Orders! I vas yust following ORDERS! Nothing! I know NOTHING! Bring on those hot pinchers. We'll find out if you know nothing.

Why do the police go about armed? They need fear nothing from me. I obey the laws as well as I can. If I am stopped for going over the posted speed limit a little, am I going to draw down on the officer of the law? No way! so why do they have to be armed? You all know the answer to that, don't you? It's not you or I they are armed against. It is against those who operate OUTSIDE the law, who carry guns and intend harm against the citizens and against law enforcement.

And if these enemies of the law and civilization up the ante and make or find automatic weapons what are the police going to do? Stick to using peashooters against full auto fire? I think not. These days law enforcement has to have parity with what ever the criminals may pull out of their evil bag of tricks.

Elevate that to the national level. Our armies seek to have parity to match whatever a hostile nation might throw our way...or even superiority to deter a hostile nation from even attempting to come at us. We expect our chosen leaders to be able to defend its citizenry. This is not unreasonable.

How do we know what weaponry and design our potential enemies have? Well, that's where our intelligence community comes in, a network of free democracies sharing information gathered and verified from a myriad of sources. The level of conflict and the proven ability of an enemy determines the importance and urgency of the needed information. An enemy that has indiscriminately attacked our citizens and infrastructure of this nation has proven it's intent and information is critical to halt any future attacks.

The degrees of escalation, regardless of that enemy's perceived provocation (or propaganda) is based upon threat level.

As with the officers' of the law, the idea is to meet fire with fire, otherwise we lose...everything.

Our enemies of the past, most notably Germany and Japan, used torture with abandon and I have no doubt that our side also used some techniques that meek and mild would have disapproved of. Our enemies of today also use torture and gruesome murder to inflict terror upon us. Aren't there some occasions where we ought to apply the same or at least the THREAT of the same to counter the plans and ambitions of our enemies?

If we could prevail without such practices I would wholeheartedly agree that we abstain from torture or the threst of torture. If we had good cause, good information that an imminent threat to American or Allied lives existed I think pouring water on somebody's mouth and nose for 40 seconds or telling them there are poisonous bugs in their cell or playing some godawful rock n' roll records non-stop, all without actual harm to the enemy combatant, would not bother me overly much. Sorry if you don't agree but that's your right under this current form of government we have. It is also my right to hold my opinion...currently.

Which brings me to Comrade Obama. Currently. At the rate of his ass-kissing and apologies to the world's dictators and socialist governments is going, at the rate the economy is going, at the rate our freedoms are going, going, going...,why I may have to change my opinion...if I want to live.