Is America a democracy or a hidden dictatorship?

[Old_Rooster]

Drawing a parallel between a tributary nation revolting from an imperial power and a sovereign nation being effectively annexed by one; how stupid can you be...

not as stupid as you, nor as big a sadsack as you seem to be.

[Old_Rooster]

the dems DID win in Ohio in 2004.  And the republicans sued to prevent the paper ballots from being counted.  in fact, it's STILL being fought in the courts.  Republicans want them destroyed, Dems want them counted.  Statistically, there is a 1 in 50,000 chance that the recount will show Bush won.  There is also a 49,999 in 50,000 chance that Kerry will have more votes.

perhaps someday we'll know.  And of course the job is Bush's to keep.  But I wouldn't mock people who want all the votes counted.  If Hilary cheats her way into office in 2008, I have a feeling a few of the people who poo-poo'ed all this talk now, will suddenly get very interested in vote legitimacy

sure....

[w8tlftr]

If Bush is guilty of war crimes isn't the UN Security and US Congress also guilty for authorizing military action against Iraq?

He lied to them.

Then so did the previoius administration.

If Bush is guilty of all of the accusations you have listed why hasn't he been arrested?

Because of people like you.

Wow. I didn't know I had that much power and influence. Thanks for the heads up. 

How can Bush have lost Florida when the recounts stated otherwise. Even the recounts from such liberal newspapers like the Miami Herald came to the same conclusion.


That's debatable.

Would it have been debatable if Algore had won the recount?

[Slapper]

1-The US has a form of government known as a republic;
2-The US government does use extreme violence in foreign affairs;
3-The US government does invade sovereign countries;
4-The US government tortures;
5-The US government has, is and will break UN resolutions until someone puts a stop to it.

Et cetera.

[Oldschool Flip]

If some here feel it's a dictatorship, then tell it to all the illegal immigrants and maybe they'll leave.

[w8tlftr]

1-The US has a form of government known as a republic;
2-The US government does use extreme violence in foreign affairs;
3-The US government does invade sovereign countries;
4-The US government tortures;
5-The US government has, is and will break UN resolutions until someone puts a stop to it.

Et cetera.

Fvck the UN.

[ieffinhatecardio]

If it were a dictatorship, Rosie O'Fat and the rest of the Hollywood left would have been executed long ago!

Hey, how's it going Mr. Hate? Did you kill anyone today? If not, how many times did you punch the wall or pound your fists on the steering wheel because there are people in the US that aren't exactly like you?

Enjoy that ulcer.

This administration clearly doesn't care about certain areas of the Constitution, it's clearly not a dictatorship but it's willingness to trample personal freedoms is troubling to say the least.

[Hedgehog]

Fvck the UN.

I disagree. The UN has its (great) problems, but its a forum where nations can meet and discuss. It has undoubtely helped bringing our world closer in the last 50 years. I hope it can continue do that, and hopefully it can develop further.

We have to prevent a 3rd world war. A 3rd world war could very well be the end of the world. UN can't prevent it on its own, but it's a start, and a part of the solution, not the problem.

USA, as the leading nation in the world, the superpower, needs to play an active part in UN.

-Hedge

[Old_Rooster]

I disagree. The UN has its (great) problems, but its a forum where nations can meet and discuss. It has undoubtely helped bringing our world closer in the last 50 years. I hope it can continue do that, and hopefully it can develop further.

We have to prevent a 3rd world war. A 3rd world war could very well be the end of the world. UN can't prevent it on its own, but it's a start, and a part of the solution, not the problem.

USA, as the leading nation in the world, the superpower, needs to play an active part in UN.

-Hedge

Thats hard to do after Germany and France spit in our face.  Screw the UN, its useless, they wanted to let Iraq continue to ignore the resolutions.

[Hedgehog]

Thats hard to do after Germany and France spit in our face.  Screw the UN, its useless, they wanted to let Iraq continue to ignore the resolutions.

You are incorrect.

Don't believe the hype, that's all I'm saying.

Germany and France were never in favor of letting Iraq ignoring resolutions.

