• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What good has come from the Department of Homeland Security?

M

Masterhawk

DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2016
Messages
1,908
Reaction score
489
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Allow me to list all of the bad things about the Department of Homeland Security.

1. still uses private prisons. The DOJ stopped using them a month ago.

2. for a department meant to prevent terrorist attacks, it has never stopped a single terrorist attack

3. it consumes $41.2 billion annually ($17.07 billion goes to agencies created after 9/11. This rivals NASA's $19.3 billion)

4. pretty much every thwarted terror attack was done so by the FBI or local law enforcement

5. terrorism doesn't kill that many americans in the first place Toddlers Killed More Americans than Terrorists in 2015 : snopes.com 10 Things More Likely to Kill You than Islamic Terror

So what is the positive impact of the DHS?
 
That's a rather disjointed post.

You're referencing terrorists stopped from committing acts, yet also saying terrorism doesn't kill that many Americans as though 1) it's not a problem and 2) it's not related to to terrorists being stopped.
 
It hired a bunch of high school teachers who were bored with their jobs?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Harshaw said:
That's a rather disjointed post.

You're referencing terrorists stopped from committing acts, yet also saying terrorism doesn't kill that many Americans as though 1) it's not a problem and 2) it's not related to to terrorists being stopped.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that terrorists shouldn't be stopped, of course they should. I'm saying that it shouldn't take place over homicides, cancer, and diabetes.
 
Masterhawk said:
I'm not saying that terrorists shouldn't be stopped, of course they should. I'm saying that it shouldn't take place over homicides, cancer, and diabetes.
Click to expand...

I don't know what that means.
 
Harshaw said:
That's a rather disjointed post.

You're referencing terrorists stopped from committing acts, yet also saying terrorism doesn't kill that many Americans as though 1) it's not a problem and 2) it's not related to to terrorists being stopped.
Click to expand...

What is disjointed is your logic. 2 different reasons are given for why Homeland security is a waste of treasure.

1) there are not that many terrorist acts in the US committed by Islamic Terrorists. (The money could be much better spent elsewhere)

2) Homeland Security has not prevented any terrorist attacks ( it is a waste of money to begin with as it does not do what it is supposed to). Even if some false flag is created to show "look look HS prevented an attack" this does not show that this money could be better spent elsewhere.

I will give another,

3) Asking US citizens to trade essential liberty for temporary security is a technique used by totalitarian police states. Fear to take away rights and freedoms.

Giving the Gov't a whole bunch more power (way more than was ever intended by the founders - because they did not want the Gov't to abuse that power as always is the case) presents a far greater danger to the security of the citizens than the threat it is trying to prevent ( Terrorism).

For those that missed it the first time : The Gov't is a far bigger threat to the security of US citizens than Terrorism.
 
thinkagain said:
What is disjointed is your logic. 2 different reasons are given for why Homeland security is a waste of treasure.

1) there are not that many terrorist acts in the US committed by Islamic Terrorists. (The money could be much better spent elsewhere)

2) Homeland Security has not prevented any terrorist attacks ( it is a waste of money to begin with as it does not do what it is supposed to). Even if some false flag is created to show "look look HS prevented an attack" this does not show that this money could be better spent elsewhere.

I will give another,

3) Asking US citizens to trade essential liberty for temporary security is a technique used by totalitarian police states. Fear to take away rights and freedoms.

Giving the Gov't a whole bunch more power (way more than was ever intended by the founders - because they did not want the Gov't to abuse that power as always is the case) presents a far greater danger to the security of the citizens than the threat it is trying to prevent ( Terrorism).

For those that missed it the first time : The Gov't is a far bigger threat to the security of US citizens than Terrorism.
Click to expand...

Wow. Hope you feel better.

Meanwhile, you didn't really speak to what I said.
 
Harshaw said:
I don't know what that means.
Click to expand...

It means that a death by a terrorist or even some rare disease is no more tragic than a guy murdered by a fellow American or by cancer. The department of homeland security plus the lack of caring about suicide, cancer, homicide, and car accidents demonstrates a sad perception demonstrated by Joseph Stalin "One death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic".
 
Masterhawk said:
Allow me to list all of the bad things about the Department of Homeland Security.

1. still uses private prisons. The DOJ stopped using them a month ago.

2. for a department meant to prevent terrorist attacks, it has never stopped a single terrorist attack

3. it consumes $41.2 billion annually ($17.07 billion goes to agencies created after 9/11. This rivals NASA's $19.3 billion)

4. pretty much every thwarted terror attack was done so by the FBI or local law enforcement

5. terrorism doesn't kill that many americans in the first place Toddlers Killed More Americans than Terrorists in 2015 : snopes.com 10 Things More Likely to Kill You than Islamic Terror

So what is the positive impact of the DHS?
Click to expand...

It's name can't be argued with unless you hate America and the Patriot Act, which allows the feds to surveille anyone at any time and what are you afraid if you have nothing to hide?
It's supported by a whole bunch of so-called 'small-government' conservatives though, advocates of what I call the 'daddy state'.
 
cpwill said:
It hired a bunch of high school teachers who were bored with their jobs?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why do you hate America?
 
