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: Hawkmoon who wrote (184006)	3/23/2006 7:38:07 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 281500

How about the fact that, until 220+ years ago, THERE WERE NO DEMOCRACIES on this planet. No? Why don't you count the tens of thousands of years that people lived in tribes and leaders earned the right to lead by securing the following of the tribe's members? But I'd rather learn the lessons of recent history where information, education and new social experiments have created new understandings rather than getting mired in pre-democracy ancient Roman Republic bullshit. What do you think is happening in China and other parts of Asia? What happened in South America and the former Soviet Republic? What do you think was beginning to occur in the hugely literate nation of Iran? How many billion dollars did we spend to achieve the end of those evil ISMs? How many of your neighbor's kids are buried because of those efforts? And your basic premise is faulty anyway. Twice faulty. First, a democratic nation of intolerant, narrow viewed and religiously radical people is not a good thing. There are many possible scenarios that are BETTER for those people, for the west and particularly for America. Look at Jordon. Look at the partial democracies in some of Eastern Europe. Second we DON'T HAVE THE POWER TO FORCE A BENEVOLENT DEMOCRACY ON THE PEOPLE OF A DIFFERENT CULTURE. See below: msnbc.msn.com "KABUL, Afghanistan - Senior Muslim clerics said Thursday that an Afghan man on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity should be killed regardless of whether a court decides to free him. Abdul Rahman, a 41-year-old former medical aid worker, faces the death penalty for becoming a Christian under Afghanistan's Islamic laws. His trial, which began last week, has caused an international outcry. U.S. President Bush said Wednesday he was "deeply troubled" by the case and expects the country to "honor the universal principle of freedom." Diplomats say the Afghan government is searching for a way to drop the case, and on Wednesday authorities said Rahman is suspected of being mentally ill and would undergo psychological examinations to see whether he is fit to stand trial. But four senior clerics interviewed by The Associated Press in their mosques in Kabul said Rahman deserved to be killed for his conversion. "He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian," said Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque. "The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed." "He is not mad. The government are playing games. The people will not be fooled," said Abdul Raoulf, cleric at Herati Mosque. "This is humiliating for Islam. ... Cut off his head." Raoulf is considered a moderate cleric in Afghanistan. He was jailed three times for criticizing the Taliban's policies before the hardline regime was ousted by U.S.-led forces in 2001." Emphasis added. Ed