Contemporary Wars

that hate does not come from me. it comes from those huge masses of people that fall trapped to the feelings imposed onto them by outside forces. i have nothing against the ordinary american, however i would appreciate 5 minutes alone with rumsfeld or cheney.

as a student of politics i understand their means too, but that does not imply i have to agree with them and embrace it. i personaly despise all those "free-thinkers" on television taht tell us it is great to enter the EU or whatever , becasue it is the way to do.

I know, I dont agree with that kind of EU-apologetics either, because by not telling people the whole deal, with + and - they are actually doing the EU a lot of harm. Then the politicians wonder why people dont want to vote yes... well if you lie to them and you dont explain them things, and play the "we know everything, we smart you stupid" role, then you reap what you sow.
A well informed and educated citizen is worth more than the citizens hoodwinked by electoral propaganda once every 4 years. But the politicians preferr the easy way out... the former is waay too dangerous for them. They'd rather go fund raising a lot of money, which they;ll have to repay in favours when they come to power than educate their consituency. Democracy... the rule of the masses. Aristotle said the masses are like an animal.

This post has been edited by Imperialist on May 20, 2005 05:30 am

Steve, dont say that. I think the war was a good thing, the post-war period was totally unprepared and is a mess.

Well, I wish I could say the same ("the war was a good thing"). The only good thing I see, beyond offing Sadamm, is if the "perturbation theory" (borrowing from Physics) applies somehow to mid East politics.


I.E.: if an elected Iraq government so shocks/perturbs the systems there that the assorted regional caliphs, Kings, mullahs and plain dictators get blown into the 21st century..then, great. This of course is the wet dream of the neo cons. Personally, I think there are too many other (really bad) possible outcomes.

RE the postwar; the lack of planning or even acknowledgement of reality belies an incompetence bordering on criminal : i.e., failure to secure the caches of CONVENTIONAL explosives/weapons and the abject failure to control looting even of the damn BANKS!!!.

In any case, I think too many innocent people have died already to justify the paltry political change likely. That change will come, but it will be born of the restlessness of the Arab people rather than than the bombs of Bush.

(btw..does anyone here have good figures on the number of casualties in Iran/Iraq wars of the 70's-80's vs the cumulative casualties of Gulf war I plus II?
I know they are huge...but I wonder how they compare, if that's not too morbid.)

well the iranian lost about 250 thousand people while the irakis about 150 thousand. not to mention here the wounded, dismembered, blinded, shellshocked.....

but that war laster for a decade. these two later altogether what...4 months?

I dont think thats the wet dream of the neocons. Their dreams are far more diabolical than democratising the ME (where democracy will mean rule by the mob and that will mean Islamic states).
After seeing Bush hand in hand with crown prince Abdullah and exchanging kisses, I dont want to think what wet dreams the neocons have!!!

i agree with Imperialist. elections would surely bring Islamic militants to the ruling position. not too much of a success for the neocons. so a puppet government must be instated, but of course for the naive it will be a true democratic government. come on.. we are not 12 years old here to believe all these fairy tales of democracy.

you seem to forget one of the majot flaws of uncontrolled democracy. guys liek Hitler may get elected

You think is possible to happen again?? Not in a "banana" country. This will be unimportant. Yet another horror leader of a poor country... But, i ask about a powerfull country. I saw " " smilie put by you, but i ask in a serious mode.

Iama

If Irak will have after the election a leadership like in Iran, what is the near future of this country? What will happen to american and other nations troops stationed in Irak? Will be chaos, or an feared regime with order instaured in Irak and negociations to retreat multinational armys?

Iama

well the thing about Iran is that it basically has 2 leaderships: a democratically elected one and a religious one. one reformist, one conservative....i am not sure about the ballance.

and if you want the truth about the posibility for a dictatorial regime to get installed in a great power, democratically i mean, i recommenf you read the book by Sinclair lewis called " it can't happen here".

here, i found a link....

Sinclair Lewis


oh, and if you have any doubts about what almost happened in America in 1935 i guess, read the story of the attempted coup d'etat that was supposed to be lead by general Smedley Darlington Butler. i bet most of you here did not know this

so here it is. brace yourselves:



Smedley Darlington Butler

This post has been edited by Indrid on May 20, 2005 06:34 am

Personally i did'nt know. Thank you for links.

Iama

well i just hope more people read it..

It will happen that Iran will have another ally besides Syria, and one already at war with the US with the advantage of not directly involving the others.

This will be a dangerous fact. From this posiblle situation can result new subjects for the future istorians, and maybe for geographs / mapp makers (low chances).

Iama

The neocons "wetdreams" have nothing to do with democratization. The US (let's not even talk about the neocons) have never hesitated to support a dictature wherever corporate or geostrategic interests were in the balance. They're stilll doing it, all the while hammering the "freedom is on the march" slogan. Like that pityfull smokescreen could mislead anyone with half a brain. It's not like other countries are not doing it from time to time but nobody else displays such a degree of hatefull hypocrisy which is the "factory stamp" of this administration.

Irak will never have free elections as long as the US army is occupying the country, for the reasons already given here.

If I must believe the reported recuitment problems, young Americans are apparently less eager to die in Irak for a cause in deep trouble. That could be I hope the ultimate brake on the Bushist clique.

When We the People say "no more, thx".

This post has been edited by Chandernagore on May 20, 2005 08:54 am