Reply With Quote
I would prefer we let them decide on their government, yes. If they decide on one that puts them at risk, then it's on them.
So you are saying that you would still prefer a government that was "democratically" elected even if it was a religious theocracy that threatens Israeli and US interests over a strong centralized government that was aligned with Israeli and US interests?
I would prefer we let them decide on their government, yes. If they decide on one that puts them at risk, then it's on them.
What if it's one that puts the stability of an entire region -- including our interests there -- at risk?
Does your preference change?
Isn't that pretty much all Mahmoud Ahmadenijad has done since he's been around? Threaten us and provide arms, expertise, and personnel to those who have been killing our soldiers on the battlefield?
No. Letting them decide on their government is a necessary first step for fostering permanent stability in the region. You deal with anti-American governments after they're elected. You don't squash democracy before the people are even given a chance to elect their government. That precedent puts us at much greater future risk than the alternative.
I'm sorry, I didn't read the news that Mahmoud Ahmadenijad was the new elected leader of Egypt, link?
And Us.
If this happened in Saudi Arabia you would cheer lead the people on against the evil Saud's and then blame the Evil Oil companies for raising your Gasoline prices to $8 a gallon when their strong central government was destroyed and the entire middle east funded the civil war trying to get their tribe in control of Mecca/Medina and the oil reserves.
So just how is UCA, and Yoni and CC, going to prevent these countries from installing govts that are unfriendly to the American Empire?
Go 1956 on Egypt, and US/UK invade again?
In the context of this, I don't give a flying about gas prices. We will adapt.
And in this same context let me tell you that I would directly profit 4X + from oil prices that generated $8 a gallon and would do everything in my power to STOP it from happening because it would be bad for America.
You must not eat.
Higher fuel prices impact the price of every good that finds its way to the grocery store in the back of a truck, on the car of a train, or in the belly of a plane.
We will adapt. And we should, if our interests are tied to a commodity that requires billions of people to live under tyranny.
" your human rights, I need $3 gas."
And we call them evil. Awesome.
You can't have it both ways. Are you willing to walk 6 blocks to get water?
Are you willing to have electricity once a week for 6 hours?
That is the kind of rationing that would be necessary for EVERYONE to be equal.
Be happy you live here. Fight to stay on top.
I am and I will. I've walked around the bottom.
Glad you're willing to abandon all morals to accomplish your goals, even if the outcome may be that it leads to our demise quicker.
What you're saying is, we could beat Hitler and a vast army while keeping our morality, but we can't do the same to defeat a small number of scattered terrorists.
Might as well say "I'd be happy to live in a world where unicorns existed and they pooped ice cream."
And of course, what serves the interest of the American people is whatever you think serves the interest, right? Tell me, when DOESN'T democracy serve the interest of the American people?
Not really. You're just basically ignorant.
Certainly, the best way to get them to side with us instead of our enemies is to demolish their hopes for a democracy, and install a dictator and support him. Surely, the people will love us after that.
When doesn't democracy serve the best interest of the American people?
Uhh how about when Palestine elects Hamas...
How about when our allies that helped us gain our own freedom were being drug to the gallows in France.
Trying times...
Now you can argue that the French revolution ultimately served our best interest because we were able to peacefully obtain half of the nation from a defunct Napolean.
But certainly looking at it at the time of the occurrence, it was pretty hairy...
Ah, so you think we should squash democracies that are not friendly with us, and install dictators who are, and there won't be any negative effects. Do you think areason why Iranian people might be pissed at us is because we controlled their government?
False dichotomy. We can have our rights AND still not live in a hut.
That makes a nice excuse.
Why are they mad at Israel?
Of course there are negative effects... There are reactions to every action. The problem is... You cannot take using the big stick off the table.
I'm not Machiavellian. I would rather people like us than fear us. But if they are going to hate us anyway, it's much more productive if they fear us.
Probably become another Iran or Iraq. Get rid of someone you dislike, just to be replaced by a "twelver."
Bull .
LOL...
Are you crazy? Just watch... Things will get worse in Egypt, not better.
You are naive.
So you favor a democracy where the wolves outnumber the sheep.
It never is. That's why we are a representative democracy with values of the republic. Not a true democracy. Democracy's don't last.
You are un-American for not wanting more democracy in the world.
As for "most likely", I don't think you know enough about Egypt to render an opinion as to what is "most likely" that I would be willing to bet money on.
Name three people in the Muslim Brotherhood.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
