At what price are they lost?

It is truely tragic that lives are lost, especially in conflict.
But I must disagree, especially when you equate their loss to our loss of freedom,
Our troops die for our freedom not despite it.
If they die for anything it has to be for the freedom of the rest who don't give the ultimate sacrifice.
If they die and freedom is lost then surely they die in vain.

thats what I meant to say. Sorry.

Here is another way of looking at it...

At what price are they lost?

If somone dies on a construction site in America, no one say's he died fighting four our freedom, he was just doing a job to earn a living and got killed.

I think most soldiers are just people with a job, trying to earn a living just the same as the rest of us. They are not seeking to die a glorious death for our freedom, they just wan't to pay the rent like all the rest of us do. Every soldier has to make a choice if the money they earn is worth the risk and that is precisely what all of us do, and that is the price at which they are lost.

Edit; If conscription is used, as it was for the Vietnam war, then that is a different story!

Interesting point of view. I think your right in a lot of ways... I think thats why they join the army (40,000$ yippee), except somewhere down the line (some of them, not all of them) I think they believe they are doing it for the american cause.

Better that than selling burgers at Mc Donalds! not that theres anything wrong with that but i can understand how being in the military would provide a greater sense of purpose than allot of the other crappy jobs around the place.

There are a lot of people who are pressured into it by their parents too, because their parents think it will be the only way that their kids will stop playing computer games.

hahaha yea. Ironically though allot of computer games would actually improve your soldiering potential. Especially flight simulators and then you become a piolate.

No kidding. For example, and I use this example respectfully, the Virginia Tech and Columbine massacres. I almost gaurantee Sueng Cho played GTA, and 1st person shooters. The Columbine kids were big Doom fans (Which was also a considerably low tech shooter game). I think that they mentally prepared them to pull the trigger, and to go to that special place in the mind where people go when they are at their peak performance. They use video games to train in all sorts of different specialities. We are basically at the very begginning, and I mean the first small step of technological achievement. All because a couple of people wanted to make the graphics of Pac-Man better. I'm truly excited to see what comes out 20 years from now. People are going to give all the credit to Thomas Edison, but not me I believe that Mr. and Mrs. Pac-Man deserve full credit for computer advancement.

I just saw an amazing anti-bush protest in Boston centered arround just one dead soldier.

I guess the price of change and progress.

I'm sorry, but I have to take issue with this. Have you read the Patriot Act, or are you just relying on media representations. Primarily it allows certain kinds of evidence to be admitted to federal court that is normally barred under the exclusionary rule. These exceptions are similar, for instance, to those found in the Racketer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. No one thought that act was the death of freedom. Are you going to be in federal court and feel there will be evidence used against you that should be kept out? Is excluding evidence ever as a way to punish police forces the best strategy to check state power? As it stands, the only people who are hurt by the broader range of admitted evidence are people who are guilty, or at least have evidence against them that makes them seem guilty, when they are in court.

What specifically do you have issue with when it comes to the Patriot Act? Cite me the section and subsection and perhaps I can help you understand why it is there.

Its not really what the act is about, it is what it is leading too.

As a famous man once said. "Anyone willing to give up a little freedom for a little security deserves neither".

I beg to differ on this one. Anyone joining the military, and I'll put Police and firefighting in the same category, has a deeper sense of community over self. Anyone who disagrees with this doesn't have a good grasp of reality. I mean, of course you don't enlist thinking" hey, hopefully I'll get killed today" but you recognize the possibility is there. I don't think any civilian profession is anywhere similar.

Ic ic so anyone who dissagrees with you dousn't have a good grasp on reality. It is nice to be so confident in ones self to say such things.

Personally i do not see how your remarks even if true for many people, actually means my remarks are wrong. Also i'm sure there would be plenty of people in civilian proffessions who would be insulted by your final remark.

Very good point! I remember an old peice of wisdom my minister used to say... Put a frog in hot water and it will jump out, put a frog in cold water and slowly heat it up and it will not realise it's life is in danger untill its too late!

same goes for the loss of freedom

The amount of money spent on the Iraq War could have solved the social security issue for 75 years into the future.

The amount of money spent on the Iraq War could have doubled the amount of money the entire world collectively provides in aid to developing countries.

Think about that.

Well, call me when they get to what it is leading too and I will draft an amicus brief against the curtailing of liberty. I'm not particularly convinced by a slippery slope argument, I've worked with too many lawmakers. Change is slow and difficult and inefficient, and every little clause can lead to months (or years) of arguing. Maybe RICO lead to the Patriot Act. If so, those two are baby steps - especially if, as I believe, the exclusionary rule was made over broad by a series of decisions in the 60s and 70s.

People that try and compare the Patriot Act to the parable about "First the Nazi's came for the Jews, but I didn't complain because I wasn't a Jew... etc." miss the point that the Patriot Act doesn't come for anybody. It doesn't taget a people, it targets a type of actions that are, point in fact, already illegal, and then makes evidence gathered in trying to prevent those activities easier to admit in federal court. If it targeted a people, that would be a problem. If there are laws against Austrailians, that is a problem, Australians are Australian no matter what they do. Making laws against being a baker is different, because it is a pattern of behavior, and bakers can do something else.

In this case, the law is in regards to evidence admission related to a patterns of behavior advancing terrorism. Terrorism itself is not already legal. Keeping out evidence was always against the state's interest, because terrorism is an attack on the integrity of the state. It was passed by large margins the first time, and while slight alterations were made, a very similar version was also passed into permanent law in 2006. Why? Well maybe terrorism. Personally, I believe it passed the second time not becuase of 9-11 nostalgia, but because the people voting on it were themselves lawyers... and outside of the popular symbol it had become, as lawyers they all understood both why it was needed and that its provisions are not as pernacious as its critics claim.

I do not happen to support either major American political party, and am only registered to vote in the United Kingdom. I have never voted in a US election. However, as a lawyer, attacks on the Patriot Act frustrate me. People think it symbolizes something, but it is a misperception... and what it actually does is very sensible, which is why it has consistantly been supported by the American Legislative branch, no matter what its constituant members say to rally their supporters.

Gah, somehow double post.

Yes Iraq wasted allot of money but not as much as you think. Firstly you have to deduct the abount which would have been spent simply because the military exists, regardless of being in Iraq or not.

then all the extra military spending because of Iraq would mostly flow back into the American economy through soldiers spending the money they earn and weapons manufacturers and othe benefited industrys spending their money on extra staff etc etc.

Only equipment purchased from overseas companies would take money out of the American economy.

Yes aid given internally to the poor would flow back into the economy just as good, and actually help people at the same time, i will give you that point.

On the other hand, aid given to developing countries would be a much worse economic outome than the current military spending because it dousn't flow back into the American economy.

According to the police search findings and his roomate's reports, he neither owned any consoles nor played any PC games. All he was ever seen doing on his computer was typing and little else. He reportedly played counterstrike in high school, but no one had seen or heard of him doing so recently.

See I told you Kyro he played Counter Strike! Even if video games didn't make him the officiant killer he became. They will for other people. It just depends on whether the person is a psycho.

"I AM NOT BLAMING VIDEO GAMES FOR THE FALL OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION"

I'm simply saying they are good tools to learn certain specialities.

Wyndstar: I really like you and your posts (I wanted to make you emperor of the high command until I spoke to alex), and I'm sorry but I have to fire back at what you said. You personally insulted me several times by calling disbelievers in the patriot act stupid so please dish in what you dish out and listen to my argument.

