Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (105335)	7/14/2003 7:11:47 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<it is an imperative in each case that there be adequate security against civil war before further progress is made> Yes, that is the first priority. First, we must crush, using whatever amount of force is necessary, any indigenous forces who want U.S. soldiers off their soil. Then, and only then, are we assured of winning an election. So, elections can't be held, until we're sure of the results. As Bush has made clear, we will not let Islamists win an election, no matter what the Iraqi people want. Our army will remain the ultimate authority, with veto power over any wish of the people. This meets the NeoCon's Orwellian definition of democracy. <To consider Iran an elected government is risible.> It's a semi-democracy, very imperfect. Sort of like the American Republic was, 200 years ago, when only white male property owners had the vote. But, imperfect as it is, Iran is much closer to being a democracy, than our close "allies" Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt.......the list is long. So, in a relative sense, relative to the American allies in the region, Iran is a democracy. Another disproof of the NeoCon thesis, that democracy can be, that we even intend on, shove democracy down Arab throats with our bayonets.