Final answer:
The main reason actions perceived as threats to US freedom attract concern is the balance between national security and civil liberties. Throughout history, measures like the USA PATRIOT Act have prompted debates on whether restricting individual rights in the name of protection is justifiable. It underscores the ongoing tension between ensuring safety and preserving fundamental freedoms.
Step-by-step explanation:
The main reason that any action that was perceived to pose a threat to US 'Freedom' can often be considered a significant concern is due to the delicate balance that needs to be maintained between national security and the protection of civil liberties. In historical contexts, such as during the Cold War or the introduction of the USA PATRIOT Act, these issues are highlighted as the government takes measures that can restrict individual rights in the name of protecting the nation. This debate raises critical questions about to what extent these restrictions can be justified and whether they are truly in the best interest of the citizens.
In times of perceived danger, such as during terrorist threats or moments of political instability, individuals may be willing to sacrifice some freedom for increased safety. However, these concessions often lead to government actions that, while intended to safeguard the nation, can infringe upon basic freedoms and privacy. Events like the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, the suppression of dissenting views during times of war, or the surveillance and limitations on speech under the guise of combatting communism during the Cold War all serve as examples where national security concerns have led to the curtailment of civil liberties.
Ultimately, the debate of security versus liberty is a persistent one. Societies may find it necessary to accept some level of restriction on freedoms, especially during times of crisis, but it is crucial to continually assess whether these measures are proportional and truly serve public interest, rather than simply expanding governmental power. Such considerations remain highly relevant today as new challenges emerge in the arena of national and global security.