ANTIWAR

 ANTIWAR VOICES

The role of antiwar voices in the first amendment is truly astonishing if you're able to take a deep look into the state of US foreign affairs. Since we consider ourselves the world leaders in the United States, we feel the need to deploy our troops in these war-stricken countries in the Eastern part of the world. Our issues with countries like Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan are well-documented for being detrimental to our foreign policy. There have been several instances as early as a couple of months ago where lots of people are killed during bombings. The vast majority of these people are innocent women and children who are unfortunately living in a bad environment of war. The US government needs to be more calculated on which battles to fight against overseas. The assassination of Al-qaeda's Osama Bin-Laden is the only successful mission of terrorist executions that I can think of during my lifetime. It makes it even worse knowing that we've had troops in these countries for over ten years. 

Why do people that are against illegal occupation of foreign countries have their voices muzzled? As we can see, it's very hard to access anti-war information because of the agenda that it could drive in our local media. Taking those troops out of countries like Afghanistan would send a message of defeat to our military, and I believe that's what our government wants to avoid. They committed to keeping these countries civil, and it has and will come at a cost to our military. The vast amount of resources that are committed to maintaining foreign wars will put us into deeper debt. I strongly believe that it's proactive to listen to everyone's opinion, even if it can be considered radical. Social media apps are beginning to censor their users a lot more nowadays, which is indicative of how our society feels about war. These apps are allowed to censer users since they're private companies, but it's shown to be problematic for us as a society.