SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LLCF who wrote (30517)3/31/2003 9:42:42 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (1) of 74559
 
Well IMO democracy IS better, but you seem to be telling me we should use force to create democracies where ever there are none.

Why? They're not particular efficient.. They're divisive, indecisive, rather naive, and they tend to put off hard decisions until it become inevitable...

Or as Churchill put it.. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for every other kind"...

But they are the only form of government, IMO, that is truly legitimate.. Government by, for, and of, the people. People who possess inalienable rights.. Not just rights that some dictator or monarch CHOOSES to bestow (or rescind) upon them at his whim..

Thus, I have no real problem with confronting unruly dictatorships and totalitarian states when they threaten my security. I'd rather not, because I loath the thought of having to risk American blood and treasure dealing with such brutal regimes, but when they threaten me or mine... I believe LEGITIMATE (democratic) governments should not be held hostage to illegimate regimes.

I think we should use other means to move in theat direction. JMO..

I'd love to hear about those "other means".. After all, we left Saddam in power after he brutally invaded and occupied Kuwait. Yet, we demanded that Hitler be overthrown.. And we overthrew the Kaiser... It's seemingly only been in Korea and Iraq, where regimes were left in place after invading their neighbors, that we find this ongoing threat.

Saddam has had every chance to moderate his regime and cease threatening the region. He could have gone to his grave content with his clan controlling Iraq's oil wealth... But he obviously has another agenda.. Why else would he give up all that wealth merely to retain his chemical weapons program?? What "greater glory" does he have in mind? And what's his game plan for achieving it??

Yeah... I would like to have you describe some of the "other means" of deterring and "civilizing" someone who has no concept of his own personal limitations. Someone who will kill anyone who suggests that his is not the "correct path"...

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext