NationStates Jolt Archive

With Iraq's voting, if all is successful there with the voting process, that will bring the Middle East's list of democratic nations to three, which are

1) Israel
2) Afghanistan
3) Iraq

Still, there are some 24 countries in the area that are non democratic, what countries do you think need democratic governments the most, and why?

With Iraq's voting, if all is successful there with the voting process, that will bring the Middle East's list of democratic nations to three, which are

1) Israel
2) Afghanistan
3) Iraq

Still, there are some 24 countries in the area that are non democratic, what countries do you think need democratic governments the most, and why?
I'd say Saudi Arabia. With a liberal democracy, they have so much potential to develope and enrich their country.

How about we leave them alone, because we can't impose our will on sovereign nations?

While I'm not sure if the benefits outweigh the disadvantages, I absolutely cannot stand the regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia

How about we leave them alone, because we can't impose our will on sovereign nations?
That thinking is outdated. As the world becomes globalized, everyone's security depends on one another. And as we have seen, autocratic nations do nothing but create instabilaty in their region, and breed terrorism abroad.

Everyone of them could use a little democracy.

That thinking is outdated. As the world becomes globalized, everyone's security depends on one another. And as we have seen, autocratic nations do nothing but create instabilaty in their region, and breed terrorism abroad.
I agree, the thinking that perhaps DEMOCRACY should not be mandated, but the result of the people is outdated. The irony seems lost on you.

Where's the "I don't give a shit and think they should work it out for themselves" option?

none

they should be free to develop and sort out their problems at their own pace. Enforcing democracy on a split country that is used to strong leadership could be disastrous

I agree, the thinking that perhaps DEMOCRACY should not be mandated, but the result of the people is outdated. The irony seems lost on you.
Appearantly so.

Afghanistan is not in the Middle East. It's in South Asia. It is grouped more so with the subcontinent. The Middle East ends with Iran.

Edit: While Israel may be a democracy, it needs reforms. Many many reforms. Just because a government is democratic, doesn't make it good. Also, many middle eastern governments are democracies, or at least as democratic as the U.S. The U.S. is technically not a democracy, it's a republic. So by your own standards, most middle eastern countries are democracies, being republics where citizens can vote on representatives to parliament. Look on the CIA World Fact Book you idiot.

Second Edit: Yemen is recognized as a democracy for sure. Just because it doesn't agree with the U.S. automatically makes it not a democracy to idiots like yourself.

While I'm not sure if the benefits outweigh the disadvantages, I absolutely cannot stand the regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia

I second that emotion.

Everyone of them could use a little democracy.
I support your opinion but can we really risk destabalizing these non-aggressive countries?

I think Egypt.

I mean, they say they have a democracy, but let's face it: it has serious issues.

The ones that don't have democratic governments, or at least the ones that have never had a referendum in order to decide whether they want a democratic government. I mean an uninhibited referendum, not one inundated with with the usual 'yes, we might be a cruel and oppressive government, but think of the Palestinians!' and 'America is the devil. Vote us, and don't ask what these two things have to do with each other.' propaganda.

Appearantly so.
Democracy is a governmental system founded on the idea that the people should be free to make choices regarding their lives and government. Forcing people to be democratic violates the basic ideal that system is supposed to represent.

If the population of that country supports a change to a democratic form of government, thats different. Thats a great thing in my opinion, the people chose to be free. We should probably help support that.

I support your opinion but can we really risk destabalizing these non-aggressive countries?

I'm not saying we should. From an abstract point of view, every Middle Eastern country could be helped by democratic reforms. Yes, doing so would destabilize the region. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to help as many as we can over the years, though.

I'd say all of them, especially IranIran and Shatain. Damn troublemakers. They need a good democratic system to stop them a-warring (not that that would change a lot, to be honest). Oh well.

I support your opinion but can we really risk destabalizing these non-aggressive countries?

Only if we're willing to deal with little transportation, less electric, and even less heat.

Let Saudi Arabia run out of oil in a couple decades (Unless what's-his-face's theory that a self-renewing source of oil is created in the mantle of the planet with methane proves to be true. This is unlikely.) and we'll see how things are going.

I think the US should invade all countries in the middle east and north Africa.
All at once.

Democracy is a governmental system founded on the idea that the people should be free to make choices regarding their lives and government. Forcing people to be democratic violates the basic ideal that system is supposed to represent.

If the population of that country supports a change to a democratic form of government, thats different. Thats a great thing in my opinion, the people chose to be free. We should probably help support that.
Still, most of these people don't even have the option to create a liberal democracy. Leaving an autocracy, especially a rich one, to its own devices is playing with fire.

Let's re-examine that list, shall we?

1] Israel: Western Democracy
2] Afghanistan: Not a Middle Eastern country.
3] Iraq: Military occupied territory. Democracy not fully established.

Now ... to add to your list ...

4] Algeria: Democracy
5] Bahrain: Democracy
6] Egypt: Democracy
7] Jordan: Hereditary Monarchy with democratically elected Parlaiment.
8] Kuwait: Constitutional Monarchy with democratically elected Parlaiment.
9] Iran: Islamic Consultative Assembly, which consists of 290 elected representatives who serve four-year terms. The people - who enjoy universal suffrage - also elect a president for a four-year term.
10] Lebanon: Lebanon has a democratic system but sectarian militias.
11] Libya: The Libyan Government is organised as a pyramid of committees and congresses, each layer of which is involved in the selection of the level above.
12] Morocco: Hereditary Monarchy
13] Oman: Sultinate
14] Qatar: Constitutional Monarchy with advisory council. In 1999 the country's first elections - for a 29-member municipal council - were held in which women were allowed to vote and stand for office.
15] Saudi Arabia: Hereditary Monarchy
16] Syria: Authoritarian Rule.
17] Yemen: Representative Democracy

Everyone got that straight? Good.

Still, most of these people don't even have the option to create a liberal democracy. Leaving an autocracy, especially a rich one, to its own devices is playing with fire.
They have the same option to create a democracy as the United States did, they would need help but it would be their choice.