After all, UN had inspectors all throughout Iraq, searching for WMD's.

During the cold war, the UN was a forum for USA and the Soviet Union to meet and discuss, althoug they were a world apart.

UN is a good thing. But it will only be a force with backing from the most powerful and important nation in the world.

-Hedge

[Old_Rooster]

You are incorrect.

Don't believe the hype, that's all I'm saying.

Germany and France were never in favor of letting Iraq ignoring resolutions.

After all, UN had inspectors all throughout Iraq, searching for WMD's.

During the cold war, the UN was a forum for USA and the Soviet Union to meet and discuss, althoug they were a world apart.

UN is a good thing. But it will only be a force with backing from the most powerful and important nation in the world.

-Hedge

and the inspectors were often tossed out at gunpoint and allowed back in a month or two later.

Why does that not bother you?

If they had to give a drug dealer a few weeks notice to search his house, you think they would find drugs?

[vikingpower]

I pray none of you are American, because not one person in this thread understands the nature of American Government. America is not a democracy and it is not a dictatorship(at least not yet). It is a constitutional democracy; a government consisting of elected representatives upholding the rule of law as set forth in the constitution.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_republic

lol ... that would have been a great post sasha but you ment constitutional republic

[Decker]

My questions are as follows and I think they are valid ones.

If Bush is guilty of all of the accusations you have listed why hasn't he been arrested?

If Bush is guilty of war crimes isn't the UN Security and US Congress also guilty for authorizing military action against Iraq?

How can Bush have lost Florida when the recounts stated otherwise. Even the recounts from such liberal newspapers like the Miami Herald came to the same conclusion.

Which Geneva Convention laws regarding unlawful combatants did the United States violate? If he did break International law then see my first question.

The remedy at hand for Bush's violation of FISA and illegal use of force in Iraq is impeachment.  Impeachment is a quasi-judicial proceeding where politics plays a huge role.  In short, the votes aren't there to impeach him b/c of the strong republican presence in Congress.

First Congress authorized Bush to use force if necessary to make sure Iraq showed compliance w/ Res 1441 or to disarm Iraq by force.  Bush went to the UN to ask for authorization to enforce Res. 1441 (WMD inspections of Iraq).  The WMD inspectors were let into Iraq in 2002.  They were finding nothing.  Bush misused his authority and violated Res. 1441 when he ordered the attack of Iraq before WMDs were discovered and before the UN security council could authorize such a use of force.  Only Bush broke the law by misusing his authority.

All florida recounts do not show Bush won.  That's not the most pressing issue anyway.  The appearance of impropriety in our voting is the matter.  Privatized touchscreen voting machines w/out paper trails owned by dyed-in-the-wool republicans, scrubbing of voter rolls by K. Harris, mob coercion of the recount by republican thugs and a supreme court decision that was corrupt (see Vincent Buliosi's account in "None Dare Call it Treason" and he is not some liberal apologist.

[w8tlftr]

I disagree. The UN has its (great) problems, but its a forum where nations can meet and discuss. It has undoubtely helped bringing our world closer in the last 50 years. I hope it can continue do that, and hopefully it can develop further.

We have to prevent a 3rd world war. A 3rd world war could very well be the end of the world. UN can't prevent it on its own, but it's a start, and a part of the solution, not the problem.

USA, as the leading nation in the world, the superpower, needs to play an active part in UN.

-Hedge

Sorry, Hedge, I disagree.

Not a big fan of 'world government'.

[Camel Jockey]

Sorry, Hedge, I disagree.

Not a big fan of 'world government'.

What you have to admit is that we need diplomacy and cooperation with other nations. No one's saying there needs to be a world government or something like the European Union.

[w8tlftr]

What you have to admit is that we need diplomacy and cooperation with other nations. No one's saying there needs to be a world government or something like the European Union.

You're absolutely right. I'm critical for everyone we get along with our neighbors, however, I think their goals are not in the best interest of the United States.

[Camel Jockey]

You're absolutely right. I'm critical for everyone we get along with our neighbors, however, I think their goals are not in the best interest of the United States.

Of course. That's why I hate the idea of a north american union.. It would be a huge mistake.

[24KT]

and the inspectors were often tossed out at gunpoint and allowed back in a month or two later.

Why does that not bother you?

If they had to give a drug dealer a few weeks notice to search his house, you think they would find drugs?

It doesn't work that way. there's no disguising the signature of nukes. If he had them and tried to move them, the inspectors would have known even months after the fact. he didn't have anything.

[Old_Rooster]

It doesn't work that way. there's no disguising the signature of nukes. If he had them and tried to move them, the inspectors would have known even months after the fact. he didn't have anything.

who said it was nukes?  chemical weapons?
and even if he had nothing, the tossing out inspectors only added to the thinking he did have something.

So quit blaming Bush, Saddam asked for it and he got it.

[ToxicAvenger]

As far as the oil resources goes: USA is also better off with NOT controlling another country's oil, because it would force USA to make both technological improvements as well as trade improvements internationally.

we are doing an excellent job of that!

What if all cars in 10 years had an alternative energy source? How would that affect the US economy, and the US society as a whole?

we already have em...wont happen..

If USA leeches Iraq for oil, what will happen to the Iraqi economy, and how do you think the public in that area will react to that? And would you blame them for it?

what iraqi economy..you r talking like we have already stabilized the area...economy my ass

how would the public react?..well right now they r running around trying not to die.

no i don blame anyone for not wanting to die.

There are so many reasons why USA should give 100% control of the oil to the Iraqi people. Foreign relations being one of them.

i think we sunk the foriegn relations boat a while back...and give 100% control to iraq? so ya actually BELIEVE the whole WMD fiasco...and we went in to free the iraqis..

move ova mother teresa..there is a new philanthropist in town..


although his philanthropy do be telescopic in nature!

[ToxicAvenger]

The poster of this thread should have lived In Iraq with Saddam in power, he then would know what a true dictatorship is all about.

America?  Fuck son, this is disneyland.

we have killed by now MORE people in iraq than saddam ever did.

aint freedom great!

btw  exactly what magic # of people did saddam have to kill for us to go to war againt him..i mean he ws friends with us back in the day.

120,922 killed by saddam..fiine by us
120,923 ..uh ooo..now ya gone done it we must free the iraqi people..find weapons of mass destruction..kill al queda..gawddamn a whole host of goodies in one invasion!

bush sure does care a lot about muslim people 

[ToxicAvenger]

It doesn't work that way. there's no disguising the signature of nukes. If he had them and tried to move them, the inspectors would have known even months after the fact. he didn't have anything.

repbs dont believe in radioactive decay    err science

[Camel Jockey]

Good posts, Junaid. You're steering clear of the whole trying to come off as tough thing and making very valid posts with excellent arguements. I am proud of you. 

[seauantea]

lol ... that would have been a great post sasha but you ment constitutional republic

Clearly an oversight, much like will transpire the next time you call at 4am for bail money

I am disheartened that in spite of my previous post informing this board about the true nature of American government, not one of you understands the fundamental difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic.

Democracy means athenian or direct democracy; That is to say a nation whose decision making process is directly in the hands of the people and not elected representatives. Imagine every decision being a referendum. Obviously this is not practical in a nation with over 200m eligible voters, even if there is only a 35 percent voter turnout.

A constitutional republic means elected representatives legislate based on the constitution, this is the how modern democracy manifests itself, but it is not democracy in the classic sense of the word.

[240 is Back]

IMHO, America is a democracy which functions inside a structure set forth by a small quiet group who doesn't take suggestions when it comes to longterm US interests.

In other words, this group would decide 20 years ago that we'll be grabbing middle eastern oil in 2007, and let those elected deal with teh day to day mgmt.  They keep us from allowing short term horizon issues in the popularity contests known as presidential elections, get into the way of multi-decade trends and activities. 

It's necessary to ensure nobody dose anything stupid that hurts our LT position, just to keep a 4 year job..