Recommended Posts
QuoteYou can't force democratic governments - the impetus has to come from within. And it is very clear that the middle East these days is not ready for a system like the US's - it's not tolerant enough.
That is part of the problem the world is experiencing.
There are people whose societies are mature enough to have moved past despotism to elected representative government, forced to live right alongside societies that have not come that far and thus are DANGEROUS for many reasons.
If you are in a republic, it's a lot harder to get your country to go forward with a plan to invade and conquer, because there will be disapproval and resistance to that plan from within.
If all you need is some clerical leader of a country making a despotic decision, isn't it easier to order up a war? Isn't it easier to get sponsorship for terrorism to happen?
So, how long should the civilized world wait while the laggers catch up -- or don't even make an effort to catch up?
If your neighbor was storing sweating sticks of dynamite in the shed near the fence that's 6 feet from the corner of your house, is it not in your interest, and your right, to try to encourage him to get rid of it and store more stable stuff there?
It's also like a neighborhood homeowners' association requiring that homeowners can't let their properties fall into disrepair because it brings down the neighborhood. Pressure can be brought to bear, and it's really not wrong in the case of sovereign nations dealing with DANGEROUS sovereign nations and their leaders.
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
Amazon 7
And a WHOLE bunch of those people supported all of that governments ORDERS of their elected officials... seems we did not agree with those ORDERS in 1945 and 1946...
kallend 1,644
QuoteQuoteYou can't force democratic governments - the impetus has to come from within. And it is very clear that the middle East these days is not ready for a system like the US's - it's not tolerant enough.
That is part of the problem the world is experiencing.
There are people whose societies are mature enough to have moved past despotism to elected representative government, forced to live right alongside societies that have not come that far and thus are DANGEROUS for many reasons.
If you are in a republic, it's a lot harder to get your country to go forward with a plan to invade and conquer, because there will be disapproval and resistance to that plan from within.
If all you need is some clerical leader of a country making a despotic decision, isn't it easier to order up a war? Isn't it easier to get sponsorship for terrorism to happen?
So, how long should the civilized world wait while the laggers catch up -- or don't even make an effort to catch up?
If your neighbor was storing sweating sticks of dynamite in the shed near the fence that's 6 feet from the corner of your house, is it not in your interest, and your right, to try to encourage him to get rid of it and store more stable stuff there?
It's also like a neighborhood homeowners' association requiring that homeowners can't let their properties fall into disrepair because it brings down the neighborhood. Pressure can be brought to bear, and it's really not wrong in the case of sovereign nations dealing with DANGEROUS sovereign nations and their leaders.
-
Let's not forget that democracy was invented in Greece about 2,500 years ago. It is not a US monopoly. Among the conditions conducive to such a remarkable occurence, the most important was probably the ABSENCE of a monotheistic, prophetic religion.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
tkhayes 140
I disagree - I do not see "Non-Terrorist" or whatever NON-else anywhere in the definition of democracy. That just happens to be our current state of mind
This "Free" country HAS in the past elected MANY governments that supported slavery and terrorism (I bet the British red-coats would have called the new settlers 'terrorists')
So anyway, my point stands - we ask for democracy, we get it, then we criticize the results. one of many reasons America is disliked around the world - we are meddling in their politics to suit our needs. I think they call it puppet governments when the foreign country 'elects' the leader of our choice.
This "Free" country HAS in the past elected MANY governments that supported slavery and terrorism (I bet the British red-coats would have called the new settlers 'terrorists')
So anyway, my point stands - we ask for democracy, we get it, then we criticize the results. one of many reasons America is disliked around the world - we are meddling in their politics to suit our needs. I think they call it puppet governments when the foreign country 'elects' the leader of our choice.
True.
I've been saying all along that religion (of any sort, really) is an impediment and NEVER an expediter of peaceful coexistence of the world's people.
Look not between different religions; look simply at islam for a good example. These are people supposedly of the same religion, and even there they are fragmented so badly along tribal-type lines that the murder each other, and have for generations. All because of religious disagreements and differences, and within ONE religion, not between different ones!
