||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ANNOUNCEMENTS and ARTICLES: http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I like what Wesley said about freedom being a process, not an object. We
can't make them democratic or impose our freedom. Their freedom may mean
something entirely different and it does. Nor can we demonstrate democracy
by example because it simply does not exist in one form and our model has
many flaws. There is also nothing in democracy that requires a
constitution and one was never the object of the "articles of
confederation" to have a constitution nor the will of the colonies to
impose one. I doubt if they had instant balloting they would have had one
in the U.S. And England does not have a constitution. Our constitution
grew to protect minorities, but has as its real objective to protect
wealth.
Iraq must have a federation if it is going to stay together and to
separate it would separate its resources and cause economic problems for
the divisions or it can split up and the most probably consequence will be
civil war.
George Bush wants to be a uniter, but only if some of those who are united
lose their voice. It won't be a democracy anymore than leaving the war
lords out of the government has been in Afghanistan. The American model
could only be imposed by force which is why we will stay there and the
American model requires that we manage the important components of their
wealth, oil and construction, etc. (Unless Kerry gets us out and at this
juncture he says that he will stay the course)
It is my view that a divided Israel/Palestine would also fail for much the
same reason. Palestine can't be viable without the economic advantage of
one state - without water and other resources -- unless it builds the
world's biggest casino (but that is also no longer the novelty it once was
when Morroco had the only one in the Mid-East.
But Michael, the goal of GWB was never to bring democracy to Iraq. That
was an after thought when they failed to find WMD (and the U.S. failed in
its attempt to smuggle in WMD). I believe most people now realize that,
and the real prize has ALWAYS been oil. The left has always been saying
that and even some on the right have admitted it. Now most realize it.
The majority wants a theocracy. Saddam ruled by force and achieved power
with a military coup and was supported by the U.S. to prevent a theocracy.
A real democracy would lead to a Shiite government. The U.S. knows that
which is why there will not be anything but an imposed government; and
they can call it anything they want but it won't be a democracy.
Hank
On Fri, 7 May 2004, Michael McMillan wrote:
>
> I've had a question right along, don't know if there is an answer to it.
>
> GWB said one of our goals is to bring Democracy to that part of the world,
> and I suspect the idea is to make Iraq a Democracy after the American model.
> Now, of course the problem is that these people may very well vote
> themselves another dictator, with the most powerful party being able, either
> directly or through a convenient coalition, to vote in their strongman. This
> strongman might not necessarily be pro-American, in fact given the history
> of the region he's apt to be anti-American. What do we do then?
---
/ o o \ PNEWS Topic Specific Portals (Vortals)
===OO=====OO=================================================
http://pnews.org/vortal/ New World disOrder and Myth Busters
http://g0lem.net/vortal/ Insane Planet and Wacko World
http://g0lem.net/portal/ Bad-Ass Truth and TheGolemsPortal
http://pnews.org/portal/ Naked Truth and PNEWS Portal
=============================================================
\_/ \_/
