How can you not support democracy?

[peepingdan]

And don't forget Pinochet! We put him in power because we love our dick... uhh...tators. As long as they play nice to us.
Saddam is a whole new story. We KNEW about his billion dollar oil deals, but we were too busy screaming at the UN's Oil for Food program to care. The United States KNEW that Saddam was selling oil to countries like Iran and thats where he got his money with which he supported terrorism against Israel.

[cougem]

Guy who said the CIA installed Sadam, I think he meant Bin Laden.
The confusion between the two pisses me off.

[9mmCensor]

Originally Posted by cougem

Guy who said the CIA installed Sadam, I think he meant Bin Laden.
The confusion between the two pisses me off.

Rightly so.

The aledged link between the two is preposterous.

Bin Ladden hated the Americans for being in the Middle East, and certainly did not link Saddam for giving the Americans an Excuse to be in the middle east.

BS pumped into the minds of people through the wonderful media.

[Lothar5150]

[quote=Incoherent]Sweden?


You’re correct I forgot the Swedes were "neutral" during the war as were the Swiss. I left the Swiss of because they were "neutral" Finland...I didn't want to get into a discussion on their role in WW2. It was just easier to leave them off.

Marcos was supported by the US as was Pinochet of Chile. However, both regimes were under constant pressure to make democratic reforms. The US did not give support to Marcos when he was given the boot. In fact we helped seize a lot of assets that Marcos had hidden in the United States. Unfortunately we had to deal with a lot of these tin pot dictators during the Cold War.

9mmCensor

A) began with the USA and other nations creating the need for liberation
B) and was not solely the USA.

The need for liberation was create by the aggressors which were German not Americans. You can thank the French for the environment which helped bring the Nazis to power. It all goes back to the Treaty of Versailles and the French insistence on draconian reparations.

Germany was democratic WTF the Weimar Republic died and was replaced by a dictator.

Japan – I think it is a shame that we targeted a civilians but difficult to Monday morning quarter back that decision given all the circumstances.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by peepingdan

And don't forget Pinochet! We put him in power because we love our dick... uhh...tators. As long as they play nice to us.
Saddam is a whole new story. We KNEW about his billion dollar oil deals, but we were too busy screaming at the UN's Oil for Food program to care. The United States KNEW that Saddam was selling oil to countries like Iran and thats where he got his money with which he supported terrorism against Israel.

More commentary from the kid whose parents are hippies turned yuppie. I might give your argument a little more credence if you live in one of the communes on the other side of that hill.

Before you get viscously critical of you country consider this, young one, the worst part of Oakland is better than the best part of Basra.

Finally be intellectually honest in this thread. Intellectual dishonesty makes for poor debate.

[peepingdan]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

More commentary from the kid whose parents are hippies turned yuppie. I might give your argument a little more credence if you live in one of the communes on the other side of that hill.

Before you get viscously critical of you country consider this, young one, the worst part of Oakland is better than the best part of Basra.

Finally be intellectually honest in this thread. Intellectual dishonesty makes for poor debate.

Are you going to attack me or my points? What you just displayed was Ad Hominem attacks, a logical fallacy. You just proved me right, congrats.

[nexxo]

I must agree with peepingdan here. If you want to have an intellectual discussion, don't get personal.

But this illustrates the point nicely. I think you're too emotionally involved to maintain a dispassionate discussion about this. That's OK, it's good to feel passionate about something and I know you've got your heart in the right place. I know you want to make the world a better place and that's a good thing.

Yes, democracy is the best form of government available (not brilliant, but the best we have) and I believe democracy is bettrer than non-democracy. I believe civilisation is better than barbarism. But you have to be careful when you start making decisions on how your neighbour should live. They hit their wife and kids? Fine, intervene. They dump their rubbish on your lawn? By all means, intervene. But you don't like, say the church they visit or the way they live? As long as they do not hurt anyone, and do not inpinge on your life, it's none of your business. Star Trek (as an allegory) made a big deal about the Prime Directive for a reason.

Just remember, the price of being the good guys is that we have to be the good guys. That is a far more complicated and difficult proposition than it sounds.

[Belenar]

You know my own countries history better that I do then ...
Belgian democracy being a result of AMERICAN pressure? WTF?

The only thing you guys CAN claim here is the fact that you liberated us from the germans,which was a war we didn't even have anything to do with in that first place. You guys came to fight this war on our territory.
But the fact that we're a democracy now, as far as I'm concearned, the Americans don't have anything to do with that.
The first democratic government here was a result of the belgian revolution in 1830, which was a conflict during which we liberated ourselves from external suppressors. During that time, the American's were not interfering with politics here.
And as far as I know, there are stories like this to the French and the Luxemburg democracies too.