Everyone got that straight? Good.
Its misleading to say that a country like Iran is a "Democracy" in the same sense as the France or the USA.

Edit : You didn't say that specifically, but I think thats what the thread's creator meant when saying "democracy."

Its misleading to say that a country like Iran is a "Democracy" in the same sense as the France or the USA.

Edit : You didn't say that specifically, but I think thats what the thread's creator meant when saying "democracy."

Yes, I know ... the narrow view is that since other countries are not "my kind" of democracy, then they're not a democracy. By definition, though, the US isn't a democracy either.

Personally I look forward to the day the US gets invaded and occupied by another nation because the US government "ain't quite right".

I think they dont need Democratic reform. They need Autocratic Reform.

They have the same option to create a democracy as the United States did, they would need help but it would be their choice.
I disagree. Often, they are even unaware of the option of democracy. Now if they vote under these conditions, then they're likely to vote in something akin to the old order. But that is less likely to happen with a clearly defined constitution. That's what's happening in Iraq: politicians, powerbrokers, businessmen, scholars, labor advocates, and pretty much every one you can think of will draw up the constitution. They have nearly a year to do it, whereas the US's Founding Fathers took only a season, despite rampant fighting.

I think they dont need Democratic reform. They need Autocratic Reform.
No. All countries between the Atlantic coast to the Indus river need a US invasion. By next week.

Afghanistan is not in the Middle East. It's in South Asia. It is grouped more so with the subcontinent. The Middle East ends with Iran.

Edit: While Israel may be a democracy, it needs reforms. Many many reforms. Just because a government is democratic, doesn't make it good. Also, many middle eastern governments are democracies, or at least as democratic as the U.S. The U.S. is technically not a democracy, it's a republic. So by your own standards, most middle eastern countries are democracies, being republics where citizens can vote on representatives to parliament. Look on the CIA World Fact Book you idiot.


Im joining the Israeli army..

its like a Jewish thing..

love,
Cardi ;)

Personally I look forward to the day the US gets invaded and occupied by another nation because the US government "ain't quite right".

Personally I look forward to the day said nation gets wiped off the map because it pissed us off a little too much.

Let's re-examine that list, shall we?

1] Israel: Western Democracy
2] Afghanistan: Not a Middle Eastern country.
3] Iraq: Military occupied territory. Democracy not fully established.

Now ... to add to your list ...

4] Algeria: Democracy
5] Bahrain: Democracy
6] Egypt: Democracy
7] Jordan: Hereditary Monarchy with democratically elected Parlaiment.
8] Kuwait: Constitutional Monarchy with democratically elected Parlaiment.
9] Iran: Islamic Consultative Assembly, which consists of 290 elected representatives who serve four-year terms. The people - who enjoy universal suffrage - also elect a president for a four-year term.
10] Lebanon: Lebanon has a democratic system but sectarian militias.
11] Libya: The Libyan Government is organised as a pyramid of committees and congresses, each layer of which is involved in the selection of the level above.
12] Morocco: Hereditary Monarchy
13] Oman: Sultinate
14] Qatar: Constitutional Monarchy with advisory council. In 1999 the country's first elections - for a 29-member municipal council - were held in which women were allowed to vote and stand for office.
15] Saudi Arabia: Hereditary Monarchy
16] Syria: Authoritarian Rule.
17] Yemen: Representative Democracy

Everyone got that straight? Good.


I agree that he was missing a few people, but not all of the Democracies that you have there are actual democracies(just guises).

Also, most of North Africa(with the exception of Egypt) isn't part of the Middle East. Its part of...North Africa!

No. All countries between the Atlantic coast to the Indus river need a US invasion. By next week.
Unfortunately, my politics don't have a country to be invaded anymore :rolleyes:

I think the US should invade all countries in the middle east and north Africa.
All at once.

Well.

Bush would destroy the whole lot..

what a concept ..hes going to do it anyways..


ps: to the Muslim, progressive dem., rock on.


love,
Cardi-ishness
_ _
P.S. I ( ` )
\ / Qatar!

if you cant tell, that ish a heart

Unfortunately, my politics don't have a country to be invaded anymore :rolleyes:


What are those politics dear?


love,
Cardi

ps that wasnt sarcasm if youre sitting there wondering why people are mean..
im not mean..
please dont think im mean..
ok ill sod off now.

Personally I look forward to the day said nation gets wiped off the map because it pissed us off a little too much.


hehe lets all poke fun at the dumb arses!

love,
Cardi!


damnm militaristic neo conservative

Well.

Bush would destroy the whole lot..

what a concept ..hes going to do it anyways..

He should hurry it up a bit. And he should invade China and N Korea as well.

I disagree. Often, they are even unaware of the option of democracy. Now if they vote under these conditions, then they're likely to vote in something akin to the old order. But that is less likely to happen with a clearly defined constitution. That's what's happening in Iraq: politicians, powerbrokers, businessmen, scholars, labor advocates, and pretty much every one you can think of will draw up the constitution. They have nearly a year to do it, whereas the US's Founding Fathers took only a season, despite rampant fighting.
You do realize there is a very large pro-democratic movement in Iran, right? It doesn't make they're message look good when we threaten invasion. Democracy is founded on choice, you CAN'T force someone to become democratic without destroying the very thing you fought for.

He should hurry it up a bit. And he should invade China and N Korea as well.


Heh...i guess..
what a bitchy american he is

love,
Cardi

go jews!

hehe lets all poke fun at the dumb arses!

love,
Cardi!


damnm militaristic neo conservative

Damn Stalinist commie! (hey, if you want to make assumptions based on next to nothing, so can I)

Let's re-examine that list, shall we?

1] Israel: Western Democracy
2] Afghanistan: Not a Middle Eastern country.
3] Iraq: Military occupied territory. Democracy not fully established.

Now ... to add to your list ...

