Historically speaking, the US peaked some time ago. There is no way but down now.
If the US were a modern state, maybe the trend could be stopped, but with waning economic power, over-sized military spending, religion becoming more and more important than science and education, it does look rather like the classical collapse...
If the US collapses it will land on Europe. The native European population is heading for a demographic collapse in many countries. To compensate many European nations are accepting large numbers of immigrants that are fundamentally hostile to European values. The immigrants are beginning to replace the native population and are not assimilating. Europeans are increasingly abandoning the Christianity that contributed to building its civilization and now Islam is rapidly growing. There is already pressure in many countries in Europe to recognize Sharia law as valid, and many Muslims support it. That is before you get to the many and growing economic problems of the EU. The Euro is unlikely to survive in the present form. There is growing hostility among various European nations over economic issues. European states are beginning to enhance their security services and increase surveillance of their populations. That is a trend likely to continue. You are so busy enjoying what you perceive as the impending fall of a decaying America across the street that you don't notice that your own house is on fire. Europe is likely to be in a civil war of some sort within 50 years, and some see the possibility of another genocide attempt. At least you are likely to have the US to continue to hate as a cold comfort.
Anything and everything? It should be a source of concern that they have a massive budget and you don't actually now what their overarching mission is.
You should be worried about....
One of the things you should be most concerned with...
We have a fundamentally different approach to this question. You recognize the lack of information and say, "you should worry" and "you should be concerned." I say, if you don't know, go to the web site and find out. If you both to look into the question you learn that the Department of Homeland Security is almost entirely simply a regrouping of existing Federal agencies under a new headquarters to try to make them more efficient since those agencies perform related functions. In essence the Department of Homeland Security does a significant portion of what is done by the Ministry of Interior in other nations. ("Interior" as a name was already taken in the US. Should we still panic at adopting another European institution in all but name?) As to "militarizing" the police, there is room for a certain amount of concern, but the US isn't anywhere close to forming a gendarmery as used by many European nations, and others. The local city or country SWAT team that gets occasional use isn't close to being in the same league as a national gendarmery like France's National Gendarmerie, Spain's Guardia Civil, or Italy's Carabinieri. The US doesn't really have a national police force as other nations do. It is almost entirely handled at the local or state level.
funny: america was CREATED by a bunch of 'terrorists'.
the english viewed the yanks as such...
That is bullshit and you know it. They were rebels against the British crown, not terrorists. There is a difference.
... many people believe we need a reboot of america, but if we try to change our own government like we did 200+ yrs ago, we'd be arrested and locked away for years without access to lawyers or due process.
You mean like the convention that wrote the US Constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation? I don't recall, how did that turn out?
contrary to what some may think, the role of the gov is NOT to keep itself going! they think so, but that was not the original intention of the constitution.
The Constitution has procedures for amending it to change the way the government works, and what rights you have. It has been amended numerous times, including the most famous amendments referred to as the Bill of Rights.
Have you ever heard the phrase, "Be careful what you wish for, you might get it."? You might be one of the people it was coined for.
I am free, and it will be a cold day in hell before you'll have anything to teach me about being brave. Between the two of us I have little doubt about who is more likely to be a slave to a habit, and it isn't me.
If you likewise want the freedom to get rip roaring, fall down drunk and shoot a machinegun in the air downtown you are likely to be disappointed as well. Liberty and license are two different things.
They were made illegal due to the social harms they were causing. The harm became widespread due to those substances formerly being legal and ensnaring portions of the population. Is that news to you?
With FBI withdrawing from "Law Enforcement", who is in charge of interstate criminal activities, racketeering, and so on ??
The FBI isn't "withdrawing" from law enforcement. That revision is pretty clearly simply acknowledging that they have a broader mission, they don't just do law enforcement. They can still continue investigating ordinary criminal activity too.