So get your story straight before you try to be a hero. It's not because a country is a democracy and you once fought a war in that country, that it owes it democracy to you ...

Comments like this piss me off. And it pisses of the better part of the world. The Americans think they rule the world an that everybody owes everything to them ...
Well, newsflash: This mentality is going to make more and more people dislike the Americans.

We Belgians choose deliberately not to invest a substantial part of our funds in our army ... what do we get for that? Healthcare, Social security and one of the better countries in the world regarding wellfare. You Americans are left without any income when you're without a job, no healthcare, and so on ... Lead by example ... tssssssss. Get your own country sorted out before you go and tell others how to lead.
Go and fight your wars all over the world, investing so much of your own wellfare into them. And use excuses like democracy to go get OIL in Iraq... But don't expect the world to agree with your ways of doing things. There are aother alternatives to solve conflicts. And don't be surprised if terrorists choose your country for some plane-dropping or other terrorist acts.

And for the record. I myself am very proud to be a Belgian. We are the first country that refused to take part in the Iraq war, which was so aggressively started by the Americans. Because we didn't believe in its purpose. No weapons of mass destruction were found there, which was the first reason to start the war, remember? What do they use now as an excuse? ... democracy

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Are you kidding...?
Saddam grabbed power via the Ba'ath party do your home work, the CIA had nothing to do with his rise to power. AK-47…think about it.

Nicaragua is a democracy today because of US pressure and intervention in Honduras and El Salvador... Oh and they are democracies as well.

Cuba...well I'm half Cuban American. Cuba is poor because of Castro not because we put an embargo on the Island. Hell our embargo doesn't bar Canada or any other nation from trading with that dictator...in fact you do. Castro was a vassal dictator of the Soviet Union and now that meal ticket is gone. I guess this proves that Communism is a horseshit economic theory.

Iraq...I'm not going to dignify that with an answer, but IMO thanks for sending the ballots and ink to Iraq.

9mmCensor
Here is a list of countries that are now democratic as a result of US direct military action or diplomatic pressure.

France
Belgium
Norway
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
Austria
Luxemburg
Italy
Greece
South Africa
Venezuela
El Salvador
Honduras
Nicaragua
Chile
Iraq
Afghanistan
Poland
Japan
Philippines
South Korea
Taiwan

[slr]

GREECE owning democracy to Americans!!!

I don't thing there is any page mentioning it in my country's history.
In fact i know that democracy is a Greek word

(Demos = People, Cratia = Hold - > Democratia = People hold the power)

and it was the first country that came up with the idea and first implememded Democracy more than 2500 years ago.
Do i own that to the American governments too??? :shrug:

Belenar is right on this one...Bad comments DO piss people of and make em dislike you.

Pay attention and have in mind that you don't rule the world.

It existed long before the US decided to implement "their" Democracy all around the place and it will exist even after they stop doing that...It's just how things work...

And one other thing.Doing a war to implement Democracy doesn't make you better than a Dictator.
I mean what is the whole idea???
Kill the people so they can vote after...???

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

Are you kidding...?
Saddam grabbed power via the Ba'ath party do your home work, the CIA had nothing to do with his rise to power. AK-47…think about it.

Nicaragua is a democracy today because of US pressure and intervention in Honduras and El Salvador... Oh and they are democracies as well.

Cuba...well I'm half Cuban American. Cuba is poor because of Castro not because we put an embargo on the Island. Hell our embargo doesn't bar Canada or any other nation from trading with that dictator...in fact you do. Castro was a vassal dictator of the Soviet Union and now that meal ticket is gone. I guess this proves that Communism is a horseshit economic theory.

Iraq...I'm not going to dignify that with an answer, but IMO thanks for sending the ballots and ink to Iraq.

9mmCensor
Here is a list of countries that are now democratic as a result of US direct military action or diplomatic pressure.

France
Belgium
Norway
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
Austria
Luxemburg
Italy
Greece
South Africa
Venezuela
El Salvador
Honduras
Nicaragua
Chile
Iraq
Afghanistan
Poland
Japan
Philippines
South Korea
Taiwan

[pHaestus]

The US lost a LOT of credibility in the 60s and 70s. We allowed or aided a lot of really shitty totalitarian and theocratic governments into power throughout the world in the name of "stopping the spread of communism". Why should the world or the people of nations like Iran now believe the US govt is acting only in the interests of the people of those nations? It's typical Bush mentality though: Listen to what I'm saying now and don't compare it to anything I've ever said in the past and in the name of all that is holy please never look at my record in Texas just take my word I'm competent and always have been and I have a plan and the Lord's on OUR side and let's ROLL OUT.

I find Canadian mentalities extremely frustrating as a true conservative from the US, but the idea of the US as a benevolent country spreading seeds of democracy throughout the world out of the goodness of our hearts is laughable. The imagery of the US as the champion in human rights around the world is also amusing. There's a really great chance for democracy spreading and human rights protection. It's the continent of Africa. Why then aren't we involved in that part of the world with hundreds of thousands of troops and a clear plan? Because there is no larger strategic value to that region.

If you get your news from sources other than the US media (BBC for example) then the world's view of our middle eastern forays can be summed up with "bungles and miscalculations". I'd say that's pretty accurate; there were a lot of mistakes made in Iraq for sure. Now we are just seeing the next evolution in spin on the bungling from the Bush camp. Not only was this operation a complete success (never mind the facts it went GREAT), it is a shining example of the triumph of the neo-conservative principles. We should expand this into all parts of the world now! Onward Christian soldiers and whatnot.

Give me a break.

[9mmCensor]

[quote=Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by Incoherent

The need for liberation was create by the aggressors which were German not Americans. You can thank the French for the environment which helped bring the Nazis to power. It all goes back to the Treaty of Versailles and the French insistence on draconian reparations.

The French were not the only ones in 1919 to make conditions for WWII ripe. And if they were, why didn't anyone stop them?

[Vector86]

back to the original question posed "How can you not want democracy?", the answer is simple. Democracy is supposed to mean government by the people; IE the people being governed have to want a democratic system so bad that they fight and die for it (worked well in America). In countries where democracy is being forced upon the people, the situation isn't ripe for democracy since there is no clear majority opinion in favor of it. Any democracy created on a hotbed of opinion will not work.

that's my 2 cents.

[nexxo]

Originally Posted by Vector86

back to the original question posed "How can you not want democracy?", the answer is simple. Democracy is supposed to mean government by the people; IE the people being governed have to want a democratic system so bad that they fight and die for it (worked well in America). In countries where democracy is being forced upon the people, the situation isn't ripe for democracy since there is no clear majority opinion in favor of it. Any democracy created on a hotbed of opinion will not work.

that's my 2 cents.

You are absolutely right. People value what they had to fight and suffer for, and they fight and suffer for things that they see the value of. True democracy can only be created by the people, not imposed from outside (in which case it is not really democracy, isn't it?).

Hand something to people that they do not really understand the workings of, and the benefits of which only become apparent after some time and investment, and they will simply not run with it.

[HammerSandwich]

Not long ago, I stopped at a fast-food joint for lunch. The 6-man kitchen staff couldn't keep up with the lone cashier, and the manager's participation was limited to cursing at his employees. Rule by the people? I think we can do better than that. There are a lot of under-educated, ill-informed, apathetic, short-sighted, and self-interested people who should have no part in setting governmental policy or direction. "But, HS," I already hear, "that's why the USA is a REPRESENTATIVE democracy." So the same people who can't be trusted to run the country can make informed decisions about who should?

In all seriousness, I see two major problems with the US government's direction over the last, well, as long as I've been old enough to watch. Call it since Reagan.

First off, special interests have distorted the whole idea. Representation doesn't work well when only certain people/groups have access to those representing. Throw some honest-to-God corruption into the system, and even the strongest, best-intended leaders have one hell of an uphill struggle.

Second, the two major parties have become so committed to defeating each other that many issues have lost their shades of grey. Progress through compromise is disappearing, and US democracy really is turning into majority rule. When the presidential vote splits 51-48%, fairly representing all the people requires some middle ground. Does a winner-takes-all mentality allow this?

Perhaps if we seriously address some of the problems within our own government, the rest of the world would be more receptive to our form of democracy. And perhaps not. But the USA would be a better place, and that's something we should all support.

[superart]

IMO, the biggest problem is with the 2 party system. Wev'e had pretty much a 2 party system for as long as the US has existed, and I think it sucks. At least back in the day the 2 parties would at least agree to compermise. Today its more of an all-or-nothing policy.

The problem is, I cant really think of a better way. Would a multi-party system like italy work out better? I doubt it. Multi party systems give greater representation to extremist groups, and are very unstable, so that sucks too, just in a different way.

