NationStates Jolt Archive


"No Democracy for You!"

Liuzzo
25-10-2006, 19:00
Ah, all those lovely purple fingers we so proudly politicized at the SOTU speech will mean nothing because we will destroy what we have tried to create. "Democracy is on the march" but if you don't choose the democracy we want we'll change it. Before the Iraq war I wondered this very thing...If Iraq is made into a democracy and they chose inept people or terrorists to lead them what then would we do? I knew the answer and according to the "liberal rag" :confused: the Washington Times we have the answer I knew all along.

http://washtimes.com/upi/20061023-091743-9067r.htmhttp://washtimes.com/upi/20061023-091743-9067r.htm
Neo Sanderstead
25-10-2006, 19:03
Democaracy is about more than just the electoral system. Democracies also include ideals of human rights and other values. Which is why governments like Hammass and the Nazis, whilst being democratically elected, are not democratic.
Allers
25-10-2006, 19:04
Democaracy is about more than just the electoral system. Democracies also include ideals of human rights and other values. Which is why governments like Hammass and the Nazis, whilst being democratically elected, are not democratic.

hitler was not elected, he was choosen.
Khadgar
25-10-2006, 19:04
Democaracy is about more than just the electoral system. Democracies also include ideals of human rights and other values. Which is why governments like Hammass and the Nazis, whilst being democratically elected, are not democratic.

Democracy refers only to the election process, not the resultant government.
Rowaun
25-10-2006, 19:10
Client States are great!
Neo Sanderstead
25-10-2006, 19:10
Democracy refers only to the election process, not the resultant government.

Implictly it is linked to the government resultant. Democracy beleieves in the equality of all people, since everyone is given a vote. Thus a party that is openly racist is not democratic as they do not believe in the equaltiy of all people. And thats just one example, there are many others.
Liuzzo
25-10-2006, 19:11
government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

The people have the power to elect who they wish in a democracy. They may elect someone leaders of other countries hate, but that's a democracy for you. Democracies only require that the power be dervied from the people and no one else. If the people want to elect a blood sucking canibal then so be it.
Neo Sanderstead
25-10-2006, 19:11
hitler was not elected, he was choosen.

I did not say Hitler. I said the Nazis, who were elected in.
Allers
25-10-2006, 19:14
I did not say Hitler. I said the Nazis, who were elected in.
the nazi were as much as influent as the communists
Liuzzo
25-10-2006, 19:27
none of the people in the poll have chosen the option the Wash Times says we are actually planning to employ. Let's see how the trend progresses but it would seem that the most likely solution is seems as the worst idea behind even alowing Saddam back.
Neo Sanderstead
25-10-2006, 19:32
the nazi were as much as influent as the communists

At the September 1930 Reichstag elections the Nazis won 18.3 percent of the vote and became the second-largest party in the Reichstag after the SPD. At the July 1932 Reichstag election the Nazis made another leap forward, polling 37.4 percent and becoming the largest party in the Reichstag by a wide margin. You are wrong. And to top it all you cannot spell
RLI Rides Again
25-10-2006, 19:33
I'm reminded of a particularly funny sketch on 'Bremner, Bird, and Fortune' (a satirical British TV programme) not so very long ago. The sketch involved an interviewer asking a representative of the government how they planned to deal with the anarchy in Iraq. The representative replied that invasion was the only practical option, and so all Coalition troops were to be pulled out of Iraq before invading again. "But this time we're going to do it properly".
Yootopia
25-10-2006, 19:48
Let the struggle for what they like. Let them have Saddam if they want, but don't force it.
Allers
25-10-2006, 19:55
At the September 1930 Reichstag elections the Nazis won 18.3 percent of the vote and became the second-largest party in the Reichstag after the SPD. At the July 1932 Reichstag election the Nazis made another leap forward, polling 37.4 percent and becoming the largest party in the Reichstag by a wide margin. You are wrong. And to top it all you cannot spell
i know i can not spell,that is why i like berlin
can you get the communist score then?
Yootopia
25-10-2006, 20:32
i know i can not spell,that is why i like berlin
can you get the communist score then?
Yep - they got 89 seats in July and 100 in November.
Rhaomi
25-10-2006, 20:48
If we really supported democracy in Iraq, we'd pull out soon, which is what the majority of people both there and here want. The fact that we're staying stubbornly even in the face of our own military intelligence bespeaks our true intentions.
Fair Progress
25-10-2006, 22:43
I have a strong despise for dictatorships of any kind, but it's up to whoever thought it was a good idea to clean up the glue that held all those different-minded people together to leave the country "running". It's quite obvious that no good will come from letting a bunch of "tribes" slaughter eachother and whoever stands in the middle in order to gain power.
Liuzzo
26-10-2006, 02:30
That's all there is in Iraq now. You have to pretend there is a formidable government that truly has control over the people and their security. As of now there is no security and they can't even keep power on in the green zone for more than 2.5 hours a day. Every indication is that the war in Iraq is making the hatred for American and her allies worse. In turn this promotes the global jihadist agenda. Hell, didn't Bin Laden state years ago that his mission was to drive the west from Arab lands, most significantly Saudi Arabia? It's the occupation and muddling in their affairs they find so offensive. The enthnocentrists always believe their way is better and it is their right to force this on others. Democracy cannot be forced, it must be fought for by those who desire it. While we may have the "best" of intentions our methods usually wind up biting us in the ass. Case in point? Giving the Afghan Mujhadeen 6 billion in 1989 only to let it grow into Al Queada. Giving Saddam Hussein the materials for WMD to fight Iran only to try and take them from him in 2003. Btw, he didn't have those pesky things but he did "try to kill my daddy." Do you think that the problem may be that we're always trying to manpulate the situation as to what is in our best interest and not in theirs? Is that why we continually find ourselves F'd by problems of our own design? :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:
GreaterPacificNations
26-10-2006, 16:49
I seriously think USA should bail Saddam out and put him back into power on the condition that he is their secret puppet. Nobody would suspect it, and it would be damn useful. The whole world would be laughing at USA for the whole affair, and USA would be laughing with them.
Allers
26-10-2006, 16:53
I seriously think USA should bail Saddam out and put him back into power on the condition that he is their secret puppet. Nobody would suspect it, and it would be damn useful. The whole world would be laughing at USA for the whole affair, and USA would be laughing with them.
ah nation states.
Liuzzo
26-10-2006, 17:45
ah nation states.

Saddam was our puppet at one time when we ghated Iran more. We then began to love Iran because we hated Iraq. Now we're back to hating Iran and liberating Iraq. When will we realize the "stupidity and arrogance" of our ways?