IMHF (In My Honest Fact) i think democracy is the best form of government and all countries should change over to it. Aid the US in their foreign policy of Spreading Democracy and protest to your country government to change your country if it's not a democracy. Thanks.
Dear brother, I agree with you that democracy is the best among the existing methods of rule.But still one doubt is there, George Bush said that he is spreading democracy and he murdered millions of people in Afghanistan and Iraq. Do you mean this is the "democracy"?
every form of government has its ups and downs, Otherwise they get outdated Like communism, Really shit for pretty much everyone and all, but there are still some people happy. the US can't just try to invoke its will upon everyone else (as much as they wish they could )
Jafar he just just a case of paranoia. And yes every form has its ups and downs. But we should build on democracy until it straightens out those flaws. trying to straighten out the flaws of the other types of government will take too much time and lives as proven by the example Jafar introduced.
The thing is, Democracy is the worst form of government. Just look at how the Democracy of the Athenians worked out. The blatant truth is that actual Democracy has a government ruled completely by the People, and the People are just too incompetent to rule the country in which they live. Just look at the majority of People out there, and you'd shudder if you think that they would govern your life rightfully and justly. This is why the best government is a Republic. In it, the People get to elect their representatives in the government, so that the government could never be said to oppress the People, even though there are other officials within the government as well that are not elected. That is thankfully how it is in America. The People don't elect the President. The Electoral College elects the President. The People don't get to choose their judges. They do, however, get to elect the Legislative Branch of such government. This ensures that the government is balanced and won't crumble in the heat of corruption. If the President becomes corrupt, the Judicial Branch and the Legislative Branch would still be there to make sure the country doesn't fall. If the majority becomes corrupt, then the Judicial Branch and the Executive Branch would make sure that Congress won't infringe upon the rights of the minority. Society should neither be under a Rule of a Monarch or a Rule of the People, but it should be under the Rule of Law. Of course, many politicians nowadays want to use the banner of Democracy to manipulate the People and make their cause seem prettier, but, of course, Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, and the majority of the countries in the world do acknowledge that Republics are superior over all.
It is by majority, means that it is more in agreeing to... (insert cause or concern here.) So, the majority in that case agreed to slaughter hundreds of people (not millions as you claim, though within time it might reach there as Obama sent more troops) base on national interest. God Bless the system
Actually, there is still furthermore a distinction between a Representative Democracy and a Representative Republic. Some people believe that America is a Representative Democracy, which it also is not. A Representative Democracy is when all officials in government are elected by the People, and that is not so in America. The Executive Branch, after all, has its head being selected by the Electoral College. Even though the People do directly elect members of the Electoral College, the People have absolutely no say whatsoever of the Judicial Branch, whose members are all chosen by the President. The People, of course, would then get their say in the entire Legislative Branch, but the point is that Democracy cannot even be said of America, even in the form of a Representative Democracy. It is all a Republic or a Representative Republic, because all these checks and balances do make the Law, and it is the Rule of Law, and not of the People, which runs the country. So, I therefore find it quite hypocritical for American politicians to want to enforce Democracy on countries that don't have it, when they don't even have nor actually support it in their own country. What they should technically be fighting are the governments that do not have the People their voice anywhere in government, and they should be helping the creation of governments with checks and balances, an equilibrium within them. If not, then the government would surely be taken over by a Dictator, one who has absolute power, which would never have with the Separation of Branches.
Dear, we're not talking about Muslims or any other specific community. Humanity is the main point. Who entrusted America to enforce democracy (!) upon other countries? If all the countries try to enforce their own wills upon others, what will be the consequence. Just try to be just and don't lean to one side always. Think...think...
Jafar it's just one of our foreign policy I think until this so called depression is over, our foreign policy should be isolation.
I think you are referring to Mr. Truman. Sometimes, you have to drop a few bombs on a country to bring them into the modern age. For Japan, it resulted in their ascension to one of the top financial powers on the planet, both peaceful and stable. Bush's problem is that he didn't drop enough bombs, but I think Obama is going to fix that in Afghanistan. Jafar, the answer is Nobody. Democracy does not work for every nation. You need an educated population, otherwise they just elect idiots to office that destroy the democracy(See Palestine). Socialism works better for many nations. US foreign policy is not now, and never has been, to spread Democracy by the sword. We have definitely supported and worked at bringing down various governments abroad based on what we felt was in our national best interests, be those financial interests or military. What you refer to as "enforcing our will on others" when you see US troops on foreign soil, we refer to as protecting our interests at home and abroad. You are quite welcome to whatever form of government you like, even if that means you want a Muslim state that abuses it's own people and rules with an iron fist. I doubt you'll see any Americans enforcing our will on those people, outside of trying to sell them a few McDonalds Hamburgers, until they feel they can aide or harbor those who would attack America without consequences.
That's EXACTLY what you're talking about. Maybe they don't teach reading in the ME anymore? Would make sense, that's the only way people would still be buying into a government and religion that is that oppressive. Read what you said. Bush slautered millions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unless, of course, you didn't type that, that's just the words that popped up on the screen for me
Just one thing, everyone have their own right to decide their foreign policy. This is what the terrorists also say. So only one solution is remaining, all of us should have to suffer because of this kind of 'foreign policy'!!! But keep in mind that noone has elected America as their rulers even if they think so. World is not America, never...
Lol without America most of the developing nations wouldn't be shit. They'd be war torn countries instead of countries that are on their way up. I like how you ignored what I said.
Presidents who ran office during wars tend to get the lowest rating and most biased opinions pushed against them. Try to look pass your own world and into ours. Afghan was war stricken and so is iraq. Sometimes the only way to achieve democracy is through non democratic ways.
Why would an American not dare to speak any way they want? American's are very proud of their freedom of speech, do you not have that where you come from? Regarding America stopping terrorism, I 100% agree. The world will be a lot more peaceful one we rid the world of radicalized Muslim terrorists, and we are working very hard on it. We just caught a scumbag terrorist yesterday that I have no doubt will serve the remainder of his natural life in prison. As a bonus, it seems he is telling US authorities pretty much everything. Hopefully that means we will be dropping a few bombs on some really nasty people in Yemen, or some other country. Thanks for your support. [Edit]I just had a thought. If Muslims believe homosexuality is an offense to god. does that mean this guy is going to hell after he gets sodomized in prison? What about if he just has to give head?
It gets really lonely out on the desert with all them muslim men camp-out at night, I would assume that being gay is okay with Muhamad the great prophet. Haven't many of you seen Muslim walking real close to each other and holding hands? I don't think they like women.
So would I, but I don't think that is what is taught at the Mosque these days. I'm also not trying to say the guy wouldn't like being sodomized, he probably would. I suppose my question is for someone well educated in modern Islamic teachings. Does he loose out on the 75 virgins and heaven if he sucks a cock in prison, or takes it up the ass? If not, what if he enjoys it... What if he changes his name from Abdul to Mrs. Bubba? I think the chances of such an eventuality are good, so if the guy looses his redemption and faith in the process, we can all savor the delicious irony. ** Yes I did just use the word "delicious" in a sentence.