http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A7991-2003Nov6?language=printer This article on Bush's speech today should be read by all. Apparently Bush is going on a mission/crusade to bring "democracy" to the Middle East and the Moslem world. But just how do you create democratic states in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, Iran, the Sudan, Algeria and other Moslem nations? There is considerable evidence to suggest that if many of these countries could have free elections, many radical fundamentalist Islamic governments would be elected in them. So this may not even be something that would make America safer. As the article says bringing "democracy" to the Moslem world is dogma of right wing "neo-conservatives" and Bush is apparently going to continue it in the future. I strongly suspect that when a right wing neocon talks about "democracy" in a Moslem country, what he really means is a "democracy" that the right wing approves of--pro Israel, pro America, pro West. Which means I suspect this is a cover for something else--like an American empire or an American hegemony. Bush is apparently going to "impose" democracy on Iraq at the point of American bayonets. The question is whether he and his right wing, mostly ultra-pro Israel Jewish advisors see this as a model of how to impose democracy on other Moslem countries. Before the invasion Bush and his puppets were also saying that conquering Iraq would bring peace to the Middle East. That did not happen. There is a considerable danger that they now think the only mistake they made here was that they did not go far enough--they may decide that if they take over Syria, Israel will have peace. This speech increases my suspicions that Bush and his merry band of right wing nuts intend to invade either Syria or Iran if he is re-elected.
Yes, CB66, us white folks can handle Demcoracy but those ragheads better not get it. YOu have a problem with a speech promoting Democracy?
When you've got 'em by the balls their hearts and minds will follow. So CottonBigMouth, since you are against democracy I suppose you would be satisfied if Iraq were turned into a Revolutionary Workers Paradise like North Korea.
Oooh, Oooh, I almost missed it. CottonPickHisNoseIdiot66 actually posted a link. Not a link that supported any of his misconceptions but we can all be encouraged that the speciman has finally jumped on the lower end of the learning curve.
CB66 You might have been kidding about invading Iran, Syria, but i can tell you this. You arent going to stop terrorism invading South Dakota. You stand a much better chance of catching and ridding the world of Terrorism by invading those countries. If we were truly serious about stopping it we would be invading those terrorist sponsoring nations. Because you can bet your ass that they are there learning those values that make human life trivial. But since Liberals like you dont have the stomach for standing up anddoing something then i guess a speach about Democracy is the best we can do right now. Geaux Tigers
Cottonbowel WHo do you think rules Iran now? The young are going against the religious leadership and are wanting change there to have more freedom. Can the Syrian leadership be any worse than what they have now? If Muslims extremists have enough power to take over a democracy they would just take over the country anyway in some kind of coup. How can you want to be so selfish as to not give to people the freedoms and rights that we have here. More good than bad will come out of it. There is a hint of bigotry in your post that Muslim countries should not be allowed the same freedoms that you have because they cannot be trusted to elect the right people in free elections with true freedom. Like I said in one discussion a month or so ago you and your man David Duke really do have a lot in common. You both hate, and you both want to keep other groups down by blaming them for the problems of the world.
I was not intending the post for your kind, Calco. My post was meant for people who can actually think. I guess I should have stipulated that.
i would consider listening to you if you didnt lie. they never said that and we both know it. people may consider listening to you if you had policy opinions you didnt back up wth lies. credibility is your problem.
