|
| |
|
|  tripledoubles | Dec 12, 2007 10:54pm | | The idea that the US is interested in Democracy in Iraq is preposterous. The US routinely disposes of democratically elected leaders abroud. The last thread breaks. The puppet must fall. |
|
| | | lizzy | Dec 13, 2007 10:16am | | more like hypocracy in Iraq |
|
| 
Sponsor | |
| 
| | akaginajudd | Feb 8, 6:26pm | For the U.S. to spread democracy it has to have democracy. This country hasn't had democracy since every household started owning a television set. Thanks to social engineers we "won" from Germany after WWII we wouldn't know democracy if it walked up and kissed our asses.
PEOPLE THINK THEY WANT HILLARY CLINTON, NO YOU DON'T. FOX NEWS AND CNN CONVINCED YOU THAT YOUR NEIGHBOR DID THOUGH AND SO YOU ACCEPTED IT WHEN THEY GAVE YOU HER AND OBAMA AS THE ONLY CHOICES. |
|
| 
|  z1295 | Feb 10, 11:12am | | Our goverment is full of hipocites yet the vast majority of the population is solely concened with sitting on their fat butts watching America Idol. What a wonderful world. |
|
| 
|  Socman | Feb 10, 12:06pm | 2: Actually, more like paradoxes in Iraq. Hypocracy would require people to feel free to open their mouths to spew what will get them reelected.
4: Actually, we've never had democracy. We're a republic. Direct democracy is the only democracy. Representational only works on the theory that the candidate is an exact replica of the average opinion of his or her constituents. And the electoral college only views the votes of the people as a light suggestion, to be taken or dismissed at a whim--it was only put in there because the people who founded this country were scared to death of democracy, but knew it would win over the people. Even now-a-days, when polutitions use the term word "grass roots", it's all a show because they know that if the people had any real control, they'd be out of the job.
5: Therefore, we have the joke (which is so unfortunately true): If the presidential election was done through a text message, everyone would vote. I think either by the next presidential election, this joke will be put to the test, or they're afraid of what might happen (teen vote).
Now, really, let's not throw every conspiracy theory up in the air, when they're barely related. I don't think we've talked about the issue at all here. Democracy in Iraq.
I think that the level of political instability (which we helped to achieve) is so high that the idea of a political system where the popular census is key would be hysterically terrible. What Iraq needs is stable, long-term leadership. But let's ask why dictatorship formed there in the first place.
People were scared, there was chaos. Presidents offer slow change to make it more orderly. Dictators offer control over chaos. Which would you chose?
The thing that I think would be best for Iraq is socialism. The thing I think would work would be a dictatorship or a communism. It's shit, but it's how things work. |
| |
|
You need to Sign-up for StumbleUpon to post to this forum
| |
|
Anti-War Movement → Discussion
blueflameleo