1) People have faced at least the prospect of searches if no actual searches since the late 1960s and the epidemic of hijackings. 2) NSA isn't listening to phone calls or reading emails of more than a couple of hundred Americans. They do broadly collect metadata. 3) You seem to be saying that laws exist to enforce safety measures or outlaw stupid behavior. The DNA collection is ill considered, but voluntary. They are being sued. 4) I doubt it. No. Yes. No. 5) You mean the ones that stores use to catch thieves? Or the ones the traffic departments use to help control traffic?
You don't seem to provide any evidence of anything like this noted above:
Who has been sent to jail for making jokes about Obama? Who gets arrested for voting for the "wrong" political party?
Opium has a long history as an illegal drug in the US. The problem with it predates cocaine, as do the laws as I recall. The racism of the South in the US at the turn of the last century hardly needs any commentary. Laws against opium started becoming an issue when women and children began partaking.
People continue to use highly dangerous illegal drugs even when "safer" illegal drugs are available, and regularly destroy their health and lives in the process. The marijuana available today is far, far stronger than it was 50 years ago when it became a popular. Now as evidence continues to mount of its dangerous affects on the young it is being legalized even while tobacco use is being beaten down further and further. What madness.
As more and more Americans patronized opium dens and became addicted, communities responded with alarm and concern, especially when women and young people were among the curious. Cities and then states began passing anti-drug laws.
As more and more Americans patronized opium dens and became addicted, communities responded with alarm and concern, especially when women and young people were among the curious. Cities and then states began passing anti-drug laws. Opium use spread steadily east, until by the 1890s, opium dens were commonplace in American life....
As one turn-of-the-century morphine addict bemoaned, "At first, habit only binds us with silken threads, but alas! these threads finally change to links of strongest steel."
1903 Heroin addiction in the United States rises at an alarming rate. 1905 U.S. Congress bans opium. 1909 The first federal drug prohibition passes in the U.S., outlawing the importation of opium and opiates.
If those entities are still huge threats that justify such pervasive action, then it's time for congress to declare war on countries harboring these agents
Most of these 'terrorist' groups are getting backdoor support from the governments whose countries they occupy.
In at least some cases, yes. That is why Afghanistan was invaded.
... take out a few mosques, randomly.
That isn't allowed under the law of war unless an enemy force is fighting from it. Even then it still isn't a great idea since Muslims get touchy about that even if they freely incinerate mosques and Korans.
More effeminate passive aggression will not solve this. They're either threats that should be dealt with, or they're not, and the troops should come home.
They are, and people on Slashdot, not to mention Europe and various parts of American society complain bitterly about it. Air strikes and drone strikes are only one of the means. Special Forces are another. There are others.
Either way, crap like the patriot act should be abolished, and the politicians who voted for it should be voted out of office.
The problem is that there are plenty of Muslims in the US that would gladly participate. Example from last month:
I'd love to hear your theory. Was opium use outlawed to suppress the Republican vote, or the Bull Moose party vote? Was LSD banned to reduce communist votes?
A problem was seen, laws were passed. New problems arose, more laws were passed. People tried to evade the laws, more laws were passed. It's quite linear.
The day came when ordinary Romans were no longer willing to be soldiers and defend Rome. The West is nearing that point, whether you refer to the willingness to take up arms individually, or support it as policy. By the time the people learn what enormous folly they are embracing it may be too late.
Slashdot Mirror
Historically speaking, the US peaked some time ago. There is no way but down now.
If the US were a modern state, maybe the trend could be stopped, but with waning economic power, over-sized military spending, religion becoming more and more important than science and education, it does look rather like the classical collapse...
If the US collapses it will land on Europe. The native European population is heading for a demographic collapse in many countries. To compensate many European nations are accepting large numbers of immigrants that are fundamentally hostile to European values. The immigrants are beginning to replace the native population and are not assimilating. Europeans are increasingly abandoning the Christianity that contributed to building its civilization and now Islam is rapidly growing. There is already pressure in many countries in Europe to recognize Sharia law as valid, and many Muslims support it. That is before you get to the many and growing economic problems of the EU. The Euro is unlikely to survive in the present form. There is growing hostility among various European nations over economic issues. European states are beginning to enhance their security services and increase surveillance of their populations. That is a trend likely to continue. You are so busy enjoying what you perceive as the impending fall of a decaying America across the street that you don't notice that your own house is on fire. Europe is likely to be in a civil war of some sort within 50 years, and some see the possibility of another genocide attempt. At least you are likely to have the US to continue to hate as a cold comfort.