4] Algeria: Democracy
5] Bahrain: Democracy
6] Egypt: Democracy
7] Jordan: Hereditary Monarchy with democratically elected Parlaiment.
8] Kuwait: Constitutional Monarchy with democratically elected Parlaiment.
9] Iran: Islamic Consultative Assembly, which consists of 290 elected representatives who serve four-year terms. The people - who enjoy universal suffrage - also elect a president for a four-year term.
10] Lebanon: Lebanon has a democratic system but sectarian militias.
11] Libya: The Libyan Government is organised as a pyramid of committees and congresses, each layer of which is involved in the selection of the level above.
12] Morocco: Hereditary Monarchy
13] Oman: Sultinate
14] Qatar: Constitutional Monarchy with advisory council. In 1999 the country's first elections - for a 29-member municipal council - were held in which women were allowed to vote and stand for office.
15] Saudi Arabia: Hereditary Monarchy
16] Syria: Authoritarian Rule.
17] Yemen: Representative Democracy

Everyone got that straight? Good.
Algeria: Military controled
Bahrain: Formerly an absolute monarchy, but experimenting with democracy
Egypt: "Democracy" controlled by Hosnei Mumbarak and son
Jordan" constitutional monarchy
Kuwait: constitutional monarchy
Morrccco: autocracy/monarchy
Oman: autocracy/monarchy
Qatar: constitutional monarchy
Saudi Arabia: autocracy/monarchy
Syria: Autocracy
Lebannon: Nominal democracy, but Syrian controlled
Yemen: pretty democratic, but the government has very little power outside Sana'a and Aden, and those elected are extremely corrupt
United Arab Emirates: autocracy, with elements of feudalism
So some are making great progress, especially the smaller Gulf states and Jordan. But most of them are very autocratic, and in Yemen's case, have no real government.

What are those politics dear?


love,
Cardi

I am a Fascist.

Heh...i guess..
what a bitchy american he is
I'm not an... eew..American. I'm just in need for some quality reality TV.

Appearantly so.

The iorny is that democracy is all about choice. Telling people they have no choice, but to have choices is pretty damn ironic.

Damn Stalinist commie! (hey, if you want to make assumptions based on next to nothing, so can I)


im so not a stalinist

and i wasnt assuming anything

i was talking about bush

damnm militaristic neo conservative

Interesting. I don't want to turn this thread into a US-other country-conservative-liberal-whatever debate, so I'll keep it short.

Since I am not a "pseudo-marxist/commie Bush-hater" makes me a damn militaristic neo-conservative. Interesting logic, or lack thereof. First of all, I am niether a new conservative (the "neo" part), nor am I a true conservative. My beliefs fall more in line with libertarianism. Anyway, the next time you insult someone because they have a different opinion on something, do please try to make it a logical insult so that they don't get a headache trying to figure out what you said.

Thank you so much for your time.

You do realize there is a very large pro-democratic movement in Iran, right? It doesn't make they're message look good when we threaten invasion. Democracy is founded on choice, you CAN'T force someone to become democratic without destroying the very thing you fought for.
I hope they do succeed in overthrowing. In fact, I'm not suggesting that every autocracy needs to be overthrown. Just one or two need to be, and then they get the message. If the Iraq experiment succeeds, I predict that theocratic Iran will not last much longer.

I hope they do succeed in overthrowing. In fact, I'm not suggesting that every autocracy needs to be overthrown. Just one or two need to be, and then they get the message.
What "message" is that. That a country does not have the right to govern in a different manner then you?

What "message" is that. That a country does not have the right to govern in a different manner then you?
Yes. I believe that a liberal capitalist democracy is the only moral form of government, and should be regarded as such. In addition, the more liberal democracies are created, the better off existing ones are.

I believe that falls under the definition of imperialism and bigotry at the same time. Bigot.

I believe that falls under the definition of imperialism and bigotry at the same time. Bigot.
It does not. What successes has feudalism had? How about socialism? Communism? None of them have completed in a hundred years what it takes liberal democratic capitalism a few years to accomplish. Did absolute
monarchy create the lightbulb? Did communism invent suburbia? Was it a theocracy that created the internet? No. All of these were created in systems where humans had control of their own lives.

What "message" is that. That a country does not have the right to govern in a different manner then you?

That the people get a chance to decide whether or not they should be governed by a representative or non-representative government.

I'm not an... eew..American. I'm just in need for some quality reality TV.


aah!
this ish quite the disturbing forum night

i think you each think i am talking about you...i am talking about bush

if i say something mean it ish about BUSH
not you!!
i dont say mean things to ppl

only bush

aah!
this ish quite the disturbing forum night

i think you each think i am talking about you...i am talking about bush

if i say something mean it ish about BUSH
not you!!
i dont say mean things to ppl

only bush

George Bush is a person. You just failed.

It does not. What successes has feudalism had? How about socialism? Communism? None of them have completed in a hundred years what it takes liberal democratic capitalism a few years to accomplish. Did absolute
monarchy create the lightbulb? Did communism invent suburbia? Was it a theocracy that created the internet? No. All of these were created in systems where humans had control of their own lives.
The shining examples of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Japan and China. It was we that saw the greatest expansion in a few short decades. We that provided people with what the squabbles and inneficiencies of democracy that could not. And it was YOU that have brought these nations to decline. And now it is YOU that is Bigoted, and denies it.

That the people get a chance to decide whether or not they should be governed by a representative or non-representative government.
That they should, but they should have that right to a non-representative government.

The shining examples of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Japan and China. It was we that saw the greatest expansion in a few short decades. We that provided people with what the squabbles and inneficiencies of democracy that could not. And it was YOU that have brought these nations to decline. And now it is YOU that is Bigoted, and denies it.
What are you talking about?

Wow, the very concept of other systems successes goes over his head :rolleyes:

Interesting. I don't want to turn this thread into a US-other country-conservative-liberal-whatever debate, so I'll keep it short.

