http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000080&sid=a5oHq3zv_c34&refer=asia
So why can we not help other countries whose citizens actuall want democracy, rather than wasting money on people who would rather have totalitarian governments.
The US stands for Democracy everywhere
- Thread starter RichardE
- Start date
So why can we not help other countries whose citizens actuall want democracy, rather than wasting money on people who would rather have totalitarian governments.
I think that the rhetoric supporting democracy everywhere is founded on a prejudice. Whether parts of the government believe the rhetoric I do not know. Here the US and other governments have given support to democracy as the article stated. They support it in words and am sure are considering the necessary actions in various contingencies.
The more I realize it, the US stands for not much. I'm sorry, but after events like Waco, where the Federal government, FBI, ATF and various other organizations did nothing but cover their butts, it makes me wonder.
The FBI and ATF engaged in behavior that seemed fitting on the Chinese during that Waco siege. What a shame. In fact, they were nothing but terrorists. After that, and their failure to prevent 9/11, these organizations, including the CIA have no credibility left.
Their goal is not to protect us, but to cover their butts.
Now we are letting the government here grow and grow while they spy on us supposedly to protect us. It's a shame. If Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were here today, they would move to another country in shame. Or at least do something radical to shake things up.
The FBI and ATF engaged in behavior that seemed fitting on the Chinese during that Waco siege. What a shame. In fact, they were nothing but terrorists. After that, and their failure to prevent 9/11, these organizations, including the CIA have no credibility left.
Their goal is not to protect us, but to cover their butts.
Now we are letting the government here grow and grow while they spy on us supposedly to protect us. It's a shame. If Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were here today, they would move to another country in shame. Or at least do something radical to shake things up.
The government is not a symbol. That is your mistake I think. The government does not stand for anything. It supports things. Nor does it care for abstract principles, of the sort that you seem to want it to hold to. It is largely a practical endeavour. You mention Washington. He was a practical man. He knew a thing or two about spying too.
He also knew a thing or two about limits of government, and executive in particular, power. From what I've heard, the people of the time were so in love with Washington that they wanted to give him a lot of power. He avoided this, even though he didn't have to, because he knew what this country should be about.
I don't think Nepal have oil or any natural resources that is atractive enought for the US to be interested in. And, the problem for meddling in China & India backyard is not worth the gain.
Democracy? Democracy? I love the democracy joke. LOL. As stated; Nepal has no oil. You ain't got no oil; you don't get no democracy.
Herr Bushler is laughing at all of us.
Herr Bushler is laughing at all of us.
The U.S doesn't care about democracy.
They only use it for their campaigns against weak nations.
I dare them to pressure China on democracy as much as they pressured Iraq or Iran.
Why not look a little deeper? Saudi Arabia? What is up with that?
They only use it for their campaigns against weak nations.
I dare them to pressure China on democracy as much as they pressured Iraq or Iran.
Why not look a little deeper? Saudi Arabia? What is up with that?
The American intellectual elites DO love democracy. A number or researchers have published tons of papers about the shining beauty of liberal democracies, and how they tend to be paeceful countries. The people in the US intellectual elites also seem to care a lot about human rights in the world.
Now, this is NOT the reason why the US are in Iraq. It DOES however, seem to be the reason why the US government uses the human-rights violation, lack of democracy excuse to advocate an invasion. Nobody will be against removing a bloody dictator.
Liberal Democracies indeed tend to be peaceful, what few people know is that countries forced to turn into liberal democracies are more likely to cause war than illiberal regimes. Many papers about the so-called "failed states" support the theory.
In the end, everybody would like to have global human rights respect, but truth is that this will never be up on the agenda of any government. Wars are too expensive and need a strong geopolitical reason. Love for Law and justice are not enough.
Now, this is NOT the reason why the US are in Iraq. It DOES however, seem to be the reason why the US government uses the human-rights violation, lack of democracy excuse to advocate an invasion. Nobody will be against removing a bloody dictator.
Liberal Democracies indeed tend to be peaceful, what few people know is that countries forced to turn into liberal democracies are more likely to cause war than illiberal regimes. Many papers about the so-called "failed states" support the theory.
In the end, everybody would like to have global human rights respect, but truth is that this will never be up on the agenda of any government. Wars are too expensive and need a strong geopolitical reason. Love for Law and justice are not enough.
Nope. The US is tops in this regard. We actively support dictatorships with money, arms, intelligence, etc.
The EU just trades with them.[/quote]
And given the good points you have just made, the US policy may be a good one here, no?
I stumbled over an article about Nepal yesterday. There's a passage about what external acteurs are doing which I find interesting. Translated:
India: Is negotiating behind the stage. Made the agreement between the seven biggest parties and the rebels possible (which also led to a 4 month unilateral armistice by the maoists which recently ended because the military showed no reaction). But it keeps itself in the background to avoid alienating the Nepalese. Also a more resolute tactic could endanger the good relation to the king and lead to a loss of regional influence for the benefit of Pakistan and China.
The EU and Switzerland as important development aid provider together asked Gyanendra in a statement to finish his repressive policy.
However, Japan as the biggest source of capital for Nepal so far seems unimpressed by the domestic policy "problem" there.
The US are against further sanctions against the king because of fear of contact with the maoist rebels.
The UN's high commissariat for human rights in Nepal, Ian Martin, heavily criticised king and army for human right violations, but the main quarter in New York remains silent because Nepal provides the UN with many peace troops. Ironically the money recieved for these troops doesn't get spent for peaceful purposes back home in Nepal!
The king is abandoned even by the royalist parties now and he fired all consultants except the yes-men. The elections next April will be a farce because there only is at least one candidate in 36 of the 58 states. The conflict can't be solved by the military because the army firmly controls the big cities while the rebels virtually control the rest.
India: Is negotiating behind the stage. Made the agreement between the seven biggest parties and the rebels possible (which also led to a 4 month unilateral armistice by the maoists which recently ended because the military showed no reaction). But it keeps itself in the background to avoid alienating the Nepalese. Also a more resolute tactic could endanger the good relation to the king and lead to a loss of regional influence for the benefit of Pakistan and China.
The EU and Switzerland as important development aid provider together asked Gyanendra in a statement to finish his repressive policy.
However, Japan as the biggest source of capital for Nepal so far seems unimpressed by the domestic policy "problem" there.
The US are against further sanctions against the king because of fear of contact with the maoist rebels.
The UN's high commissariat for human rights in Nepal, Ian Martin, heavily criticised king and army for human right violations, but the main quarter in New York remains silent because Nepal provides the UN with many peace troops. Ironically the money recieved for these troops doesn't get spent for peaceful purposes back home in Nepal!
The king is abandoned even by the royalist parties now and he fired all consultants except the yes-men. The elections next April will be a farce because there only is at least one candidate in 36 of the 58 states. The conflict can't be solved by the military because the army firmly controls the big cities while the rebels virtually control the rest.
The US stands for greedy self-interest everywhere in the world except within the USA, where American citizens tend to believe there own propaganda.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter