Should access to Internet be blocked by the government during the wartime"
During Arab Spring Internet was shut down because governments of countries like Egypt, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, saw Internet as a threat to their national security. Internet was considered to be provoking the people to revolt, and to spread the false information. nevertheless, people weer even more angrier when the fouind out that their freedom of petition and assembly, freedom of expression were limited. Savvy users found other ways to circumvent the blocking and weer able to get an access and tell the world about the current situation in their countries. As a protester of a revolution in Iran confessed: "We use Facebook to schedule our events, Twitter to coordinate them and Youtube to tell the world". By blocking the Internet, governments of aforementioned countries did not ameliorate the political situation. Goverment has a wrogn understanding of power of Internet, it thinks that it the Twitter/facebook/Youtube which start the revolution, whereas it the people, not the Inthernet who start the revolution. This issue deserves to be discussed as Internet is becoming more pwoerful and influential in our lives.
I agree, limiting Internet freedom does violate human rights, such as freedom of expression, of petition and assembly. Also human right like access to information. However, if to look from government's perspective, Internet might contain false information and might cause protests based on incredible information. I'd like to emphasize that in these debates I'm saying that government should restrict Internet access only during the wartime. Not everyday.
i agree with you! blocking the internet access is not the right thing to do. specially in war times. you see, without the internet, people will not be able to communicate with the outside world and will not be able to let the people know what is going on with them either for support or for help in all its ways. on the other hand, the internet is actually a good way that helps people in war zoned countries to stay communicated with their beloved ones outside. so i don't think it is a good idea to block the internet access in wartimes.
Basically yes. After the war would have been won, the goverment decides to keep it going to keep it's war time powers. It uses propaganda and the "hate hour" to give the illusion that war is still happening, while restricting all other sources of information to prevent any controdictions to be revealed to what the public was being told.
During times of discontentment(economical,social etc.),a country tries to settle a problem through bureaucracy... However like most countries the system is corrupted and flawed, thus leading to what could become a riot. By banning the Internet, the governments can prevent a riot from occurring
First, Only the people around the area and who are committed to the cause will be involved in the "war" and thus most people will be ready do react accordingly in example during the riots in Malaysia in 2012 everybody participating were told not to resist the police. By allowing Internet access, we may allow people who want to be part of the cause but we also encourage people who may want to use this as an excuse to harm others thereby distorting the original message the cause intended
I agree, while most of the people consider Internet as a source of information, which they need to know during the wartime in their country, the rest use it to worsen already instable situation in the country and get more people involved by spreading the message that will enrage majority of others and which is not even true.