Communist Party USA
A bad idea that never really caught on in the US, but it exists. There are plenty more like it.
"But what DHS deals with ? "
Anything and everything? It should be a source of concern that they have a massive budget and you don't actually now what their overarching mission is.
You should be worried about ....
One of the things you should be most concerned with ...
We have a fundamentally different approach to this question. You recognize the lack of information and say, "you should worry" and "you should be concerned." I say, if you don't know, go to the web site and find out. If you both to look into the question you learn that the Department of Homeland Security is almost entirely simply a regrouping of existing Federal agencies under a new headquarters to try to make them more efficient since those agencies perform related functions. In essence the Department of Homeland Security does a significant portion of what is done by the Ministry of Interior in other nations. ("Interior" as a name was already taken in the US. Should we still panic at adopting another European institution in all but name?) As to "militarizing" the police, there is room for a certain amount of concern, but the US isn't anywhere close to forming a gendarmery as used by many European nations, and others. The local city or country SWAT team that gets occasional use isn't close to being in the same league as a national gendarmery like France's National Gendarmerie, Spain's Guardia Civil, or Italy's Carabinieri. The US doesn't really have a national police force as other nations do. It is almost entirely handled at the local or state level.
funny: america was CREATED by a bunch of 'terrorists'.
the english viewed the yanks as such ...
That is bullshit and you know it. They were rebels against the British crown, not terrorists. There is a difference.
You mean like the convention that wrote the US Constitution to replace the Articles of Confederation? I don't recall, how did that turn out?
contrary to what some may think, the role of the gov is NOT to keep itself going! they think so, but that was not the original intention of the constitution.
The Constitution has procedures for amending it to change the way the government works, and what rights you have. It has been amended numerous times, including the most famous amendments referred to as the Bill of Rights.
Have you ever heard the phrase, "Be careful what you wish for, you might get it."? You might be one of the people it was coined for.
Courts have to approve plea agreements, so yes, courts are involved. Judges do reject plea agreements at their discretion.
Example: Judge rejects plea bargain
Socialists that want to get elected in the US tend to join the Democrats.
I don't see you as actually concerned about genuine freedom, with liberty. You seem to be interested in license instead. There is a difference.
I am free, and it will be a cold day in hell before you'll have anything to teach me about being brave. Between the two of us I have little doubt about who is more likely to be a slave to a habit, and it isn't me.
If you likewise want the freedom to get rip roaring, fall down drunk and shoot a machinegun in the air downtown you are likely to be disappointed as well. Liberty and license are two different things.
Prohibition is a complex subject, but it did result in a significant decrease in alcohol usage that lasted for decades after it ended.
Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation
;) . . . Cough cough
Heavy pot use linked to memory loss, schizophrenia link
They were made illegal due to the social harms they were causing. The harm became widespread due to those substances formerly being legal and ensnaring portions of the population. Is that news to you?
Making something illegal to arrest a certain portion of the public and their influence is a textbook political crime.
Well, the more clever portions of the public can outsmart them by not possessing the illegal substances. Tricky, eh?
That "non-possession" tactic is used for all sorts of things, like explosives, and counterfeiting equipment.
USA is not a police state.
FTFY
With FBI withdrawing from "Law Enforcement", who is in charge of interstate criminal activities, racketeering, and so on ??
The FBI isn't "withdrawing" from law enforcement. That revision is pretty clearly simply acknowledging that they have a broader mission, they don't just do law enforcement. They can still continue investigating ordinary criminal activity too.
