so you would not kill a suspect where you would have shot him before.
I'm very sad to see that you're excusing murder because tasing someone on the ground is considered 'normal' and 'OK'.
What about your right to be judged by ethical standards? The government hasn't just made Pot illegal, the government has directed its employees to lie, classing the drug as a narcotic, claiming it is chemically related to the opiates, and falsifying scientific reports on its effects. They've done the same in claiming that crack is somehow worse than regular Cocaine, claiming that various herbs and designer drugs have caused overdoses, suicides and murders where the statistical evidence shows no correlation at all, and in many, many other ways. The crack laws are essentially "Possession of Cocaine while Black" charges. Most of the others are set up as "Possession of a drug while too poor to afford a 'treatment program' which won't cure you but will get the charge suppressed".
If speeding laws resulted in a tremendous percentage of selective convictions against people on their way to vote in certain districts, or noise ordinances were being applied chiefly to some political rallies in the inner cities and were ignoring suburban 2 am parties, then they would be political and violate basic rights as well. As you put it, context matters, and part of that context is that certain groups have a much higher chance of being convicted once charged, or of getting much harsher sentences.
Who is John Cabal?
You do realize that you do have the right to speed don't you? Turn on the TV to the racing channel and you'll see lots of people speeding on private property and sometimes on public property. You just don't have the right to endanger others unless they agree.
I'm not arguing that you have the right to blow smoke in someones face or operate heavy equipment while under the influence of anything that can screw up your judgment/reflexes.
You also have a right to loud music. Try it sometime, go somewhere where people don't mind and turn up the music as loud as you want. As long as you are not interfering with other peoples right to quiet it is perfectly legal.
Just like you have a right to swing your fist. Just not to make contact with my face.
The drug laws are one of the few things where if you are not a danger to others and doing it in complete privacy the law can and if they don't like you will arrest you and convict you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Right. When that fist or nightstick is headed towards your face, don't throw up your arm to protect yourself, just take the hit. We have advanced dental science in America; once you get out of prison your teeth can be made almost as good as new. In fact, it's recommended that with every kick or punch, you say "Thank you sir may I have another".
Asshole.
Allowing cops to beat on people with no punishment for them and punishment for their victims even if the cops were in the wrong -- that's what's really anathema to the rule of law. That's rule of men, men with badges.
America is immensely less free, with much less privacy, than when I was 20, less than 30 years ago. It's amazing how much freedom we've lost and people don't even seem to notice because they are told we are so much better than other places.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
In principle you are perfectly right. The problem comes when the nation doing the pushing is 10 times larger (population) spends most of their money on weapons and you are economically dependent on them.
America has a long history of beating the shit out of countries that have something they want and don't give it. Just today I was reading in the paper Obama saying that he won't hesitate to enter a just war. And America is very good at twisting something into a just war, 2 of them happening right now. Iraq was disobedient and got invaded and Afghanistan wanted proof that Bin-Laden was behind the 9/11 actions and got invaded.
There is a reason that you guys have 10 or more carrier fleets spread around the world and it's not for self-defence.
Also it is kind of disheartening when our political activists end up in American jails where it is very hard to run for government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
No one is telling them not to enforce the law. Just not to beat the suspect.
Dream on. Unless someone unrelated to the cops got it on videotape or you're some sort of VIP, you'll never get YOUR day in court. Oh, you'll be in court all right, for all the charges they pile on you. You might get out of them. But "take it to court" translates to "STFU" when it comes to cops.
That's a pretty dumb comparison. Get back to me when Americans are being hauled away for expressing anti-Government views. Get back to me when Joe Biden assassinates Barack Obama so he can seize power.
You mean get back to you when it's too late? Like the Germans in the winter of 1945?
My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
I often wonder if foresight wouldn't have lead to constitutional amendments preventing the restrictions since imposed, as I'm quite sure the right to bear arms explicitly disavows any future police state.
Its too bad really, when I look at America now and count off all the things they used to mock the Soviet Union for, all the freedoms those poor "commies" didn't have that Americans no longer have either. I specifically recall many political discourses and writers commenting on how evil it was for their governments to encourage snitching on your neighbours and how the KGB would make you disappear without access to representation.
Welcome to the era of the FBI snitch 800 numbers, and the ability to throw people in jail without access to a lawyer for security reasons, without an open hearing, with no public record. Sounds like something America fought against to me.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
The problem is not as clear cut as you think. I know it's a popular and misguided philosophy in the US to think that you can live and not affect the environment around you but this is not the case.
Now, the US simply doesn't ask for these laws to be put in place, they shoe horn, back door and in some cases force it. Most of the bad US laws entered onto Australian books came attached to trade deals (pretty one sided trade deals at that), the unenforceable DMCA came in on the free trade deal made by Howard in the early 2000's. In the case of many Asian 3rd world nations the introduction of these laws came attached to aid packages which is why the drug laws in Thailand became so draconian. In many cases the US has threatened sanctions and even military action for not adopting laws stipulated by the US, a lot of this happened in South America which is why much of Latin America is Europe friendly but not US friendly.