Since I am not a "pseudo-marxist/commie Bush-hater" makes me a damn militaristic neo-conservative. Interesting logic, or lack thereof. First of all, I am niether a new conservative (the "neo" part), nor am I a true conservative. My beliefs fall more in line with libertarianism. Anyway, the next time you insult someone because they have a different opinion on something, do please try to make it a logical insult so that they don't get a headache trying to figure out what you said.

Thank you so much for your time.

Please dont be mean when i am not mean to you.
I was not calling any of you a militaristic neo conservative, malkyer.
I was calling George W. Bush a militaristic neo conservative.
Please dont be mad!
and i dont think all people should be pseudo-marxist/commie bush dislikers, i think there should be freedom to be affiliated with any political er...affiliation with out the pressures caused by bigotry and intolerance.
I fully support your being affiliated with the ideals of Libertarianism!
And im quite sad and distraught that you think i was insulting you. :(
Im sorry.

love,
Cardi

DISCLAIMER: the author of the forum post above does not wish to offend anyone by throwing insults or names at those persons. And does not wish to be identified as an affiliate of either the Democratic party, the Marxists, or The Communist Party of G.B.
though she did belong to yclusa when she lived in georgia:)
cheers! :p

Wow, the very concept of other systems successes goes over his head :rolleyes:
Well there's a reason for that: they are ineffective. After giving it some thought, the only common system I could come up with (asside from China) was fascism. That did succeed a bit, but at what price? The enslavement of many nations, and a militancy so strong that it led to its own destruction. And if you are suggesting that communism succeeded, you are out of your mind.

China did have Fascism. Our beloved Generallisimo. However you point to single examples to disprove it, Japan I assume. But that means Democracy should be represented by Adolf Hitler. I'll take Salazar thank you.

:confused: George Bush is a person. You just failed.


wtf i said "i dont say mean things to ppl ...only bush.."

heh bush ish monkey!

not a pony..heh


love,
Cardi

China did have Fascism. Our beloved Generallisimo. However you point to single examples to disprove it, Japan I assume. But that means Democracy should be represented by Adolf Hitler. I'll take Salazar thank you.
China under Chiang Kai-shek was never great to begin with, as not much was left by the Quilong or Sun Yixian to begin with. I can't blame that mess on him. But why did Taiwan become an "Asian tiger" after he died?

As for Salaazar, I would never want him. He was just as militant as Mussolini or Tojo. He spent 70% of his nation's budget in trying to preserve his nation's control in his African colonies. Now tell me what good fascism has done us, again?
Edit: Japan wasn't the only victim of its advanced militarism. Antonio Salaazar fell because of it, and so did Benito Mussolini. Tojo's destruction was just the most dramatic and spectacular.

The shining examples of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Japan and China. It was we that saw the greatest expansion in a few short decades. We that provided people with what the squabbles and inneficiencies of democracy that could not. And it was YOU that have brought these nations to decline. And now it is YOU that is Bigoted, and denies it.

The United States saw an immense expansion during and after world war two in an economic sense. We're talking a few short decades, right? So that's three or four. There was large growth between 1945 and 1985.

You provided people with... a sense of superiority? A sense that led those countries to immense growth. I think the United States has shown that it can do the same thing under a democratic system.

Also, you can be fascist and democratic at the same time (I assume that you're talking about a fascist dictatorship). I don't know if the United States counts as a fascism (I think it's at least close). If we had a fascist dictator, would growth be faster? It depends on their motives, but I don't think that fast growth in productivity is worth trading in my civil rights and social freedoms. Perhaps if we had a benevolent dictator it'd be ok, but I can't think of anyone that would be able to fit that discription.

I didn't mention a single party system as the middle ground. That wouldn't work either. No checks and balances and no alternatives for people to vote for means that the government can go from being inefficient to being self-serving and inefficient. That'd be the least desirable of the three.

And look what happened when Portugal abandoned them and they got democracy. They got together and elected a nice communist dictatorship to kill massive portions of the Population. Same thing when the people made their own choice in China. Lovely thing letting them pick.

:confused:


wtf i said "i dont say mean things to ppl ...only bush.."

heh bush ish monkey!

not a pony..heh


love,
Cardi

I'm glad we agree with my conclusion.

That they should, but they should have that right to a non-representative government.

Agreed.

You provided people with... a sense of superiority? A sense that led those countries to immense growth. I think the United States has shown that it can do the same thing under a democratic system.
And you're free to do so, no country should ever interfere with the inerworkings of another's government unless under direct threat. Every time another country has tried to change the government of another or aid another country it only makes things worse.
Perhaps if we had a benevolent dictator it'd be ok, but I can't think of anyone that would be able to fit that discription.
Salazar...Chiang...Metaxas

And look what happened when Portugal abandoned them and they got democracy. They got together and elected a nice communist dictatorship to kill massive portions of the Population. Same thing when the people made their own choice in China. Lovely thing letting them pick.
That's why the rule of law comes first. I actually regard the Singaporean model to be superior for emerging countries: a dictatorship that develops a fair and advanced legal system, creates a capitalist atmosphere, then offers democracy only after people are ready to handle it (which is the stage they are at).
And btw, the communists in China did not recieve popular support. Most fought against them, though not necessarily for the existing regime.

They had immense popular support against Chiangs movement. They took power by strength of number, there was a number of factions within the communist but as a whole they were the majority, and awful leaders.
However no one system works everywhere so explain to me why the whole world has to follow your model. Which might I point out, is much greater tyranny then anything that Saddam was capable.

However no one system works everywhere so explain to me why the whole world has to follow your model. Which might I point out, is much greater tyranny then anything that Saddam was capable.
Becaus everyone is a human, and it works for humans. It combines the best of three things: ownership, representation, and individual determination. Most systems eliminate one, the other, or all three. But all three are essential for a human to be a truely free and productive part of society. The best part for society at large, however, is that if one acts as himself, even if he is greedy and selfish, he is making a great contribution to society. That is tyranny. You are confusing capitalist liberal democracy with unfettered democracy, which faiiiled in Athens, and is currently failing in Venezuela and Russia.

Salazar...Chiang...Metaxas

I'm not familier with the Metaxas fellow. But, correct me if I'm wrong, the other two were fairly ineffective in the growth department. Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the dictator? Although they were kind of benevolent (well, Chiang was pretty hostile toward communists, but I guess we're talking about fascists too), I'll give you that.

Becaus everyone is a human, and it works for humans.
So that electing Adolf Hitler thing was an example of it working for humans
That is tyranny. You are confusing capitalist liberal democracy with unfettered democracy, which faiiiled in Athens, and is currently failing in Venezuela and Russia.
Democracy is not democracy unless they can vote away your capitalism, its an intrinsic part of your own system.

:p :D I'm glad we agree with my conclusion.

Yes as am i!

love,
Cardi

dp

So that electing Adolf Hitler thing was an example of it working for humans ?
No, as that was unfettered democracy. The Weimar Republic had a constitution that was a piece of crap, and there were illiberal policies imposed by its neighbors.
Don't forget, though, that once Hitler came to power, the German state was turning fascist, reaching its apex by WWII. Why did he ally with Mussolini and Tojo, and supported Franco?
Democracy is not democracy unless they can vote away your capitalism, its an intrinsic part of your own system.
But if capitalism is whisked away, civil liberties are nonexistent, guranteeing that democracy will become a tool for oppression of a minority by a majority, as the Weimar Republic was. Capitalism and a strong constitution guranteeing human rights will make such a thing virtually impossible. So in this system, democracy has the limits of not depriving its own people of the rights of life, liberty, and property. Other than that, democracy has free rein.

Now, I am going to bed. But to those that want fascism, I do pity you. You want a system that does nothing but keep you in slavery. It is still possible that you'll get what you want, as history's drama is not over. But once they put you behind the prison walls, don't take defense by wailing "I diidn't mean this!" If you want slavery, at least have the courage to admit it.

Now, I am going to bed. But to those that want fascism, I do pity you. You want a system that does nothing but keep you in slavery. It is still possible that you'll get what you want, as history's drama is not over. But once they put you behind the prison walls, don't take defense by wailing "I diidn't mean this!" If you want slavery, at least have the courage to admit it.


GOOD thing then, that i dont want Fascism isnt it?

heh

love,
Cardi :)

Let's re-examine that list, shall we?
.....
Everyone got that straight? Good.
2] Afghanistan: Fixed Elections?
4] Algeria: fixed elections Dem?.
5] Bahrain: Dem ???
6] Egypt: allegations of Fixed Elections....Dem?
7] Jordan: Dictatorhip
8] Kuwait: Dictatorship
1] Israel: Democracy ...issues with minority vote.
9] Iran: Democracy...religion issues.
3] Iraq: US installed Puppet...War torn country ...
10] Lebanon: War torn country ...
11] Libya: Dictatorship
12] Morocco: Dictatorship
13] Oman: Dictatorship
14] Qatar: Dictatorship
15] Saudi Arabia: Dictatorship.
16] Syria: Dictatorship
17] Yemen: Representative Democracy ???

If you don't like them, why do you buy their oil?

Technically advanced states should be able to reduce dependability on oil insofar, as to be able to continue economic growth without having to support Hitler and the like.

aah!
this ish quite the disturbing forum night

i think you each think i am talking about you...i am talking about bush

if i say something mean it ish about BUSH
not you!!
i dont say mean things to ppl

only bush
Ah. Ok then. Carry on.

The shining examples of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Japan and China. It was we that saw the greatest expansion in a few short decades. We that provided people with what the squabbles and inneficiencies of democracy that could not. And it was YOU that have brought these nations to decline. And now it is YOU that is Bigoted, and denies it.
Anthrus is a US facist. His idea of the perfect world is everyone under the US jackboot.

With Iraq's voting, if all is successful there with the voting process, that will bring the Middle East's list of democratic nations to three, which are
1) Israel
2) Afghanistan
3) Iraq
Still, there are some 24 countries in the area that are non democratic, what countries do you think need democratic governments the most, and why?Are you dreaming? Democracy does not ensure civil liberties. And neither Israel nor Afghanistan have functional societies. Israel does not respect human rights and Afghanistan is a terrible joke altogether.

The democratic countries here have more trouble with terrorism than any of the others. Being allowed to openly recruit opposition to the government in such violent countries is just stupid. No African country has a successful democracy either.

As for the US supporting its own oil usage. Right now it uses more than twice as much oil as it can produce. The only two countries that can make up the shortfall are Saudi and Iraq. It does not just mean giving up your car or stocking your shop shelves as much, but how about everything made from plastic. Hmm. Wooden computer cases and back to silk stockings.(do you call them hoes?) Oh no there goes the rainforest.

I agree, the thinking that perhaps DEMOCRACY should not be mandated.

That is an oxymoron. Democracy cannot be mandated, by definition. Only its absence can be mandated.

Suggestion: Syria and Iran.

However, all we need to do is just provide some support. Once things settle down a bit, the Iraqi Kurds will help the Kurds in Syria, and the Iraqi Shia will help the Shia in Iran. Freedom is infectious.

Democratic Reform would be great if it wasen't administered by the blastered American Army!

Democratic Reform would be great if it wasen't administered by the blastered American Army!

If not, then who?

You don't think that waiting fro two or three decades to give others a chance to act is enough?

Ah. Ok then. Carry on.


Glad we can finally not be angry!

I am having a stonkeringly brilliant day then.
hows it with you?

mates are we?
hope so..
political differences aside!


love,
Cardi :D

Democratic Reform would be great if it wasen't administered by the blastered American Army!


Im going to erm..join the israeli army and erm..get a yarmulke thats olive colored and says ISRAELI ARMY and the hebrew equivilant!

itll be wicked awesome damn..


love,
Cardi..

yeah i think the american army's rubbish and they should sod off the iraqis

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Americans should mind there own business and the gun-ho american soldiers should learn friend or foe not fire and forget.

:mp5: :mp5: "Quick it's moving! Kill it!"

Oh and American stay away from Iraqi's natural resources! Your the bums for wasting all your own. And who would put their largest naval fleet in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, Pearl Habour was just waiting to happen...

"If we do not learn from our mistakes, we are doomed to reapeat them" something the US Govt. doesen't do. Ahhh and the Slaves, that is amazingly barbaric thing to do.

Off topic but there you go...

I have no problem discussing these facts if any one wants too...

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Americans should mind there own business and the gun-ho american soldiers should learn friend or foe not fire and forget.

:mp5: :mp5: "Quick it's moving! Kill it!"

Oh and American stay away from Iraqi's natural resources! Your the bums for wasting all your own. And who would put their largest naval fleet in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, Pearl Habour was just waiting to happen...

"If we do not learn from our mistakes, we are doomed to reapeat them" something the US Govt. doesen't do. Ahhh and the Slaves, that is amazingly barbaric thing to do.

Off topic but there you go...

I have no problem discussing these facts if any one wants too...

"Sir! They are attacking!"

"Who?"

"The flamebaiters!"

"OMFG! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!"

"Sir we, uh, still have the anti-flame cannon..."

"Oh yes! Use that!"

*boom*

"That should work."

i concur!



again!


MIND YOUR OWN BLOODY BUSINESS AMERICA! :sniper:
and leave the uk out of it too!


love,

I'm an American and I think we should keep our noses well out of other countries' politics (unless we're asked, or something, and even then it would depend on the situation.) Funnily enough I've heard almost as many people here in England criticise the US for isolationism as I have for the 'world police' mentality, so it does often feel like we can't win no matter what we do. I'm a big believer in sorting out the plank in one's own eye before fiddling with the speck in someone else's, personally, so I favour a more isolationist approach. We can go ahead and create a perfect world when we've figured out how to make a perfect country, not before; and last I checked there were still problems in the US. (Please note, this isolationism does not extend to things like sending foreign aid to victims of natural disasters and things - if we can afford it, which I think we can, we should help people in countries that can't. That said, I think it's often best to provide that aid through charitable non-government sources to avoid food and supplies getting stockpiled by corrupt governments rather than going directly to the people who need them. If Zimbabwe were hit by an earthquake or something I wouldn't trust Mugabe to give oxygen to his dying mother, let alone to send food and medicine to poor people who may or may not really support him.)

It's true that a lot of the democracies in the Middle East are corrupt, but so are a lot of the democracies in the West - how many people feel that between slush money, special interest groups and voter fraud the US elections were more than a little skewed? Capitalist democracy isn't a perfect system; it just tends to work better than others because it relies on human greed and self-interest as the dominant force. From a purely ideological point of view communism is probably preferable in that it seeks equality for all, but it falls down in practice because it requires people to be self-sacrificing and not desire great wealth or power. As soon as someone gets wealth or power (they're more or less interchangable), it falls down and becomes a dictatorship, or a 'master-servant' style state again.

The US has to stay in Iraq for a least a while longer because we made the mess and we have to clean it up. But unless we're actually being invaded I don't want to see the US engaging in any more "liberations" any time soon.

Isn't that in there somewhere? Well, anyway...

How about we sit back and see how things stew? We already know Isreal has been a huge destabalizing power, not so much because it's Jewish(and they HATE Jews) but because it's POWERFUL and JEWISH. That's just adding insult to injury to most of them. Isreal is powerful, at least moreso than it's neighbors, because it is alot more democratic than they are. So, we take out one of the military and political 'leaders' in the region - Iraq - replace IT with a democracy, and see if we can't destablize the whole region enough that democrats take over everywhere on their own.

And as for those of you screaming bigotry at the mere mention that this part of the world is a cess pool, get your head out of your arse! Comparing Iran to the US is simply idiotic, no matter what political point you are trying to make. Wah, wah, your guy lost the election, that MUST mean this entire nation is a Theocracy. Boo hoo.

-j

Im joining the Israeli army..

its like a Jewish thing..

love,
Cardi ;)
You have my full support and prayers as a Christian.

So that electing Adolf Hitler thing was an example of it working for humans

Democracy is not democracy unless they can vote away your capitalism, its an intrinsic part of your own system.
Hitler was never elected he was appointed by the Chancellor to stave off a civil war.

You seem to miss the point that after WW2 it was the Marshall Plan from the yanks that rebuilt West Europe and Japan and hugely benifited China. It was money and equipment from the yank factories that did the rebuilding and kept the people alive until they could support themselves. A MAJOR fact that people like you and France like to forget. It is like denying your parents had anything to do with raising you after all the resources they commited to keeping you alive! Go to Berlin you can still see what the Facists did to the country since the Communists never helped the East Berliners rebuild. Great systems! Even the Chinese Intelligence community will admit that they would have not been anywhere near their present level of tech if they had not stolen everything from the yanks.

As much as I am remiss to admit the yanks are good for the world they have been able to do alot of good for al,ost everyone.

Isn't that in there somewhere? Well, anyway...

How about we sit back and see how things stew? We already know Isreal has been a huge destabalizing power, not so much because it's Jewish(and they HATE Jews) but because it's POWERFUL and JEWISH. That's just adding insult to injury to most of them. Isreal is powerful, at least moreso than it's neighbors, because it is alot more democratic than they are. So, we take out one of the military and political 'leaders' in the region - Iraq - replace IT with a democracy, and see if we can't destablize the whole region enough that democrats take over everywhere on their own.

