What's the point of spending trillions of dollars on weapons if we can't even shore up levees at home?

Question

Let's face it, we have been so far lucky with Gustav.

The fact is that Katrina did more damage to the city of New Orleans than Al-Qaeda did to New York.

The biggest threat to national security is not some terrorist living in a cave somewhere, but the forces of Nature and climate change.

Isn't it time we spent our "Defense" budget on protecting us from the elements rather than in invading other countries?

Answer 1

What's the point in spending Billions of dollars to build levees around a city that is 6 to 8 feet below sea level, and continues to sink every year because of the very levees that were built to protect that city?

Answer 2

great point..

Our country is now geared to an arms economy bred in an artificually induced psychosis of war hysteria and an incessant propaganda of fear.

Douglas MacArthur

Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor - with the cry of grave national emergency.

Douglas MacArthur

Bush family member is often just trolling ignore him, correct him and you get blocked and reported.

Answer 3

States are responsible for maintaining their own levees.

Democrats create budget deficits.

Democrats don't understand everytime they create a new social program that will eventually create the need for another new social program.

To the uneducated poster below:

The constitution requires the federal government to defend states.

U.S. Constitution: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion"

To jpenergy... : I only block people that use strong insults and I almost never report people. I get insulted often but I don't report.

Answer 4

Like most people, you miss the point of the decisions post-9/11.

The point is not that 9/11 happened, but rather how easy it now is to create massive, man-made destruction like never before.

The steps taken by the government are not just about stopping an attack the size of 9/11 but stopping attacks which could be orders of magnitude more powerful. Suppose the yellowcake that was found in Iraq had made it into the wrong hands and was used to create a bomb that took out a US city?

(I should add that for insurance purposes, a nuclear weapon taking out a city is regarded as "when not if".)

True, the government did not take sufficient steps against known threats. With limited funding, there often needs to be a wake up call - 9/11 was that for terrorist, Katrina was that for New Orleans' levees.

Answer 5

I would like to disagree with you on this statement....The biggest threat to national security is not some terrorist living in a cave somewhere, but the forces of Nature and climate change....

The biggest threat to this country is in the White House.  Any one that would be willing to forfeit American lives for a lie & a "legacy" is much more dangerous

Answer 6

HERE HERE!!!   *Looks to answer above him*  Like N.Y. is responsible for defense against a terrorist attack right?"