Honestly, let me fix this for you. If bob sells widgets and you need a widget for your douvalacky but Bob wont sell you a widget until you do something stupid and you do, who's fault is that? It is Bob's fault primarily, it's called coercion and in many cases does absolve the person who commits the stupid act as it was not their intent and the coercive party was the one with the motivation.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
I am a US American, but I live in Japan with my wife, who is Japanese. We have severely reduced the number of trips back to see the US family due in no small part to our unpleasant experiences with immigration and the TSA.
One time the immigration goon almost wasn't going to let my wife in because she only had $5 (oh, and a joint US savings account with almost $100k in it, and a checking account in her name only with a few thousand more--ATM cards in her wallet), and they didn't believe that she was married to an American. She started jumping up and down and waving to me, where I was waiting, which was a long way away, since the armed thug in the hall told me I couldn't wait for my wife by the booths, and that we should just meet up in baggage (good thing I kept just standing out of his sight, but where I could still see my wife, who was taking forever). I then started walking to her booth, panicking that they might detain her and we didn't have phones or anything, and were not even in the right state yet (connecting flight), so I would have nowhere to go and no one to help me. Of course, the goon put his blue-rubber-gloved hand in my chest and started regurgitating his training, but evidently this was enough for the moron dealing with my wife to believe that the panicked guy getting in an altercation for this woman actually was her husband.
Then there is the string of presents for Japanese relatives that have been destroyed by the TSA in their vigilant "dump the suitcase on the floor, rummage around in the contents, open any toiletry bottles, and then scoop the pile up and throw it back into the suitcase" searches. They scratched an otherwise spotless guitar that I was transporting for sale, and broke a brand new one that I had put in an expensive flight case because I thought I'd learned my lesson the first time. How they managed that, I don't even know. They've done hundreds of dollars of damage to our stuff over the last few years, so now when we go, we just mail everything home. Our highly-suspect garlic salt seems to slip through the postal service unabated.
And then there's this "even if you are from a visa-waiver country, you need to tell us 3 weeks in advance that you are coming so we can get the detention cage ready for you" bullshit. Gee, guys, going online and giving you all the details of my wife's stay in the US, almost a month before... That really kinda sounds like what most people in the world would call a "visa." In fact, the only country I've had to do that for, aside from the US (for my wife), is China. And then you only have to do it a few days before!
It breaks my heart to see what utter pussies my countrymen are. Nineteen assholes knock down a couple buildings, and we blame our freedoms and beg for them to be taken away. And what absolutely slays me is that the Tea Party morons--the very people who would support these actual intrusions on our freedoms--scream about their freedoms when the government is trying to bring their health bills down to something that doesn't send them into bankruptcy.
The US is a wasteland. Avoid.
In Canada we had a case which was captured on video of RCMP officers tazering a man to death. While legally it had been recommended to prosecute these officers, this is not going to happen without the cooperation of the RCMP. This is seriously fucked up.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
I like the comment about how it's ok to take away rights at the request of the public.
Take a democratic society where everyone is supposed to have one vote representation. If there are enough people who are convinced that they should have something, then you can legally vote in a process to take away from one segment of society and hand it over to another, larger group. The easiest and most prominent example of this is the taxation of everyone who actually has money to give it to people who do not work or make as much money. Used to be banks would fail, not live on life support from our income.
You might say that there is some argument that these people who have money are stealing it from the poor and down trodden. You might find a few who are not ethical about it. But most are just smarter and more productive. Doesn't the guy who invented mutella deserve something? Did Google actually create something of value? Do you have a right to take it away? Based on what? You have done nothing to earn it.
The same thinking allows a room of 10 men and 2 women to democratically vote to gang rape the women. The only thing holding them back is moral fiber. But that can always change. It used to be that we were expected to be responsible for our own lives and not expect handouts or a Right to everything.
Ancient Greece had Democracy. They collapsed because the had mob-rule through democratic voting and the entire upper half of the society was destroyed. And at every election, the upper half was a lower standard than the last cycle. Divide by two and repeat until you hit a point where you can no longer sustain the civilization.
There is a reason that you guys have 10 or more carrier fleets spread around the world and it's not for self-defence.
No, it's to protect all of our Allies whom have the luxury of investing in massive social safety nets because they don't have to pay the true cost of their own national defense.
Whoa, wait a minute. You think that the reason your allies can run more inclusive welfare programs and universal healthcare is because the US is taking it on the chin for the rest of the world with defence spending?
Perhaps that might be so if the US didn't spend nearly twice as much (percentage wise) on the crippled, hopeless and grossly unfair healthcare system it has currently compared to a country like the UK. We spend about 9% of our GDP on our healthcare system, you spend 16% of yours - your ineffective social systems are not in any way connected to your defence spending.
Yes, it is extremely useful to have the projected force of a US carrier group if you are involved in a war where it is required, but to state that those same carrier groups also provide sovereign defence for their allies... well. Not since WW2. The Royal Navy could defend the UK from a foreign power (with the exception of the US if it became hostile) and we still manage to run a welfare state. We are missing a force projection carrier like the Nimitz class, but that is being addressed. In terms of defence of the nation though, we do not need to rely on the US.