National Security Limitations
For the Past ten to twenty years the main topic in politics and national news has been National Security, the National Security Agency and terrorism. For many adults and military personnel there is a constant everyday concern about border security and the nation's security from terrorism. There are everyday threats from terrorist; anywhere from shootings to nuclear attacks that could put the American people in immediate danger. With the United States being one of the leading countries in the world, it puts the American people up to higher threats from the nation's enemies For the sake of national security many would argue that it is necessary to give up some personal freedoms and information to be
…show more content…
The United States is continuously strengthening the military, which is a positive reinforcement for strength but lacks leading with purpose without the strategic purpose to effectively keep the nation safe. According to Whitehouse.gov in “Fact Sheet: The 2015 National Security Stratagy”, “Maintaining a national defense that is the best trained, equipped, and led force in the world while honoring our promises to service members, veterans, and their families.” (President Obama, page 7) The majority of the american population wants the nation to be safe from terrorism and other threats, which comes to equipping and providing for the military and its families. Even with budget cuts veterans and families have not been taken care of to the peoples standards. According to Whitehouse.gov and the National Security pdf, they United States government believed that they have made the homeland “more secure” since President Obama has taken office. But they also state that the United States government has to “continue to learn to adapt and evolve from threats and hazards.” The United States government believes that the best way to successfully secure the homeland is to secure the borders, improve upon information sharing and to improve cooperation skills between countries. To improve upon sharing information it would include that they would have to make it more difficult to download and share everyday public information. According to Whitehouse.gov in the “2015 National Security PDF”, They have used “Through risk-based approaches, we have countered terrorism and transnational organized crime in ways that enhance commerce, travel, and tourism and, most fundamentally, preserve our civil liberties.” (President Obama, page 7) Which will test how they control the country at home and abroad; and how they communicate with other foreign leaders to keep ties between countries civil and
In this essay I will discuss the pros and the cons of the Patriot Act, how it affected the lives of US citizens and the world, and whether or not it fits within our democratic form of government. The Patriot Act was a rapidly drafted and approved Act of Congress which was intended to increase the security of US citizens by combatting terrorism. Although granting increased security to an extent, the Act was and still is extremely controversial due to certain parts of the Act limiting the freedoms of American citizens. The Patriot Act enhanced the government’s ability to spy on their own people, and with far fewer restrictions, so many people were and still are disgusted, but many others completely agree with it. Millions of people, billions across the world have a historical trend of being happy to sacrifice their freedoms for increased security. The controversy lies with how more safe are you in comparison to how much of your freedom you have to give up, and that compromise is weighed vastly different for individuals across the world. Did the Patriot Act save enough lives to warrant what it cost, or did it inhibit the lives of too many people to be allowed to continue. The answer will always be disputed and weighing each side will be a very difficult task.
Today, electronic surveillance remains one of the most effective tools the United States has to protect against foreign powers and groups seeking to inflict harm on the nation, but it does not go without a few possessing a few negative aspects either. Electronic surveillance of foreign intelligence has likely saved the lives of many innocent people through prevention of potential acts of aggression towards the United States. There are many pros to the actions authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) pertaining to electronic surveillance, but there are also cons. Looking at both the pros and cons of electronic surveillance is important in understanding the overall effectiveness of FISA. [1]
The NSA, or National Security Agency, is an American government intelligence agency responsible for collecting data on other countries and sometimes on American citizens in order to protect the country from outside risks. They can collect anything from the people’s phone data to their browser history and use it against them in the court of law. Since the catastrophes of September 11 attacks, the NSA’s surveillance capabilities have grown with the benefit of George W. Bush and the Executive Branch (Haugen 153). This decision has left a country divided for fifteen years, with people who agree that the NSA should be strengthened and others who think their powers should be limited or terminated. Although strengthening NSA surveillance may help the
After Katie Williams lost 140 pounds, she decided that she also wanted to transform her love life. She ditched her husband for a younger man. Katie was over 300 pounds before she lost weight. She underwent a tummy tuck and gastric bypass in order to reach her goal weight. She also got a boob job. Katie was happy with her new body, but she stated that her husband was jealous of her new body.
In society today many citizens feel violated with the security methods taken by homeland security. “On September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States marked the beginning of the global war on terrorism. The methods used are justifiable as they provide protection against possible threats or attacks. This attack on U.S. soil increased surveillance of both American citizens and foreign nationals” (Andrew, C., & Walter,
For some residents, the reluctance to give up freedoms is a reflection of their belief that terrorists will succeed no matter what. However, according to a poll run by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, ⅔ of Americans say it’s appropriate to sacrifice some privacy and freedom in the fight against terrorism. People worry that giving up one freedom will lead to the loss of others. They believe that the one time someone does not get scanned at an airport or does not get their luggage checked it will be detrimental to society. With 9/11 still at the back of everyone’s minds, people do not want to risk our national
One beautiful morning in September 2001 many people went about their day like they have before. Some off to work, or traveling for business, or to visit family, and in a blink of an eye our lives in America changed forever. We were attacked, on our own soil, not once, but four times. That fourth plane didn’t make it to its destination, thanks to the brave souls aboard that sacrificed their lives to save others. On that fateful day 2,753(NYmag) families would never be the same, as well as the rest of us that watch in disbelief. The attacks on September 11th 2001 led to something called the Patriot Act. In the days after 9/11 Congress hurried to pass a bill to give law-enforcement agencies the power to fight domestic terrorism. On October 26, President George W. Bush signed three hundred page USA Patriot Act into law (Crf.org). The USA Patriot Act of 2001 was created to prevent and catch terrorist in the United States and around the world. The contents of it has been one of great controversy in the rights of our privacy and the violation of our constitutional rights. Can we give up too much freedom to keep us safe? Where do we draw the line to keep our Country safe?
After the terrorist attack September 11, 2001, the United States government increased their investments in security. Many innocent lives were lost because of that incident, which worried the United States of America about self-defense or Homeland Security. Homeland Security was signed to become a law by the President George W. Bush in November 2002. Their main priority was to secure the country from the threats such as international terrorism. The Department of Homeland security had to focus on five goals such as prevent terrorism, enhance security, secure the borders, enforce immigration laws, safeguard, and cyberspace. In order to achieve these goals a lot of work was needed.
Benjamin Franklin, one of the founding fathers of the United States, once said “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” In America’s society today, some are willing to sacrifice their civil liberties in order to gain protection and security over some potential threat. Especially after the events of September 11th and several attempted bombings in U.S. cities. This sacrifice of individual freedoms such as the freedom of speech, expression, the right to information, to new technologies, and so forth, for additional protection is more of a loss than a gain. Citizens of the United States deserve equal liberty and safety overall, as someone should not have to give up
I was a Follower of Christ and I didn’t even know it. I was the last of three boys to two faithful Christian parents. My parents attended St Paul’s Episcopal Church in Akron, OH. I was baptized and confirmed by the same Bishop. Some of my earliest memories are of me standing in the pews with my parents and stacking the prayer books as if it were my own pulpit and I would pretend to be the priest giving the Sunday sermon. I didn’t know what he was talking about but I always thought that I would be like him one day. I was an acolyte and attended the youth programs regularly with my friends. I completed my studies to earn my God and Country award with the Boy Scouts.
During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.
Life is a state of existence, but for Africans traveling the Middle Passage across the Atlantic, this was not a life anyone should ever have endured. The Atlantic slave trade was a long, horrific journey. Ships that were designed to carry 350 people were sometimes crammed full of over 800 men, women, and children (Holt & Brown, 2000). The enslaved Africans endured unspeakable abuse, shackled together, and existed in holding spaces covered in their own urine, vomit, etc. for extensive periods of time. Death rates were high, as they were malnourished, diseased, and exposed to unspeakable conditions. Necessities were minimal and they were not treated humanely.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 impacted the American people without many of them realizing it. The act called for increased monitoring of computer networks, phone lines, and online history inside the United States and allowed the government to deport suspects (ACLU). What was created by the act has snaked its way into all aspects of our lives, creating a sense of order and restricting some freedom. However, some say that this imposition into our daily lives limits our freedoms and actions allowed us by the Constitution. Many interest groups voice strong resentment for the act while others try to demonstrate the strengths and triumphs of the Homeland Security Act. This paper will show the differing viewpoints of those that feel that the
Finally, security loses its worth if not accompanied by rights. Benjamin Franklin states that "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither liberty or safety" Without Liberty, Security is purposeless. The entire purpose of national security is to protect the American way of life and what our nation
Thesis Statement: “Citizens of this country should value the national security more than their privacy since it is concerned with a much larger group of people in order to protect our country from invaders, to maintain the survival of our country and to prevent airing of criticism of government.”