a Democratic form of government. Why should they, they don't even know what it is? It goes against their history. It goes against their religion. So how can we "guarantee" they will have a Democratic form of government? What happens when we leave (if ever)?
I'm tired of hearing about a "democratic form of government that will change the landscape in the Middle East." No it won't. Otherwise all the Iraqis would be flocking to Turkey if that is the form of government they wanted.
But maybe the people in Iraq don't Want...
Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by LadyEagle, Nov 12, 2003.
Page 1 of 2
-
-
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
We tried from 1920 to the mid-1950s - didn't work then, won't work now.
Yours in Christ
Matt -
-
ah - but you guys don't understand the logic behind the neocon position.
The neocons have been heavily influenced by writers like Fukuyama - his book 'The end of history and the last man' argues that representative democracy is the ultimate form of government and that it fits the most closely with the nature of man. By their logic everyone wants democracy, there can be no argument in their minds over that point. -
Matt said:
Remember, we made a success out of South Vietnam after the French bungled it ...
Actually, I think the Iraqis do want a democratic government, though not necessarily what we might consider a democratic government to be. They certainly don't like the folks who are in charge (well, so to speak) now. -
Remember, we made a success out of South Vietnam after the French bungled it ...
</font>[/QUOTE]We made a success out of South Vietnam??? This was an attempt at humour, right? -
One of the problems with imposing a democracy on another country is that we have no intention of allowing a true democracy. What we want is for them to choose their representatives from a pre-approved list made up by us.
What in Islam precludes a democracy any more than in Christianity? -
The Iraqi people have a right to govern themselves. If they choose a democractic form of government, then that's their right. If they choose a theocracy, that is their right as well (although I doubt this will happen. There's a significant amount of cultural & religious diversity in Iraq. The Kurds, Sunni's, and Shiites all have different practices. It's hard for us to see, because we often think of all Muslims as being the same, but that's like saying Mennonites, Quakers, and Pentecostals are all the same). If they choose a hybrid form of government, then that is their right. The point is, they have the right to choose how to govern themselves. We can tell us what works for us, but we don't have the right to choose it for them.
-
-
Our occupation and imposition of a democracy on Japan worked.
-
Just a question, not an opinion. -
The Athenians put together a small empire once. They imposed democracy by force on numerous other city-states.
They ended up being hated and defeated by their enemies who only wanted to be left alone to live life their way.
We should proslytize for democracy, but not try to impose it. -
It's human nature not to want outsiders telling you what to do, even if they are right.
Sort of like a house guest "helping" in the kitchen. They may have good ideas, but it's your kitchen, and you like it the way you do it. After they leave, you re-consider and realize that they had some good suggestions.
And, house guests aren't killing a few of your family to get the point across and spending hundreds of billions of dollars of other peoples' money to improve your kitchen. Furthermore, you invited them and they will leave if you just ask. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
The Arabs are a very backward people. But I agree that it is not natural for Islam to adopt a republic-style of government. For one thing, the American republic is based upon the fact that liberty and individual rights come from God and not from the government.
Islam does not have that sort of idea. Allah (actually Satan)is a fearful being and he does not grant his children anything but blindness. There is no liberty under Allah but only slavery to sin and bowing to Mecca.
Now Bush is beginning to see that his high-sounding words are wasted on Iraq. Iraq is to the USA as Palestine is to Israel. No more talk of restraint to Israel. The talk now is give Iraq back to the Arabs right away and get out. We really only want a change of government. One wonders why Bush doesn't call for martial law in Iraq until the attacks against us stop? Do we have another case of "rules of engagement" whereby the USA fights with one hand tied behind Uncle Sam's back? MacArthur is right--there is no substitute for victory.
No, the Arabs probably do not want a free form of government. They have had thousands of years of oriental despotism where the religion of the day and the head of state were tied together in the administration of bloodthirsty cruelty. If they could vote, they probably would want more of the same. Islam itself is a barbaric religion. -
Of course the "democracy" thing was brought to the front after the deceptions about 9/11 and WMD's were exposed. As this too falls I wonder what will be next.
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
We are in a terrible war, and, as usual, certain groups--I won't name them but they are about the same as they were during the Viet Nam war--do not care what happens except that they want power. They must be forced to tell the truth in their steamrolling to the White House. Do you think that Barbara Streisand and her husband care one bit about truth? They hate America the way Palestinians hate Israel. And they have gotten filthy rich here.
-
We are still responsible for protecting them, militarily speaking. Do we charge them for that or eat the cost as part of the deal? -
Certainly more than the present administration which is still lying and still not giving the committee investigating 9/11 access to necessary documents.
They didn't use public office to declare eminent domain over private property and then profit obscenely off it. -
Matt Black Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Yours in Christ
Matt -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
You would probably agree that Iraq will not likely ever be a representative government. The Arabs cannot afford to be open about the kind of society that Islam produces. If England keeps going left, England may end up Englandistan. Now there are reports that the Queen wants same-sex marriage for England. Wouldn't that be royal? Now we know why her children are so flakey. If the American people follow the Queen's ideas, we will end up an open-air nut house like England is becoming. The leftists in both countries will only speed up the process. Leftists will destroy freedom in America if they get power. Barbara Streisand and her husband are already trying to re-write history in order to destroy freedom and make a buck at the same time. She is a Malibu Democrat--but then most of them are.
No, the Arabs are not interested in representative government.
Page 1 of 2