Religion is major problem. Humans cannot handle it without it becoming a source of strife. My personal feeling is that it should be abandoned, and we should dedicate all of our efforts toward uniting the people of the world toward making life better here. We have to admit there is a lot of work to do. We're wasting an awful lot of time and energy.
-
I've been saying all along that religion (of any sort, really) is an impediment and NEVER an expediter of peaceful coexistence of the world's people.
Look not between different religions; look simply at islam for a good example. These are people supposedly of the same religion, and even there they are fragmented so badly along tribal-type lines that the murder each other, and have for generations. All because of religious disagreements and differences, and within ONE religion, not between different ones!
Religion is major problem. Humans cannot handle it without it becoming a source of strife. My personal feeling is that it should be abandoned, and we should dedicate all of our efforts toward uniting the people of the world toward making life better here. We have to admit there is a lot of work to do. We're wasting an awful lot of time and energy.
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
QuoteI disagree - I do not see "Non-Terrorist" or whatever NON-else anywhere in the definition of democracy. That just happens to be our current state of mind
...
So anyway, my point stands - we ask for democracy, we get it, then we criticize the results. one of many reasons America is disliked around the world - we are meddling in their politics to suit our needs. I think they call it puppet governments when the foreign country 'elects' the leader of our choice.
Is it not true that the despotic theocracies we don't like, don't like US because we are not like them? Is their dislike of us justified, in a way that our dislike of them is not?
Where is it written that just because we like the idea of democratic elections that we have to also like the idea that those elections brought dangerous despotic theocrats to power?
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
QuoteLet's not forget that democracy was invented in Greece about 2,500 years ago. It is not a US monopoly. Among the conditions conducive to such a remarkable occurence, the most important was probably the ABSENCE of a monotheistic, prophetic religion.
Interestingly, Greek Democratic government wasn't free of religion. But I totally agree with your premise. I would go so far as to say that a democracy, or representative republic (which is really what the US is), would be further served by having no reference to religion in its politics at all.
Brie
"Ive seen you hump air, hump the floor of the plane, and hump legs. You now have a new nickname: "Black Humper of Death"--yardhippie
tkhayes 140
Hmm I seem to remember many 'going to war speeches' that said they don't like us because we are 'free' - what a load of crap.
Yes, they don't like us because we are not like them - another of MANY reasons, but certainly not the exclusive reason why they do not like us.
Countries like Norway, Sweden, Poland, whomever else in the world do not meddle in foreign policies, do not set up military bases around the world in foreign countries and do not force their values upon other countries in the name of 'freedom'
I believe these are LARGER reasons why the world dislikes the USA so much. Why do we have military bases in Germany, the Phillipines, almost every corner of the world when so few others do?
We extend and threaten with them. How nervous was the USA when USSR put nukes in Cuba? Would you (we) tolerate a Saudi or Iranian military base in Mexico? Certainly not. But for some reason, we seem to think it is OK to extend our military might around the world without extending the same courtesy or rights to any other country.
Yet another hypocracy.
TK
Yes, they don't like us because we are not like them - another of MANY reasons, but certainly not the exclusive reason why they do not like us.
Countries like Norway, Sweden, Poland, whomever else in the world do not meddle in foreign policies, do not set up military bases around the world in foreign countries and do not force their values upon other countries in the name of 'freedom'
I believe these are LARGER reasons why the world dislikes the USA so much. Why do we have military bases in Germany, the Phillipines, almost every corner of the world when so few others do?
We extend and threaten with them. How nervous was the USA when USSR put nukes in Cuba? Would you (we) tolerate a Saudi or Iranian military base in Mexico? Certainly not. But for some reason, we seem to think it is OK to extend our military might around the world without extending the same courtesy or rights to any other country.
Yet another hypocracy.
TK
tkhayes 140
QuoteI've been saying all along that religion (of any sort, really) is an impediment and NEVER an expediter of peaceful coexistence of the world's people.
at least we agree on something - religion is the cause of all (most ) wars.
If there were no religion there then would be no evil.
QuoteCountries like Norway, Sweden, Poland, whomever else in the world do not meddle in foreign policies, do not set up military bases around the world in foreign countries...
Nor did those countries do the substantial work of defeating communism, which would have spread from the U.S.S.R. unimpeded around the world were it not for our military bases in other countries (which, by the way, could not have been in those countries without the agreement of those countries...).
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
QuoteWhy do we have military bases in Germany, the Phillipines, almost every corner of the world when so few others do?
We extend and threaten with them. How nervous was the USA when USSR put nukes in Cuba? Would you (we) tolerate a Saudi or Iranian military base in Mexico? Certainly not. But for some reason, we seem to think it is OK to extend our military might around the world without extending the same courtesy or rights to any other country.
Yet anotherhypocracy.hypocrisy
We've had those bases in other (willing) countries for an awful long time -- long enough to establish without question that they are not a foray into conquering other countries.
They were put there because we alone had the money, the will and the ability, and the countries that host them AGREED to let us do it (or else it would have been an act of war, no?) and they BENEFIT from them being there, both economically and also in terms of militarily-provided security.
If Iran put a base in Mexico, you could be pretty sure it was there as a jumping-off point for eventual aggression, NOT as a watch-post to make sure we were not going to go after Iran to take over. Ours are proved to be relatively benign. Yes, we do use them as staging areas for campaigns like Afghanistan and Iraq, but NOT for IMPERIAL CONQUERING. We are not putting U.S.-elected leadership in Iraq and harvesting all that the country produces. We are trying to get them set up as a new democracy, one that is not dangerous to our existence. So you can't go calling our overseas bases a threat to places like Iran, etc.
-
-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"
kallend 1,644
QuoteQuoteLet's not forget that democracy was invented in Greece about 2,500 years ago. It is not a US monopoly. Among the conditions conducive to such a remarkable occurence, the most important was probably the ABSENCE of a monotheistic, prophetic religion.
Interestingly, Greek Democratic government wasn't free of religion. Brie
Aah, but I didn't claim that it was. It was free of monotheistic prophetic (aka dictatorial) religion.
The monotheistic prophetic religions have been largely antagonistic to democracy. Christianity and Islam managed to bury democracy (and science) for over 1000 years.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Darius11 12
Iran is not a democracy.
There is a group of Islamic fanatics who approve or disapprove any one at will. Only the ones they approve of get to be on the ballet.
Please note even for one sec. Assume that the majority of Iranians want him as a president.
They had to choose between Rafzanjonie and him most did not vote as a sign of protest.
There is a group of Islamic fanatics who approve or disapprove any one at will. Only the ones they approve of get to be on the ballet.
Please note even for one sec. Assume that the majority of Iranians want him as a president.
They had to choose between Rafzanjonie and him most did not vote as a sign of protest.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain
rehmwa 2
Ever feel like you're caught in a Frank Herbert term paper?
All these social and population pressures - everywhere - hard to breath....
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
All these social and population pressures - everywhere - hard to breath....
...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants
Quote
So we ask them to hold elections. The Palestinians do, for example, and they elect Hamas. Good for them. But now we deny them support and wish nothing but death and destruction on them.
yeah, this one is the key example for the point I think you want to raise. It troubles me a bit that we put so much pressure on the Middle East to get with it on democracy, yet when those people fairly elect hard liners we don't like.... We should be pushing Israel to play a little nicer here too. With the travel restrictions, this government will have to do a lot of teleconferencing.
I think putting Hamas in a put up or shut up mode will moderate them greatly. It's a lot easier to be a PITA backseat patriot, a different matter entirely to actually govern.
I'm not going to pretend our history of supporting elections is anything but suspect, but short of election fraud, we ought to be accepting the outcomes. Makes Bushco's propoganda smell a bit better.
Skyrad 0
They went for the wrong kind of democracy old boy.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
See..there you go ruining a perfectly good Bushbash. It's no fun around here lately.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites