Skip to main content

First it was looking for weapons of mass destruction. Well they haven't found any. What would they do next? Oh yes, "we are here to liberate you from a tyrannical and barbaric regime." The Iraqis respond to this with bullets and suicide bombs. What would they do next? Oh yes, "We will liberate You.....Whether You Like it or Not"

If it was not that innocent people are dying needlessly. This could easily pass for the most comical stupidity of the century coming from a bunch of cowboys on Capitol Hill
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Greetings EbonyRose

For the last eighteen years I have lived in the west I have always wondered about those very words you expressed. What I find is most people know these things but refuse to think about it let alone act to enforce the will of the people

I have lived in Africa and seen dictators in action and compared them with this so called democratic governments. The truth of the matter is no dictator I have met can do and act with impunity like American Presidents backed up by a racist police, FBI and CIA and media. This group working together wreck more havoc than any dictator history can throw up. Do remember how an American president ordered Nuclear weapons to be dropped on civilians in Japan twice. Do you remember how American presidents ordered the genocide of innocent people in Vietnam for years. Do you remember how the American government experimented with their own people in mind control techniques and other hideous scientific experiments?

No dictators have ever done any of these. The sad thing is ordinary Americans are always against their President and government doing these evil things but the dictatorial Presidents carry on regardless. Is this what democracy is about
Hi Henry38,

You know, it is through this present dictatorship Administation, that the hollowness of those words have been made clear to me. And as I've thought about it, I've realized that those words have never been valid ... not from the day they were first uttered, and certainly not now. There was never a clear "will of the people" or "democracy" here, as at the time of the signing of the Constitution, more than half the population was not counted as a "person" let alone a citizen and voting, consensus and decision-making were only allowed to the rich and otherwise influential!! Democracy has always had a flag next to it and even today, it is not by the will of the people that we are governed ... it is still by the golden rule ... or, he who has the gold, rules! Eek

I remember the fervor of the Vietnam War protests, but I was too young to understand them. Today, I hear news reports regarding anti-war protests, and it is said "... the biggest protest since the Vietnam War ..." and I wonder if what I see today is just as big or is it bigger than it was then? What I do know is that, whenever the Vietnam era is mentioned, the protests are always a part of the story, so in that regard they were meaningful. But, I also know that it didn't much more good than the protests of today and this war, even though the word of the "people" is global.

I was reading stories last night of the torture being inflicted on opposition members in Zimbabwe by Robert Mugabe! It's an indescribable horror what he is doing on a daily basis to what are supposed to be "his people"!! And when I read what you said and thought 'What could be worse than a dictator doing that to people in his own country?' I came up with the answer of a dictator doing it to people in another country!! Eek Hence, we have our illustrious leader, G.W. Bush!! While hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in his own country voice daily opposition to it.

So you ask "Is this what democracy is about?" And all I can say is that I can't tell you from experience, because it seems I have yet to live it! Eek Confused Roll Eyes
This is hot off the press. The cowardly cowboys are sticking with the plan of liberating the Iraqis whether they like it or not. They noticed the Iraqis have a habit of shooting at people who are not Iraqis so they have decided to slow down, hide in their tanks and wait for the Iraqis to run out of bullets. Then they would come out of the tanks and liberate the ungrateful Iraqis.
I thought this story was appropriate for this post. So much for democracy, the will of the people, choosing one's on governance ... and all those other things this Administration knows nothing about, seeing as how it's in power due to none of those things! Roll Eyes

BBC NEWS Rumsfeld Rejects 'cleric-led' Rule

US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld says there will not be a cleric-led government in Iraq similar to the one in Iran.

The comment comes at a time when Washington is worried about Iraq's majority Shia population and its new-found religious freedom.

Just this week the US warned Iran not to try to destabilise the Shia community in Iraq, something it believes could interfere with Iraq's road to democracy.

But UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told BBC News Online that it was "a matter for the Iraqi people what kind of government they decide to elect".

In an interview with the Associated Press, Mr Rumsfeld said: "If you're suggesting, how would we feel about an Iranian-type government with a few clerics running everything in the country, the answer is: That isn't going to happen."

He said the Iraqi people needed time to determine for themselves how to organise a new government and elections.

Mr Rumsfeld's words contrasted with earlier comments by US President George Bush, who said it was up to the Iraqi people to decide who should rule them.

Muslims in government

Mr Bush said: "The form and leadership of that government is for the Iraqi people to choose.

"Anything they choose will be better than the misery and torture and murder they have known under Saddam Hussein."

US Secretary of State Colin Powell on Thursday also joined the debate over the make-up of Iraq's future government.

He said religious Muslims should not be precluded from governing Iraq.

"There are Islamic countries that are having elections - Pakistan, Turkey. It's happening," Mr Powell said in an interview with Dubai-based al-Arabiya television.

"Why can an Islamic form of government that has as its basis the faith of Islam not be democratic?" he asked.

Shia Muslims are the majority religious group in Iraq, and they disagree on whether to embrace a secular government or an Iranian-style theocracy.

They recently protested against the US presence in Iraq in the central city of Karbala at the climax of a pilgrimage that attracted up to one million people.

Some US officials worry that the Islamic government in Iran, which is predominantly Shia, may seek to influence Iraq's post-war reshaping.

Iran has dismissed any suggestion that it is doing this.

Ballot box

A key backer of Britain's military involvement in Iraq, Jack Straw told BBC News Online that there was no reason to fear a Shia government.

"I wouldn't do anything about it personally - this is their choice," he said.

"What's so frightening about a state which is 'Islamic'?"

He said that democracy was now emerging in Iran after more than two decades of political turbulance.

"If you have democratic systems, which I want to see in Iraq, you have to accept the result of the ballot box," he said.
Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2003/04/25 11:17:54
not only are we liberating the iraqis, but we are also showing them how to make proper use of their oil fields. dick cheney will be the one to show them Smile

also, once they are liberated, they are free to fight amongst themselves over who will rule iraq. wich ethnic group will it be.... will they negotiate and work together like we westerners do? or will there be bloodshed? yes, a democratic government can suit all....

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.