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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (28799)	10/12/2004 10:36:41 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 173976

Nope, Saddam got 96%, down from 98%. You don't really understand what democracy is which is why you don't see how much it has been eroded under Bush. If he had put in 3-4 times the number of troops into Afghanistan, instead of squandering them into Iraq there might have been true elections this time around. Afghanistan might have been the showplace that Bush wanted Iraq to be. Instead, it's so dangerous that Doctors without borders left in protest, some areas registered more voters than they have people, etc. etc. If you believe that we should consider Afghanistan's election to be truly democratic then you should consider Saddam's election democratic as well. In that case, Bush toppled a democratically elected government and replaced it with martial law.