And as for those of you screaming bigotry at the mere mention that this part of the world is a cess pool, get your head out of your arse! Comparing Iran to the US is simply idiotic, no matter what political point you are trying to make. Wah, wah, your guy lost the election, that MUST mean this entire nation is a Theocracy. Boo hoo. -j
Actually Isreal is the main stabalizing force in the middle East! If Isreal wasn't there then the Arab countries would be fighting each other just as they have for centuries. Just like Iraq and Kuwait, Lebanon vs Lebanon, and others! Isreal has given all the Arabs someone to focus on and a powerful enough force to discourage war. As for the rest it is next to impossible to understand your point so yeah, sure.....
:headbang:

You seem to miss the point that after WW2 it was the Marshall Plan from the yanks that rebuilt West Europe and Japan and hugely benifited China. It was money and equipment from the yank factories that did the rebuilding and kept the people alive until they could support themselves.

Omega, everyone knows (well most people) that the Marshall Plan was made to prevent West Europe from defecting to Communism. The yanks were just afraid of losing a war they should of kept out of on principle. Im sure Japan would not of had a problem with America's so called "isolationist views" if the U.S did't have a massive naval force assembled not far from their country potentially controling the pacific ocean and some of their trading routes.

Popinjay :headbang: :headbang:

Afghanistan is not in the Middle East. It's in South Asia. It is grouped more so with the subcontinent. The Middle East ends with Iran.

Edit: While Israel may be a democracy, it needs reforms. Many many reforms. Just because a government is democratic, doesn't make it good. Also, many middle eastern governments are democracies, or at least as democratic as the U.S. The U.S. is technically not a democracy, it's a republic. So by your own standards, most middle eastern countries are democracies, being republics where citizens can vote on representatives to parliament. Look on the CIA World Fact Book you idiot.

Second Edit: Yemen is recognized as a democracy for sure. Just because it doesn't agree with the U.S. automatically makes it not a democracy to idiots like yourself.Yemen? Are you joking? I think it is you who needs to spend less attention on the CIA Factbook, which just compiles the technical public-domain information, and a little more attention to reality. Did you know that Saudi Arabia, in the height of hypocrisy, is building a wall along the Yemeni border to keep out terrorists?
As far as Israel is concerned, you are thinking as a Muslim and not as a logical human here. Israel is far as away the best government in the Middle East. Any reforms there are needed by the murderous lunatic "Palestinian" Arabs who want to push the Jews back into the sea. They ought to all be moved to Gaza and walled off from the world so they'd shut up. Actually I think it is going to be interesting to see the partition plan go through, because suddenly the world will see that it isn't Israel's fault the Arabs have no economy. It is the fault of their corrupt leadership and their inborn desire to kill rather than work. If Arafat can support his wife on $100,000 a month ( A MONTH!) almost entirely from foreign aid money intended for his "people" (odd because he wasn't even from the area) then you know something is wrong. Maybe, just maybe, Abbas will change things. I doubt it though.

Yemen? Are you joking? I think it is you who needs to spend less attention on the CIA Factbook, which just compiles the technical public-domain information, and a little more attention to reality. Did you know that Saudi Arabia, in the height of hypocrisy, is building a wall along the Yemeni border to keep out terrorists?
As far as Israel is concerned, you are thinking as a Muslim and not as a logical human here. Israel is far as away the best government in the Middle East. Any reforms there are needed by the murderous lunatic "Palestinian" Arabs who want to push the Jews back into the sea. They ought to all be moved to Gaza and walled off from the world so they'd shut up. Actually I think it is going to be interesting to see the partition plan go through, because suddenly the world will see that it isn't Israel's fault the Arabs have no economy. It is the fault of their corrupt leadership and their inborn desire to kill rather than work. If Arafat can support his wife on $100,000 a month ( A MONTH!) almost entirely from foreign aid money intended for his "people" (odd because he wasn't even from the area) then you know something is wrong. Maybe, just maybe, Abbas will change things. I doubt it though.

I think you need to spend less time being racist, and more time looking at the facts. Israeli soldiers shoot little children, and their Prime Minister is a war criminal. Even Sean Hannity, that right wing idiot, said that about Sharon. Yemen is a democracy. You're probably just Jewish, or a wannabe Jew.

Edit: Also, even if Yemen is full of terrorists (I believe it was Yemeni Jew who killed Yitzak Rabin, correct?), that doesn't make it any less democratic. The acts of individual citizens doesn't decide whether or not a government is what is claims to be.

I think you need to spend less time being racist, and more time looking at the facts. Israeli soldiers shoot little children, and their Prime Minister is a war criminal. Even Sean Hannity, that right wing idiot, said that about Sharon. Yemen is a democracy. You're probably just Jewish, or a wannabe Jew. Let me quote that again You're probably just JewishNow who is being racist? And for the record, Israelis have shot little kids, but never on purpose, as opposed to the murderous criminal Palestinians who deliberately target children. They blow up school buses, they shot children in cars, they put their own children in harm's way to score PR points on TV. I am not being racist, I am looking at the facts. I think you need to do the same. Sharon was a war criminal, I won't defend that, but it was 20-odd years ago, and throwing that around as justification for killing Israeli kids is stupid. Unfortunately, it is a typical Palestinian sympathizer tactic to try and change the subject. Condemn the murderers who call themselves Fatah, Hamas and host of other names, and then you might have some moral respectability.

Let's re-examine that list, shall we?
.....
Everyone got that straight? Good.
2] Afghanistan: Controlled by Foreign Military.
4] Algeria: Controled by Military.
5] Bahrain: Dem ???
6] Egypt: Dem? severe allegation of Corruption and Fraud
7] Jordan: Dictatorhip
8] Kuwait: Dictatorship
1] Israel: Democracy ...issues with minority vote.
9] Iran: Democracy...religion issues.
3] Iraq: Controlled by Foreign Military.
10] Lebanon: Controlled by Foreign Military.
11] Libya: Dictatorship
12] Morocco: Dictatorship
13] Oman: Dictatorship
14] Qatar: Dictatorship
15] Saudi Arabia: Dictatorship.
16] Syria: Dictatorship
17] Yemen:No functioning Governement.

2] Afghanistan: Controlled by Foreign Military.
4] Algeria: Controled by Military.
5] Bahrain: Dem ???
6] Egypt: Dem? severe allegation of Corruption and Fraud
7] Jordan: Dictatorhip
8] Kuwait: Dictatorship
1] Israel: Democracy ...issues with minority vote.
9] Iran: Democracy...religion issues.
3] Iraq: Controlled by Foreign Military.
10] Lebanon: Controlled by Foreign Military.
11] Libya: Dictatorship
12] Morocco: Dictatorship
13] Oman: Dictatorship
14] Qatar: Dictatorship
15] Saudi Arabia: Dictatorship.
16] Syria: Dictatorship
17] Yemen:No functioning Governement.

anyone from Bahrain...cos I dont have enough Info.

With Iraq's voting, if all is successful there with the voting process, that will bring the Middle East's list of democratic nations to three, which are

1) Israel
2) Afghanistan
3) Iraq

Still, there are some 24 countries in the area that are non democratic, what countries do you think need democratic governments the most, and why?

You forgot Palestine. Granted they are not a state but they did have free elections.

As for what countries that need democratic Government, I say all of them because that would be the best way to help eliminate international terrorism. Though it'll still be around, it'll be severly limited.

I support your opinion but can we really risk destabalizing these non-aggressive countries?

Non-Agressive?

Syria and Iran are trying to destablize Iraq. Syria supports terrorism as does Iran. Sorry Omega but these two are not non-agressive countries.

I think the US should invade all countries in the middle east and north Africa.
All at once.

HAHA!! I do second this but alas, that'll be suicide and not even our massive sealifting capacity could sustain such a thing.

Yes, I know ... the narrow view is that since other countries are not "my kind" of democracy, then they're not a democracy. By definition, though, the US isn't a democracy either.

Personally I look forward to the day the US gets invaded and occupied by another nation because the US government "ain't quite right".

If the US is invaded, the people that do will have to have massive sea and air lifting ability. Not to mention that they'll have to worry about the civilians because we will not take an invasion lightly.

He should hurry it up a bit. And he should invade China and N Korea as well.

The last time North Korean troops met American Troops, they were tossed out of South Korea. The last time Chinese troops met American Troops, the Chinese lost a million soldiers and were also tossed out of South Korea.

Are you dreaming? Democracy does not ensure civil liberties. And neither Israel nor Afghanistan have functional societies. Israel does not respect human rights and Afghanistan is a terrible joke altogether.

Oh so you don't believe that Israel has the right to defend themselves from terrorists who kill innocent Israelis? The only time Palestinian civilians die Ankher is when the terrorists themselves hide among them and try to use them as human shields.

As for Afghanistan, how is it a terrible joke?

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Careful dude! You'll get a headache. *hands him some Tylenol*

Americans should mind there own business and the gun-ho american soldiers should learn friend or foe not fire and forget.

:mp5: :mp5: "Quick it's moving! Kill it!"

We do know who is friend or foe but sometimes accidents happen in war due to lack of communication and information. It happens all the time in war.

Oh and American stay away from Iraqi's natural resources! Your the bums for wasting all your own. And who would put their largest naval fleet in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, Pearl Habour was just waiting to happen...

Now check your facts. We are not after Iraqi's natural resources. If we were, then we wouldn't be paying high gas prices at the pump. As for Pearl Harbor, there were objections to the move but when the President says move it, it gets moved.

"If we do not learn from our mistakes, we are doomed to reapeat them" something the US Govt. doesen't do. Ahhh and the Slaves, that is amazingly barbaric thing to do.

Oh? As opposed to other nations that don't learn from their mistakes? *Looks at France, England, Portugal, Spain, Germany, Russia, Italy, China, Japan*

Off topic but there you go...

Thanks, I enjoyed knocking it around some.

I have no problem discussing these facts if any one wants too...

Want to take it to Instant Messege?

2] Afghanistan: Controlled by Foreign Military.
Had free and open elections and was declared a success by international monitors! Now helping in the search for Bin Laden

4] Algeria: Controled by Military.
Mostly accurate

5] Bahrain: Dem ???
They are beginning to experiment, albeit limited, with democracy

6] Egypt: Dem? severe allegation of Corruption and Fraud
Democratic for the most part but I'm still skeptical

7] Jordan: Dictatorhip
Monarchy

8] Kuwait: Dictatorship
Monarchy

1] Israel: Democracy ...issues with minority vote.
Issues with minority vote? They didn't interfer with the Palestinian vote and I haven't heard of them stopping minorities to vote. Proof? And yes, your right, they are a democracy.

9] Iran: Democracy...religion issues.
They eliminate candidates that they don't like, mostly reformers. I don't consider them a democracy. They are more closer to a Theocracy.

3] Iraq: Controlled by Foreign Military.
They just elected an assembly to form a constitution. US forces where not near the polls but the Iraqi Police. US military was in standby mode incase they were needed.
PS: The Iraqis control themselves, we're just helping to train their forces and assisting in security.

10] Lebanon: Controlled by Foreign Military.
Yep, Syria's not the US!

11] Libya: Dictatorship
Won't argue here.

12] Morocco: Dictatorship
Thought they were a monarchy

13] Oman: Dictatorship
Aren't they a monarchy too?

14] Qatar: Dictatorship
Monarchy

15] Saudi Arabia: Dictatorship.
Saudi ROYAL Family! Monarchy

16] Syria: Dictatorship
Can make a case for this so I won't quibble

17] Yemen:No functioning Governement.
Pretty much accurate. Could explain why I take them over so easily in SuperPower2! LOL

If the US is invaded, the people that do will have to have massive sea and air lifting ability. Not to mention that they'll have to worry about the civilians because we will not take an invasion lightly.

Yes ... and then when we're called "terrorist insurgents" by the media ... etc etc

Peoples' true colors always shine forth when the shoe is on the other foot.

Yes ... and then when we're called "terrorist insurgents" by the media ... etc etc

Peoples' true colors always shine forth when the shoe is on the other foot.

Nah! If its american Media, I'm sure they'll call us freedom fighters. That is if the media is still on the air. First rule of warfare, take out enemy mass media.