1946 Time-Life article on post-WW2 European reconstruction

If that analogy were even remotely true wed still be able to take out a slew of dictators at a time with the means at hand... The war in Iraq wasnt about humanitarianism as much as Id like that to be true it was just a side benefit to US strategic thinking...

 

You are probably too busy insulting me to read what I write, cause I cited some of the Patriot Act and discussed it with someone else.

I'm sorry to disappoint you on this, but you should read "Dei Delitti e Delle Pene", an interesting old book about justice and democracy stating that privacy and fair trials are the main characteristics of every Democracy. I would even point you to many European countries having laws which protect individual privacy.
And since you cite power invested in the people, I'd like to remember you that your current president wasn't elected democratically since the majority of americans didn't vote for it.
You should be a bit more informed before telling ignorant to anyone else, only cause he has a different opinion.

 

Uh, even if the majority (I don't know the exact number of participants of the election) didn't vote, it's still a democratic election. Just because a majority choose not to vote doesn't mean it wasn't democratic. You could actually make an argument that it has more legitimacy than if, lets say, 90% of the population participated. Since if you assume only the people that are interested in the matter voted, the votes that actually counts are made by educated people instead of votes made people who vote based on looks, popularity or any other retarded reason. Of course the argument goes both ways, since there's a possibility that the ones who know what they're doing chose not to vote, for one reason or another.

Anyway, an easy example of this is the EMU election in Sweden, where I had several friends who voted even though they had no actual knowledge of the matter at hand.

 

My fault sorry. I wasn't clear. I meant that the majority of voters voted for the other candidate.

 

That was a result of how the election system works. Actually, the same thing could happen in alot of democratic countries.

Different regions have different representation compared to the population in them. This is because regions with few people in a country are intended to get some extra political power. Without that they would have almost no chance to get their special interests on the agenda in parliament.

 

I think you are to accustomed to Italian politics.

 

Well, no, that isn't true either. The last president to be elected by a MAJORITY of the votes was George Bush Sr. The last democratic president to be elected by the MAJORITY of the votes was Carter (and that was a very slight majority).

It is true that the current president was elected without a PLURALITY, but that isn't required by our constitution (but neither is a majority).

You'd might be more persuasive if you knew what you were talking about.

 

Heheh... that's a good one

Do we want to talk about what happened in Florida? With a large part of the black people not enlisted for voting even if they had the right to do so?
This is the way the italian fascist party won elections in Italy in the 30's.

I think your TV networks are to persuasive even if they dont know what they are talking about.

 

Aha, but first, lets change the topic...

You do an amazing job of picking up parts of the story and making up the rest.

The supposed infraction was that there were people erroneously removed from the registered voter lists for being convicted felons when they weren't, and that blacks made up a larger portion of that list than they should have. It certainly wasn't "a large part" of the black population.

You on the other hand, aren't, even though you share the other quality with them.

Shouldn't you take the hint and make sure you have your facts right before sharing? It would make reasoned discourse so much easier.[/code]

 

You do that amazing job as well, mate.
Who was the governor in florida who made this "mistake"?
I'll bring you some interesting articles to read about this florida "mistake" tomorrow.

You can try to prove my facts are not right instead of just saying so without any proof.

 

Just read up on the story (yes, even Palast's piece will do) and it will point out that your version of the facts was not the correct one.

 

The 14 (about) Iraq resolutions were passed under chapter 7 of the UN. Chapter 7 CLEARLY allows the use of force to enforce them.

http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm


The second resolution the US tried to get passed was just to appease some of the europeans.

As a side not, have you seen this?

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/10/24/sprj.irq.donors/index.html

"As far as Germany and France are concerned, really, this was a regrettable position they had," Allawi said Thursday. "I don't think the Iraqis are going to forget easily that in the hour of need, those countries wanted to neglect Iraq."

Germany and France are going to be left out of the new Iraq (businesswise). I will admit this makes me laugh.

 

Actually, demo, if that's the point you're arguing then you are making fek's case for him, (or her, I don't think I've seen a definate reference).

The situations described actually allow the government to be more opaque in its actions. People can be held for longer periods of time without being charged. People can have their phones tapped without cause. It requires citizens to be be transparent in their actions to government, but not the other way around. That kind of transparency is the exact opposite of what you describe as being healthy for democracy.

 

And they would have all voted democrat? Also a large number of overseas ballets weren't counted...then there was the laughable attempt to count dimpled votes...

 

What have you heard about this?

 

Businesses without an inside track into the White House would be denied access, European or otherwise. How else would Halliburton be allowed to import gasoline into Iraq and charge the US taxpayer $1.59 a gallon? And with one of the first executive orders by the US Administration of Iraq privatizing virtually everything at firesale prices, of course they're going to bar European countries. If the Europeans were allowed in, you'd have a bidding war for Iraqi assets and that's the last thing companies like Bechtel want...

The 'exclusion' of European countries by the Americans and their Iraqi subjects doesn't come as any real surprise to anyone. I, and a great many others, actually predicted it before the war started.

 

That must be why a non US company won the contracts to build the cellular infrastructure.

 

If I recall, the cellular infrastructure in Iraq will create a 'black hole' in the region since the rest of the region has adopted CDMA (or is it TDMA or GSM or whatever) the Europe and the Middle East use...

Anyway, subcontracting can be legally undertaken by non-US firms since they don't have 'clearance' to get the primary contracts...