The patriot act is not only constitutional it's scary, and since your a lawyer your not down in the trenches with me. I've already had a friend held by interpol for discussing antiamerican views. Americans are secretely being imprisoned all over america for the slightest suspicions of terrorism, and then held without bail or contact to the outside world or representation in awful conditions until they are cleared. My friend Theo just went through it, and it was a nightmare. I don't know where you got your point of view (Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Rielly) and you sound more like a paralegal then a lawyer to me. Because I work for a Martens, Cohen, Harts, Ice & Geary to pay for my college, and not one single lawyer there thinks that bill is a good thing. Unless your a prosecuter where as it's understandable how much this bill will help you send people to life sentences. Whoever thinks Goerge Bush is clever enough to of concocted these awful attacks on the middle class themselves needs to ask themselves how gullible they truly might be. Goerge Bush is not pulling the Strings, but to contradict myself (GOOGLE THIS) he has been noted on 4 occasions saying he wished he was a dictator. Well the Patriot act is the first step on finding a loophoole in the constitution. When you defend Goerge Bush you defend America's most CORRUPT president. He put his greasy little hands in the Social Security Lock Box to give tax cuts to his oil company friends and pay the right people to get a permanent patriot act voted in. I WANT MY PRIVACY!!!!!!! I MAY JUST BE DOING SOMETHING WRONG AND NOT KNOW ABOUT IT, AND BAMMO NOW I'M IN GUANTANOMA. I got my facts straight, but you got your facts from Rush Limbaugh who gets paid by Goerge Bush to come up with propaganda. I was promised privacy, and thats what I want. I was promised a quick and speedy trial and thats what I want. I was promised freedom of speech and thats what I want. Now look inside yourself Wyndstar look at that anger there is just a small line between a Terrorist and ME isn't there. Well there isn't in reality I'm just expressing my opinion freedom of press. The Patriot Act was made to fight terrorism like you think. If we wanted to fight terrorism we would of pursued Osama Bin Laden instead of stealing IRAQ and soon to be IRANS oil. WHICH not too mention the death of our brothers and couple of my best friends in IRAQ did nothing to lower the price of gas one cent. When we get all the oil in the world the patriot act is going to make sure no one complains that 100000 american soldiers and 10 million arabic civilians died just so Exxon could charge 10 bucks a gallon of gas. So mr fake lawyer go listen Rush Limbaugh some more.

P.S. And if you want to argue about American Idol too don't think I'll hesitate to trump ya. Melinda is plastic. Jordin deserves it.

P.S.S. I'm sorry to be so rude Wyndstar, but you were rude to. I actually do like see you around the boards. So please take this with a grain of salt.

Quadruple post.

One more point to convey.

If they make the patriot act a solid part of our constitution.

At some point 100 years from now the words are going to get distorted
kind of like the constitution were some people say that they meant you have the right have arms with a hand and five fingers, and a militia no stronger then an elderly home.

More laws may be laid on top of that interpretted years later.

I don't trust the source of the creator of the bill

The law allowing us to bear arms (Weapons not fleshy attachements) and the right to a militia were piut in place to protect the American people from the any future corruption from our government like the absolutely corrupted rich British Senators and parliament during the 18th century.

THE PATRIOT ACT NOT ONLY NULLIFIES ANY FUTURE CHANCE OF DEFENDING OURSELVES AGAINST AN ABSOLUTELY CORRUPTED GOVERNMENT IT TAKES OUR RIGHTS AWAY ALLOWS OFFICIALS TO IMPRISION US INDEFINITLY WITHOUT TRIAL OR CONTACT WITH OUR FAMILY.

ask yourselfs who are the people occupying those awful gulags right now?

Prisioners of war
simple prisioners of war
not terrorists
prisioners of wars.
That's an inhumane way to treat POWS. I PRAY THEY DON'T DETAIN MY FRIENDS IN IRAQ THE SAME WAY. THEY MIGHT DETAIN MY BUDDY JASON FOR BEING A CHRISTIAN ALLAH HATER PERMANENTLY WITHOUT ANY APPEALS service.