1) People have faced at least the prospect of searches if no actual searches since the late 1960s and the epidemic of hijackings.
2) NSA isn't listening to phone calls or reading emails of more than a couple of hundred Americans. They do broadly collect metadata.
3) You seem to be saying that laws exist to enforce safety measures or outlaw stupid behavior. The DNA collection is ill considered, but voluntary. They are being sued.
4) I doubt it. No. Yes. No.
5) You mean the ones that stores use to catch thieves? Or the ones the traffic departments use to help control traffic?
You don't seem to provide any evidence of anything like this noted above:
Who has been sent to jail for making jokes about Obama? Who gets arrested for voting for the "wrong" political party?
You really have no clue about the Soviet Union, do you? Take a little time to watch these.
A Portrait of Stalin: Secret Police
The Soviet Story - trailer (This is only the trailer. I suggest finding a way to watch the whole thing.)
No, the US is not a "police state."
It's land of the politically free, not common-sense-free. Maybe you're a little too enthusiastic about use of some of those "products."
Opium has a long history as an illegal drug in the US. The problem with it predates cocaine, as do the laws as I recall. The racism of the South in the US at the turn of the last century hardly needs any commentary. Laws against opium started becoming an issue when women and children began partaking.
People continue to use highly dangerous illegal drugs even when "safer" illegal drugs are available, and regularly destroy their health and lives in the process. The marijuana available today is far, far stronger than it was 50 years ago when it became a popular. Now as evidence continues to mount of its dangerous affects on the young it is being legalized even while tobacco use is being beaten down further and further. What madness.
Opium was outlawed when women and children began partaking.
America's First Drug Epidemic 1850-1914
As more and more Americans patronized opium dens and became addicted, communities responded with alarm and concern, especially when women and young people were among the curious. Cities and then states began passing anti-drug laws.
You're a bit late with that one. Try this instead.
America's First Drug Epidemic 1850-1914
As more and more Americans patronized opium dens and became addicted, communities responded with alarm and concern, especially when women and young people were among the curious. Cities and then states began passing anti-drug laws. Opium use spread steadily east, until by the 1890s, opium dens were commonplace in American life. ...
As one turn-of-the-century morphine addict bemoaned, "At first, habit only binds us with silken threads, but alas! these threads finally change to links of strongest steel."
HISTORY of OPIATES
1903 Heroin addiction in the United States rises at an alarming rate.
1905 U.S. Congress bans opium.
1909 The first federal drug prohibition passes in the U.S., outlawing the importation of opium and opiates.
If those entities are still huge threats that justify such pervasive action, then it's time for congress to declare war on countries harboring these agents
They did: Authorization for Use of Military Force
Most of these 'terrorist' groups are getting backdoor support from the governments whose countries they occupy.
In at least some cases, yes. That is why Afghanistan was invaded.
That isn't allowed under the law of war unless an enemy force is fighting from it. Even then it still isn't a great idea since Muslims get touchy about that even if they freely incinerate mosques and Korans.
More effeminate passive aggression will not solve this. They're either threats that should be dealt with, or they're not, and the troops should come home.
They are, and people on Slashdot, not to mention Europe and various parts of American society complain bitterly about it. Air strikes and drone strikes are only one of the means. Special Forces are another. There are others.
Either way, crap like the patriot act should be abolished, and the politicians who voted for it should be voted out of office.
The problem is that there are plenty of Muslims in the US that would gladly participate. Example from last month:
Plot to bomb Wichita airport thwarted
This problem won't go away soon.
I'd love to hear your theory. Was opium use outlawed to suppress the Republican vote, or the Bull Moose party vote? Was LSD banned to reduce communist votes?
A problem was seen, laws were passed. New problems arose, more laws were passed. People tried to evade the laws, more laws were passed. It's quite linear.
The day came when ordinary Romans were no longer willing to be soldiers and defend Rome. The West is nearing that point, whether you refer to the willingness to take up arms individually, or support it as policy. By the time the people learn what enormous folly they are embracing it may be too late.