I would like to get the opinions from the CNN ireporter community and casual readers regarding the arming of foreign rebels.
Time and again over the past many decades, the U.S. has exercised its power and influence as hegemon by arming citizens of other countries to promote insurrection, rebellion, revolution and overthrow of a sitting government power in foreign lands. Recently, Syria and Libya come to mind.
My simple questions:
Why are we arming foreign rebel citizens if we do not believe that U.S. citizens should be armed with the same right and power to fend off tyranny in our own nation?
Does the overwhelming evidence of oppression of unarmed citizens in foreign lands provide us with enough evidence to confirm our founders’ belief that citizens should maintain the right to keep and bear arms as a check and balance in our system?
And, does the arming of these foreign rebel factions, causing the deaths of tens of thousands of people, cause any level of concern with the U.S. government and its people?
So, let me get this straight. The socialist majority now in power in the U.S. believes that it is perfectly legitimate to arm foreign citizens to overthrow their government at the cost of thousands upon thousands of lives, but it is not okay for U.S. citizens to be armed even though our Constitution is the only document of law on the planet that recognizes it as a right.
2A proponents understand that the right is a duty. It is a placement of power in the hands of the individual citizens as a check and balance, a deterrent in the system, to prevent unbalanced concentration of power that leads to conflict like we see in Syria today.
When you think about it; it almost seems like insanity. We are okay with arming foreign rebels and fomenting insurrection and killing in a foreign land, yet our tyrannical majority, our government, is intent on disarming U.S. citizens. It is a bizarre hypocracy.
Such is the nature of the socialist mindset, I suppose.