Iran Had a Democracy Before We Took It Away

Well, I'll tell you what Bozo, you call it the American way if you want, but you take a face away from the real criminals here and that is the politicians who buy their way into office.

Duuh, yeah. And we vote them into office at every election. It is the American way.

You are alot like those that want to blame "they". Who the world are "they". "They" are real people with real names, not some phantom that is here for a bit and then suddenly gone.

You have me confused with someone else. I do not use the word "they" to refer to some unnamed entities or other.

The same is true with your "American Way". The American Way is a creation of the politicans both democrat and republican who have practiced meddling in the affairs of other nations for years.

Duhh, yeah again. And since it's been done that way in America for a century or more, it has become the American way. If we want to change the American way, we will need to change the kinds of people we elect to public office in America. And as long as we vote for only the usual dweedle dee Republicrats or tweedle dee Democans, nothing will change.

It isn't the American way, it is the political way, a way of convienence and reassuance of reelection.

Duhh, again. The political way is the American way- and has been since even before America was an independent nation. If you don't think that the Founders were politicians up to their ears in factionalism and what very soon became partisanism, then you need to think again. When the first president was elected in 1789, it was a "contest" (albeit a lopsided presidential one) between the Federalists and the anti-Federalists. By 1796 partisan had become fully established as the American way, and has been ever since then.

[quote="ziggy"]

Well, I'll tell you what Bozo, you call it the American way if you want, but you take a face away from the real criminals here and that is the politicians who buy their way into office.

Duuh, yeah. And we vote them into office at every election. It is the American way.
[/quote}


It may be the Ziggy way, but it certainly isn't the Cato way

Cato wrote:

Well, I'll tell you what Bozo, you call it the American way if you want, but you take a face away from the real criminals here and that is the politicians who buy their way into office.

Ziggy wrote:

Duuh, yeah. And we vote them into office at every election. It is the American way.

Cato wrote:

It may be the Ziggy way, but it certainly isn't the Cato way.

Either way, Americans by the tens of millions vote for the tweedle dee Republicrat and tweedle dumb Democan partisans every election- and have for a couple centuries or so. So it is still the American way.

Cato wrote:

ziggy wrote:

"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."- Samuel P. Huntington

Well isn't that just special. I haven't a clue who Sammy Huntington is, but it appears he's just one more of the blame the US for every ill the world has known, gang. Simply he's appears to be a jerk and idiot.

So is it wrong to be superior in applying organized violence? Seems to me that if we're going to be in the business of war-making, that it makes sense to be superior at it.

I notice that you do not even deny that what he says may be true, but you call him a jerk and an idiot for saying so. Does the raw truth really hurt that much?

ziggy wrote:

"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."- Samuel P. Huntington

While I agree with the fact that the US meddled too much in the middle east (you're wrong in giving the US sole ownership on installing the Shah into power), Mr. Huntington is wrong here. You can't win with might, you have to win the hearts and minds of the people or the fighting doesn't stop.

He did not say that you win by being the mightiest. He said that you win by being superior in organizing the violent might you do have. As a student of the military, do you disagree with that?

You can't win with might, you have to win the hearts and minds of the people or the fighting doesn't stop.

Oh. So we've won the hearts and minds of the people around the world? Some one needs to tell 'em that so they will stop hating us.

Yes, I disagree but lets back up here for a minute.

When and where did the west win the world?

Cato wrote:

ziggy wrote:

"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."- Samuel P. Huntington

Well isn't that just special. I haven't a clue who Sammy Huntington is, but it appears he's just one more of the blame the US for every ill the world has known, gang. Simply he's appears to be a jerk and idiot.

OK. So is this commentator, too, a jerk and an idiot?

A world without U.S. primacy will be a world with more violence and disorder and less democracy and economic growth than a world where the United States continues to have more influence than any other country in shaping global affairs. The sustained international primacy of the United States is central to the welfare and security of Americans and to the future of freedom, democracy, open economies, and international order in the world.

Aaron wrote:Yes, I disagree but lets back up here for a minute.

When and where did the west win the world?

I'm not sure that we have won the world.

But I agree with Huntington that most of whatever we have "won" around the world has been by being superior at organizing our violent might rather than by our "values or religion". Breaking the ability of a peoples to fight back is not the same as winning their minds and hearts.

Who said anything about religion?

And I disagree. We realized it in SE Asia, the Soviets found it out in Afghanistan and countless other occupying nations have found it out all over the world.

Who said anything about religion?

Huntington did- in the quote that we were talking about.

And I disagree. We realized it in SE Asia, the Soviets found it out in Afghanistan and countless other occupying nations have found it out all over the world.

So when did any nation win over its foes by winning their hearts and minds?

ziggy wrote:

And I disagree. We realized it in SE Asia, the Soviets found it out in Afghanistan and countless other occupying nations have found it out all over the world.

So when did any nation win over its foes by winning their hearts and minds?

Germany after WW2.

When did a nation win over its foes by might?

When did a nation win over its foes by might?

Japan, WW 2.

Wrong.

Japan accepted our "values" as they are now a democratically controlled, capitalistic nation and one of the United States strongest allies. Had they not, we wouldn't still have troops there.

Try again.

We have troops all over the world. Is that because we have won the hearts and minds of all those people?

Other then a combat zone or limited military such as at an embassy, where do we have troops stationed that do not share our values or who are not our allies?

We have troops all over the world. Is that because we have won the hearts and minds of all those people?

We are currently in ~150 nations and save Afghanistan, we are there at the will and desire of the host nation. So tell me, where do we have troops stationed as a result of might?

In most of those ~150 nations.

Yes, when we are there for reasons other then combat or as part of a multinational force, or at an embassy, we are invited guest with no animosity in the 9 countries of which we have more then 1000 troops stationed.

Now why don’t you try telling me where we have troops stationed solely because of might that is not a combat zone or and embassy station.

If you can!!!