I agree, we should address the problems in our country, but how? Naturally, if I was in charge it would be better, since everyone knows I'm always right. But, unfortunately I'm immensely lazy and am not up to the chalange, so the question remains, what do we do first if twe want to change the country for the better?

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by peepingdan

Are you going to attack me or my points? What you just displayed was Ad Hominem attacks, a logical fallacy. You just proved me right, congrats.

No, Ad Hominems do not prove YOU are right, they just fallacious. However, I do love how the kids who live off the very cream of our land complain about America the most.

Ok now on to your arguments.

Yes we did support dictators during the cold war. No doubt. However, these regimes were under constant pressure to reform and provide human rights protection and free elections. Pinochet is a great example. Over the years he was eventually pressured by the US into allowing reforms which ultimately led democratic reform and don’t think Pinochet is off the hook for his crimes at the very lest he will die penniless. The same is true of all the Latin American countries which the US intervened during the Cold War, they are all democracies now. Can the same be said of Cuba?

slr & Belenar You miss the point; both your countries are democracies as a result of direct military action not diplomatic pressure. Perhaps you need a reminder that the Nazis did not did not practice democratic government and your countries were occupied by them. If the US had not interceded in Europe you would still be a province of the Reich and there is no denying that. Further, we did help set the conditions for democracy to flourish in Western Europe after WW2. You can not be intellectually honest if discount the direct impact of the Marshall Plan and NATO on the democratization of all of Western Europe.

Belenar- America only spends about 3% of its GDP on its military. $333 billion defense, yes the number looks large because our economy really is that big. Our GDP is 11 Trillion yes Trillion dollars. The military budget is not breaking our backs. FYI in 2004 we spent 4.5% of our GDP on healthcare for the uninsured. Our Social Security issues are a long term issue that we want to fix before it becomes a problem in 20 or 30 years. I know you would like to think we eat out of trashcans in the US but think again. The reason I was giving peepingdan a ribbing is because the median income in Los Gatos is almost $100,000 per year and the median house costs over three quarters of a million dollars.

Lets keep this thing on target this is not the player haters ball.

[9mmCensor]

What percent of the total government expenditures are $333 Billion?

[Lucanus]

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

9mmCensor
Here is a list of countries that are now democratic as a result of US direct military action or diplomatic pressure.

France
Belgium
Norway
Denmark
Sweden
Germany
Austria
Luxemburg
Italy
Greece
South Africa
Venezuela
El Salvador
Honduras
Nicaragua
Chile
Iraq
Afghanistan
Poland
Japan
Philippines
South Korea
Taiwan

Sweden? I'm from Sweden myself, and rather interested in history. According to every single history book I've ever read the USA has never been a part in any of Swedens foreign disputes...

Sweden has been officially neutral since 1812 (a law declared by the king). One that still applys to this day.
We were one of the first countrys in the world to adopt democracy as form of government.
Louis de Geer became our first Prime Minister in 1876.
Last war we were in was a petty little argument over weither or not Norway should belong to us or not. All in accordance with a peace-agreement signed with Denmark (Norway belonged to Denmark back then).
Having argued about it for a couple of months, without a single shot ever fired, we decided to call it a day and left the norwegians to their own devices. This was in 1814.

We've enjoyed the pleasure of almost 200 years of uninterrupted peace, largly due to our foreign policy. At no time, except for a brief period during WW II, have we been at risk of being invaded. That time by nazi Germany.. owever, that invasion never came - and it was NOT becuase of the USA, it was due to a couple of things:
1. Despite, or should I say because of, our neutral stance we let Germany transport military equipment over our borders untill we closed them in 1943. We also supplied the English with ballbearings (Swedish invention by the way, "SKF" ring a bell?)

2. We had nothing Germany wanted.

3. Rumor has it that Eva Braun, Hitlers mistress (and later on wife) had distant family from Sweden, cousins or whatever.

For whatever reason - the invasion never came. And by late 1943, early 1944 it was game over for Germany anyway - largly due to having to fight a 2 front war.

Anyway, now that we've cleared up that misconception.. on we go..

Germany.
Germany is not a democracy due to US influences, in fact - half the country suffered under a Soviet based communistic regiem for almost half a century largly due to actions taken by the US. The democratic Germany we know today owes it's " democratic freedom" mainly becuase of two things, the fall of the Soviet Union and the people of East Germany's individual thirst for freedom.

Japan:
Japan is a democracy, not due to US action, but a fortunate result of US re-action.
Had they never attacked the US at pearl harbour - chances are they'd still have imperial rule. In all honesty and fairnes, the US simply can not take credit for the end result. Even though it's nice to tell yourself you can, or should, or whatever..

South Africa

Their way to freedom is a result of miltiple nations being involved in changing apartheid into democracy. They had thief first democratic election in 1994 after more than 20 years of struggle. Nothing much changed untill the west opened thier eyes - or perhaps "wallet" is a more suitable word - in the late 80's, as the story of Nelson Mandela and ANC made it's way to our television sets.
If ANYONE person, nation or organisation should take credit for the liberation of black people ,and equal rights for all, throughout South Africa - it should be Nelson Mandela. Not the US or anyone else.

South Korea and Taiwan are... well... let's say "debatable". But to say that Sweden, Germany, Japan or South Africa have democracy becuase of the US is just plain ridiculous.


Anyway,.. Now that we'r done that that - on we go...

On the subject at hand...
Since the US model of democracy differs enormously from ours it's hard to have a democracy vs. non-democracy discussion with an american. For your enlightenment - we have a milti party democracy. No party has gotten 50% or more of votes for decades now, so all the partys pretty much have to compromise to get any work done.
This is far from perfect as it takes ages for the partys to come to an agreement on how to vote in the "Riksdag" to get a bill passed (our equivallent to the american Senate).
On the good side every body has thier say, and atleast have a decent chance of getting will. 'Compromise' being the word of the day.
And I'm rambling... What I was about to say is this:

If our nations history has taught us anything it is that democracy or any other form of government for that matter can only come from one direction - and that is from the people up. They (WE) must want it. Simply storming in with guns and shoot anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't a solution.
Sweden used to be like that, we were a super power once, most of northern Europe including large parts of what today is Russia used to belong to us. Heck, we were 2 weeks away from putting a swede on the Tzars throne in Moscow but he was assassinated on the way there...
We did quite well for ourselfs, for about 150 years or so untill we've reached a point where we had alienated most of our neighbours or old allies, spent all our money on the military, large parts of the poulation starved and the costs of war had brought us to the brink of bankrupcy.
So we were forced to give it all up and withdraw from Denmark, Norway, Poland, Germany, Russia and Finland (which by the way still has swedish as official language).
Granted our wars was faught for greed, pride, land, wealth and influence - but the lesson is the same...

War (or call it 'disarmarment by force' if you like) isn't the solution.
Democracy must come from inside. And the international community can help by providing mediation or with peace keeping forces if need be. But we simply can not let ourselfs sink so low or become so brainwashed that we believe that the way to freedom can come from the barrel of a gun, in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter. And by the looks of it, Iran is next on Bush's list.
With a war-monger like that at the wheel - I'm honestly worried he's gonna start something he can't stop. If the US goes into Iran, we might very well be facing the next big one... the one ending with III.

Anyway.. Have a nice day

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by 9mmCensor

What percent of the total government expenditures are $333 Billion?

About 17% of the budget

[MadHacker]

I duno... 333 Billion will buy a lot of healthcare and education...
I would not call it on defence though... I guess agressive defending is what you would call attacking?

[slr]

Well i do not think i miss the point here.

FYI Lothar the direct military action in my country against the Nazis was started by Greeks not Americans.
I know my history...my grandfathers fought that war and one thing that they taught me is that the weren's sitting like ducks waiting for someone to come and free them.
They fought for their freedom because THEY wanted it.

AFAIK Americans did much more damage than good to my country and the region in which i live...
It was 1967 when a Colonel Papadopoulos decided that dictatorship was the way to go for the country with the excuse that communism was spreading throughout the world and that he wanted to save the country.
Now we both know who supported dictators in this period and was against communism don't we...
And this was something that the generation of my father fought for...not the Americans that put him there in the first place.

The foreign policy of Papadopoulos was bs especially with Turkey and in a moment of tension ther government found the opportunity to invade Cyprus and split it in 2.
I bet you know the results...

And to end my thoughts do you have any idea how bad it sounds to say that US government supported dictators but the countries were always under control in order to reform them and make them democratic and then judge the dictators that YOU put there in the first place for what they did???

I mean what is the point??? :shrug:

Originally Posted by Lothar5150

No, Ad Hominems do not prove YOU are right, they just fallacious. However, I do love how the kids who live off the very cream of our land complain about America the most.

Ok now on to your arguments.

Yes we did support dictators during the cold war. No doubt. However, these regimes were under constant pressure to reform and provide human rights protection and free elections. Pinochet is a great example. Over the years he was eventually pressured by the US into allowing reforms which ultimately led democratic reform and don’t think Pinochet is off the hook for his crimes at the very lest he will die penniless. The same is true of all the Latin American countries which the US intervened during the Cold War, they are all democracies now. Can the same be said of Cuba?

slr & Belenar You miss the point; both your countries are democracies as a result of direct military action not diplomatic pressure. Perhaps you need a reminder that the Nazis did not did not practice democratic government and your countries were occupied by them. If the US had not interceded in Europe you would still be a province of the Reich and there is no denying that. Further, we did help set the conditions for democracy to flourish in Western Europe after WW2. You can not be intellectually honest if discount the direct impact of the Marshall Plan and NATO on the democratization of all of Western Europe.

Belenar- America only spends about 3% of its GDP on its military. $333 billion defense, yes the number looks large because our economy really is that big. Our GDP is 11 Trillion yes Trillion dollars. The military budget is not breaking our backs. FYI in 2004 we spent 4.5% of our GDP on healthcare for the uninsured. Our Social Security issues are a long term issue that we want to fix before it becomes a problem in 20 or 30 years. I know you would like to think we eat out of trashcans in the US but think again. The reason I was giving peepingdan a ribbing is because the median income in Los Gatos is almost $100,000 per year and the median house costs over three quarters of a million dollars.

Lets keep this thing on target this is not the player haters ball.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by Lucanus

Sweden? .
And I'm rambling...

Yes you are, please read post #29

Originally Posted by Lucanus

What I was about to say is this:

If our nations history has taught us anything it is that democracy or any other form of government for that matter can only come from one direction - and that is from the people up. They (WE) must want it. Simply storming in with guns and shoot anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't a solution.
Sweden used to be like that, we were a super power once, most of northern Europe including large parts of what today is Russia used to belong to us. Heck, we were 2 weeks away from putting a swede on the Tzars throne in Moscow but he was assassinated on the way there...
We did quite well for ourselfs, for about 150 years or so untill we've reached a point where we had alienated most of our neighbours or old allies, spent all our money on the military, large parts of the poulation starved and the costs of war had brought us to the brink of bankrupcy.
So we were forced to give it all up and withdraw from Denmark, Norway, Poland, Germany, Russia and Finland (which by the way still has swedish as official language).
Granted our wars was faught for greed, pride, land, wealth and influence - but the lesson is the same...

War (or call it 'disarmarment by force' if you like) isn't the solution.
Democracy must come from inside. And the international community can help by providing mediation or with peace keeping forces if need be. But we simply can not let ourselfs sink so low or become so brainwashed that we believe that the way to freedom can come from the barrel of a gun, in Iraq or anywhere else for that matter. And by the looks of it, Iran is next on Bush's list.
With a war-monger like that at the wheel - I'm honestly worried he's gonna start something he can't stop. If the US goes into Iran, we might very well be facing the next big one... the one ending with III.

Anyway.. Have a nice day

Was Sweden a democracy when it annexed its neighbors? Did your King allow free elections? I think the motivation of your leaders during your “Super Power” period were driven by personal ambition. I think you are comparing apples and oranges.

Iraq has had its first election so that it can write a constitution. You can’t deny the tremendous turn out. You think that well organized tyrannical states fail from the inside? Or that there can be a popular uprising? Give me a break. I've seen the fascist state in action. It is impressive what it will do to the ordinary person. After a generation people will not take a crap without permission.

Bush is playing the crazy cowboy to give you (EU) more leverage diplomatically. Besides that theocracy may fail on it's own at any minute. Almost 80% of the population is under 30 and they are sick of the Mullahs dictating to them. Now this is an example were a popular uprising may happen. Non-fascist authoritarian state with political divisions. On the other hand fascist states like Ba’athist Iraq, Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia or Castro’s Cuba will never fail on their own. They work too well.

[DryFire]

What we need are som politicains who arn't so worried about approval ratings that they don't do what's best for the country.

however the people's approval also keeps some of them in line.

[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by MadHacker

I duno... 333 Billion will buy a lot of healthcare and education...
I would not call it on defence though... I guess agressive defending is what you would call attacking?

Did you bother to read the part about us spending more on health care....

slr are you a democracy now. Do you think the Soviets had democracy as their ultimate aim. Ask anyone north of your country.

[BalefireX]

It appears the general consensus is that democracy is good, unless the United States had anything to do with it, in which case democracy is bad.