Grand Mal said:
It's name can't be argued with unless you hate America and the Patriot Act, which allows the feds to surveille anyone at any time and what are you afraid if you have nothing to hide?
It's supported by a whole bunch of so-called 'small-government' conservatives though, advocates of what I call the 'daddy state'.
Click to expand...
Meh. I thought it was a bad idea because it could be dangerous. Turns out, mostly just incompetent.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
What good has come from the Department of Homeland Security?

what do you mean "what good"? the fbi mandated backdoors are so prevalent we can just ask the russians and find out what our pederast heroin cartel (hillbillary) has been doing behind our backs.

that's "good" isn't it? or maybe i mean "poetic" :)

vice, this is what winning looks like
Bacha_bazi
obama-gives-green-light-to-heroin-epidemic
yes-our-troops-were-ordered-to-ignore-afghan-pedophiles
us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys
afghanistan-boy-abuse-us-military
devastating-u-s-heroin-epidemic-a-consequence-of-unimpeded-supply-from-afghanistan

 
The good that has come from DHS is purely and only bureaucratic. If one works for the agency, things are great because you have a job. That's about it.

For the taxpayer, it is a huge boondoggle in the finest traditions of Big Government.
 
Thoreau72 said:
You should brush up on your language skills.
Click to expand...

Not really, considering his clarification was markedly different from what the post I quoted implied by its plain "language."
 
Harshaw said:
Wow. Hope you feel better.

Meanwhile, you didn't really speak to what I said.
Click to expand...

Don't blame me for you lack reading comprehension. I addressed your disjointed logic directly.
 
thinkagain said:
Don't blame me for you lack reading comprehension. I addressed your disjointed logic directly.
Click to expand...

No. But it's funny that you mention "reading comprehension."
 
Harshaw said:
No. But it's funny that you mention "reading comprehension."
Click to expand...

Your one line responses to detailed posts speaks to you intellectual capacity.

Oh ... stop the press. From another poster to you just a couple above this one.

You should brush up on your language skills.
Click to expand...
 
thinkagain said:
Your one line responses to detailed posts speaks to you intellectual capacity.

Oh ... stop the press. From another poster to you just a couple above this one.
Click to expand...

Hey, genius -- your response to me was an extended harangue about how Homeland Security is ineffective and should go away.

The post you quoted does not mention Homeland Security, nor does it argue anything about the existence of Homeland Security one way or the other. It doesn't argue for it; it doesn't argue against it.

Nothing you said to me was relevant to what I said, which was ONLY about a conceptual contradiction in the OP, entirely independent of whether or not Homeland Security exists.

You got it now? Or do you need me to hold your hand through it again?
 
Harshaw said:
Hey, genius -- your response to me was an extended harangue about how Homeland Security is ineffective and should go away.

The post you quoted does not mention Homeland Security, nor does it argue anything about the existence of Homeland Security one way or the other. It doesn't argue for it; it doesn't argue against it.

Nothing you said to me was relevant to what I said, which was ONLY about a conceptual contradiction in the OP, entirely independent of whether or not Homeland Security exists.

You got it now? Or do you need me to hold your hand through it again?
Click to expand...

Spare me your ignorant musings.

It was you that stated:

That's a rather disjointed post.

You're referencing terrorists stopped from committing acts, yet also saying terrorism doesn't kill that many Americans as though 1) it's not a problem and 2) it's not related to to terrorists being stopped.
Click to expand...

The post you are responding to was the OP which is about how Homeland security is a waste of money.


Then you cry to me because I mentioned Homeland security (and you did not) while explaining how your post was logic was disjointed in relation to your "disjointed" claim.

Please - Is there no kindergarten class room here that you might feel at home at. Don't worry, in that room they will give you a "genius" sticker just for participating.
 
thinkagain said:
Spare me your ignorant musings.

It was you that stated:



The post you are responding to was the OP which is about how Homeland security is a waste of money.


Then you cry to me because I mentioned Homeland security (and you did not) while explaining how your post was logic was disjointed in relation to your "disjointed" claim.

Please - Is there no kindergarten class room here that you might feel at home at. Don't worry, in that room they will give you a "genius" sticker just for participating.
Click to expand...

Yeah. What you incompetently read into it is not my problem. I said what I said, and nothing else. You jumped to conclusions.

But I'll leave you to that -- there's enough long-standing hackery on this board not to bother wasting time on any new ones.
 
DHS is a waste of incompetent failure. They couldn't catch a cold.
 
d0gbreath said:
DHS is a waste of incompetent failure. They couldn't catch a cold.
Click to expand...

No, but they sure as hell know how to play the bureaucratic game. :mrgreen:
 
I say we just nuke the middle east. Turn that **** stain of a region of the globe I to a radioactive slag heap for the next 10,000 years. Then those towl headed jihadists won't have any sacred land to fight for
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom