A recent example would be Iraq, it is now a parliamentary democracy. I would suggest doing some research on history if you want other examples.
WTH?? Last time I checked, it's been under communist rule for the last couple of years. Bush forced 2nd and 4th plank of Communist manifesto on them, plus he took away their right to carry arms. Which may not specifically be part of Communist manifesto, but has been consistently implemented by socialists whenever they conquered a another country. Wars are usually fought to start communism, rarely for some other purpose
Unfortunately your opinions and hate for bush don't change real facts, Iraq is a democratic state. I will come back when you are ready to argue facts. I also dont know if you are aware that bush nor the US has been in political power of iraq for years, they have their government, their constitution and their own laws. edit: Could you please cite your source that guns are banned in iraq? And please provide proof that it was there before we came in, you cant take something that was never there.
You are aware that the Iraqi Constitution was given to them and not drafted by Iraqis? Are you telling me that the American forces in Iraq defer to the will of the Iraqi government over their own commanders and the Executive branch of the US?
That is not true, the Iraqi's approved of it before it came in. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/12/AR2005101201450.html That is not political power, our military is protecting Iraq till their army is complete. As the soldiers are not under the command of the Iraqi people, their commanders work with them I stand corrected on the old Iraqi government, Saddam was of the Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party. However, the Greek Civil War is an example of what you are looking for. South Korea was also communist until war happened, they are now a Presidential republic
The TAL helped draft the constitution. It wasn't exclusively an Iraqi endeavor. Protecting Iraq, by following someone outside of Iraq's orders? Which is it. Do the Coalition forces work for the legitimate Iraqi government or the American government? Greece was never communist. It repelled a communist insurgency. South Korea was never communist. After the Japanese left (1945), the Americans put a president in place (1948) and did not allow the South Koreans to participate in national elections (north and south). Got any other examples?
If they didnt want it, they would have voted "no" They do not, but once again, that is NOT political power That however is war ending communism, without war the commies would have came in and taken Greece. Il argue about korea when I have time to further research it tomorow, im going to bed (11:15pm where I am) I gave you a valid example, do your own homework.
They are occupied. Ever heard of gunboat diplomacy? Right, so the American political system drives the deployment and orders of the troops, and that is not political power. It didn't end communism. Communism never started. You gave me 3 invalid examples so far. Sweet dreams.
Did the troops vote on who the president would be? Did they vote on the constitution? Did they vote for any political leaders? They did not, they have no political power, although their leaders to hold political weight, china has political weight on us and they dont rule us I gave you two valid examples, without war communism would have won, it stopped communist. The shirt never said it had to be the established government. However, I remember a war where they kicked out the communist government, the Afghan Civil War.
You've lost me in this argument, the bottom line is that by virtue of it's military, the US is running Iraq. The Iraqis neither have full control politically, and they no longer have an army to defend themselves. This is what you wrote. In order for communism to end, it would have had to have began. I've already proven that Iraq was never communist, Greece was never communist, and South Korea was never communist. Afghanistan is a valid example. Your first. Since you cited many places, I'm sure you won't mind providing a few more. "One" example, doesn't make a rule or allow for the logical progression that communism is regularly overthrown militarily.
This is not the point in the debate, I dont care to argue it any further. I did say that, but I never said it only did that, the shirt makes no statement requiring it to be the established government. The communists would have taken it peacefully if they could have, without war it would have began, war ended the communism movement there. The shirt is what we are arguing either way. You do your own homework, I provided you with examples. If you are not satisfied with my examples, nothing will satisfy you, it will always be "one more?" or it wont count for some reason, I'm done arguing here unless you have something valid to bring to the table.
Something valid? What happened to last night when you were going to look up South Korea? Do you maintain that South Korea was Communist? Can you prove it? If not, you can scratch that one. Then of course you called Iraq Communist, and then later admitted you were wrong. I also proved that Greece was never Communist. They had a communist insurgency, but it was never successful. Big deal, most countries have communist parties, if they are never in power, how can you call a country communist? Stop telling me to do homework. You keep spouting off opinions you can't back up, and when I disprove them through research, you accuse me of intellectual dishonesty. You're right about one thing, this conversation is over. You lost.
Korea was not communist, though without war it would have been Its a valid example. I dont argue that Iraq was never communist, you where right there. The communists went to war to take over, war prevented that one. Not true at all, you ignore them though willful ignorance. War stopped communism from coming in both Greece and Korea, Afghanistan got rid of it though war. One incorrect statement is hardly enough to be "spouting off opinions I can't back up". How so, I gave three valid examples, you ignored two because they wherent the established government and ignored the example you considered valid because I wouldn't provide you with a fourth one. That is ignorance my friend, you have been disproven.
the bottom line is.. liberals think war is good for nothing, but if it weren't for war their gay a** wouldn't be sitting in their house (or basement) posting on a forum without the freedom that other men died for.
Untrue. Many conservatives throughout history have been anti-war. The Democrats have been the war party of America.
well regardless of the political party the modern liberal mindset is what i was referring to. obviously the beliefs of each party have crossed over through time so it wouldn't be the same as decades ago
I think a fundamental flaw in neo-conservative thinking, is that we have to continue to fight for freedom. We have to continue to fight FOR the freedoms already won or the battles were meaningless. War is the King's way of enslaving the people, either through draft, taxation or limited civil liberties. The Founders understood this, which is why our Constitution is written the way it is. To prevent the King (President) from being able to start and continue war without answering to the will of the people. This system of checks and balances has been eroding for decades, but was accelerated under Clinton and now Bush. If you want to save America, save America. Not Iraq. Not Afghanistan. Not Israel. Not Britain. Not Germany. Save America. Fix the borders, fix the economy and give people back the freedom of choice to opt out of socialized retirement and education. The American spirit is independence (on individual and collective levels). Not dependence on government, and not aggression under the flag of democracy.