Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Bush just loves a good dictatorship!

profile picture
Nine_Milla_Killa
Posts: 6783 - Karma: 23
Bush said they went into Iraq in order to destroy the Weapons of Mass Destruction that Saddam had stockpiled in huge amounts. However, since this hasd been proved as lucdicrous, he has insisted that they invaded in order to overthrow a dictator and to install democracy. Such a proclomation, though noble, is false and hypocritical.

Washington has in fact been resisting the demands of Iraqi citizens to hold elections. Instead, Bush will appoint a government that is loyal to the U.S. In other words, they are appointing another dictatorship, albiet loyal to U.S. interests.

If Bush was truly sincere about liberating countries with dictatorships and installing democracy like he says, why has he not liberated Azerbaijan? This small, oil-rich country just held elections where more than 1,000 people were arrested and tortured for casting the 'wrong' vote. Aliyev, the new president of Azerbaijan is the son of a dictator that ruled this country since the Soviets made it a satalite state. Bush recently visited Azerbaijan and was quoted as saying 'The United States has a relationship with this country. We value it.' Of course Bush would say this as Azerbaijan's dictatorship has granted billions of dollars in contracts to Exxonmobile, Chevrontexaco and BPAmoco; American oil companies.

Meanwhile, in Haiti, a country is being ravaged by armed gangs of thugs. The citizens and elected goverment have been calling for aid for weeks, but Bush has ignored them... Or has he? in truth, the U.S. has been secretely backing the rebels (many of which are former members of the brutal Duvalier dictatorship that lasted 50 years).
Bush destabilized the democratically elected Aristide government by blocking foriegn loans and encouraging the rich elite and gangs of thugs to fight the current government. Former death squad leaders from the Duvalier dictatorship are the leaders of the gangs that have stormed the Haitian capital. Bush was quoted as saying 'I have made it abundantly clear to the coast guard that we will turn back any refugee that attempts to reach our shore.' How compassionate of him.

_______________________________
What is the colour of a mirror?

'Fear is your only god' - Zach Dela Rocha

NS hockey pool champion: 2003

www.theeasyrider.com
Mar 1 2004 2:22PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
^I missed the part where you said which of the two undesirable options I pointed out was, in your estimation, the right one. Do you want to leave them to elect a fundamentalist dictator? Or would you prefer a U.S. installed leader? Because in the latter case, world opinion would only suffer, and yes, I know there are other countries involved, but no matter WHAT country or group of countries installs a leader, it's still a foreign power exercising authority over a country in which they have no grounds for doing so. The moral implications of that aside, the Iraqis would, no doubt, be a bit offended at having their leader chosen for them; I wouldn't be surprised at a coup in the near future, in which case a fundamentalist would be installed anyways.

It's really a no-win scenario at the moment, so for want of a better idea, the only thing I can offer is delay, in the hopes that perhaps a better cantidate that Iraq's populus will actually support emerges. Until that point, what they have going now seems to be preventing any major violence, though it could, ideally, look a bit less like a military ocupation. But in sum, I'm not in the least convinced that Bush intends to install another dictator in Iraq, nor will he allow the Iraqis to do so, and vice versa; the Iraqi people would never stand for a U.S. imposed dictator with ties to Bush. American troops are still in Iraq, and they should be, at least until a better compromise can be reached.

I also have little doubt that the U.S. will be involved in the final leader's selection, but I (perhaps naively) hope that the actual electoral process isn't run by Americans, from a moral standpoint. In the end, no matter what they decide, Iraq should decide for itself who their leader is to be.

Illinformed not being a word, I will say that I am, perhaps, a bit lacking in primary source information with regard to current conditions over there; my information may be outdated. What seems to be the current disposition of the Iraqis? Feel free to enlighten me, I may, given more information, have to change my position.

By the way SuPilot, I think the U.S. spelling of that word is derogatory...does that help?


J.D.'s Hall of Fame for Stupid Posts:

''mad trix is a gay name. go with the k2's.'' -Linepunk

''Dude, Americans or Canadians didn't invent english, the British dudes did.'' -Chauncy

On San Francisco: ''that was like the starting place of gayness and aids in the eighties.'' -Tandan83

''I've learned to give some canadians an intellectual buffer'' -SUpilot

''Gay people are fags'' -Atlantaski

''dude i am literat i just cant spell worth shit u got prob with it bitch'' -Bridgerbowlskier

On Bling Skis: ''Anyone know anything about this company? do they have a website?'' -makr0

''Gay marriages are gay.'' -SUpilot

'if it werent for women, i wouldnt have to wear condoms' -Hucksterjibber
Mar 5 2004 1:51PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)