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: c.hinton who wrote (244581)	10/10/2007 12:54:39 PM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Elroy, how are those countries fought over and maintained by guns......all but one would seem to use petro dollars to maintain power? Political dissent is outlawed, and dissenters are thrown in prison by policemen with guns. You can't find an article in the paper in any of those countries which states that the current leadership should be removed and replaced by some other leadership. The writer of such an article would A) go unpublished, since his editor is a bit more savvy than the writer, and B) be thrown in jail by people with guns as a mysterious threat to national security. If the leadership of those countries weren't ruling by the gun, they would be replaced by their public, probably by some guy who would use guns to maintain his power. Petro dollars don't convince Joe Average Saudi that he wants to be ruled by the Saudi rulers. The fact that seriously attempts to remove the Saudi leadership will result in guns being used against Joe Average Saudi is what convinces him to be ruled by them. ps one might say just as easily that power was fought over and maintained by guns in america.....the revolution...the civil war.....the various indian and mexican "wars"....american interventin in south america.....and of corse 44-40 or fight. That just says America has fought in wars, and passes over the fact that the USA has an elected representative government with a limited term. That's not the same as maintaining your leadership constantly through force against those who, like it or not, "follow" you - the practice of those 4 countries you listed. The USA doesn't kill and imprison its citizens for saying "Bush should be impeached". I don't think you can find a government on the planet where leaders who are not elected lead by anything other than guns.