Finally the reason for the war on Iraq

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by elijah
"Anyway, opinions in your tiny mountain hinterland matter little."

I think thats crossing a line

Don't worry, Roland is tough. That's his reply: "We prefer the term "Arschland". Please comply."

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
We prefer the term "Arschland". Please comply.

How about rebellious German province?

[Whaleboy]

"No, see we actually are fairly open to immigrants. At least compared to the xenophobia of Europe."

True, but you get less refugees from the East and the Orient than us, partly due to geography, partly due to the fact that many in the East hate you. There are a lot of refugees coming in, which seems to spark off some inherent racist reaction in people.

If America had lots of immigrants coming in, one could expect a similar simplistic, racist, ethnocentric, xenophobic response.

I dont agree with it by the way (in case that wasnt clear), I just like to think that I understand it.

[Victor Galis]

If you really want to talk about Florida, the only way Gore could have won would have been to give into the Bush counter-demand for a statewide recount rather than go for the targeted recounting he did

-While I am still somewhat bitter about this occassionally, my original point was that the spectacle in Florida helps refute the point that this country is a functioning democracy. (I don't mean to imply that democracy is necessarily a good thing by that statement, merely that the US is far from that mark.)

[Imran Siddiqui]

How is this relevant to electoral fraud in Florida?

Because if Gore won Tennessee, we'd have little or no idea of the 'fraud' that happened in Florida. It simply wouldn't have mattered, so it wouldn't have come out.\

you get less refugees from the East and the Orient than us, partly due to geography, partly due to the fact that many in the East hate you.

Perhaps, but we certain get a LOT of immigrants from the East and Orient. More than you guys, I'm sure. You will see, especially on the West Coast, many East Asian communities, and every major city on the East Coast has Asia'towns'. There is also a growing Muslim population (5% of Americans are Muslim, IIRC) and a very quick growing Indian population (it helps that they are good with computers ).

[Victor Galis]

How about rebellious German province?

-You mean Bavaria? And I believe the propper term is staat.

[Victor Galis]

Because if Gore won Tennessee, we'd have little or no idea of the 'fraud' that happened in Florida. It simply wouldn't have mattered, so it wouldn't have come out.

-Then I suppose there was a silver lining to the whole thing. Too bad people have very short memories and no real electoral reform will come of this.

[Whaleboy]

"but we certain get a LOT of immigrants from the East and Orient"

I stand corrected, although as a fraction of your population, I think we get more immigrants per year. The government has messed up distribution and cultural adaptation, as well as education programs, with the result that many are just released into hostile communities.

I guess America has more experience with immigrants, though we have had more immigration for longer, we had a gap between 1066 and the age of empire, the vast majority of Americans are immigrants, perhaps no more than 6th - 3rd generation for the most part. As such, perhaps American society is better at adapting in this respect.

[Imran Siddiqui]

that the spectacle in Florida helps refute the point that this country is a functioning democracy

Totally disagree. Did the elections in 2002 seems to be disfunctional? No. They functioned fine and representatives got elected fine. Once in a while, you hear about election fraud and people think the sky is falling.

Relax, it still is a functioning democracy. I haven't seen the military take over yet. The people that claim that we don't have a functioning democracy all seem to be the ones that don't like Bush. The next time a Democrat gets elected President, will they still say the US doesn't have a functioning democracy. $100 says no.

[Kirnwaffen]

In terms of what people think of him, it is comparable. The actual mechanics of the policies is a completely different matter

The 'mechanics of the policies' are integral to the perception of any government. Because of the fear Saddam provoked in the Iraqi people, their perception of him will be fundamentally different from the British perception of Tony Blair.

He was tolerating a slightly larger degree of dissent than previously when he was younger. It is a possible explanation for why the Iraqi people havent rose up against Saddam for years. Another reason was the fear after the previous ones failed when the Americans refused to help after the gulf war I, which would seem to indicate that concern for Iraqi people doesnt exactly rank particularly highly. A convenient, emotive excuse for a people whose government has blinded them by the flag.

When it comes down to it, Saddam would not have tolerated a full scale revolt. Whether the Americans helped the Iraqi people in their revolt before is irrelevant. The Iraqi people did not revolt because they knew they would be crushed.

[Victor Galis]

Relax, it still is a functioning democracy. I haven't seen the military take over yet.

- Why bother with a bloody coup when they can just get everything they want through Bush?

The next time a Democrat gets elected President, will they still say the US doesn't have a functioning democracy. $100 says no.

-Depends. My cynicism is reaching new heights. Too many "Democrats" nowadays are so much like Republicans it's not funny. I'm seriously considering joining the Green Party myself... I just wish they could put together a platform that had a snowball's chance in hell of appealing to more than 1% of the population. If they could just stick to being the Green Party and not the Communist Party as well, they could probably make some small inroads.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I stand corrected, although as a fraction of your population, I think we get more immigrants per year. The government has messed up distribution and cultural adaptation, as well as education programs, with the result that many are just released into hostile communities.

That could be true. The US tends to get immigrants from everywhere . As you said, the US is used to immigrants and better adapting. My entire father's side of the family have all immigrated to the United States in the last 30 years (Pakistani Muslims). We also tend to immigrate a lot of Latin Americans (obviously). I think the reason Britain has more Indians/Pakistanis is because you colonized them, so they feel more at home in your country (I actually have an uncle in South Essex... he and his wife are both doctors, his eldest daughter is a dentist, youngest daughter is a lawyer, and the son is studying in London to be a doctor... gladly they've assimilated well). And it is obvious why Turks would be in Europe and Algerians in France. The problem is you gotta be more accepting of these people. Though I'm sure Britain will be quite alright (having far spred out colonies tends to make you blokes a bit more cosmopolitan... of course, if that's the reason, then I have no idea what is up with the French .

[Imran Siddiqui]

Why bother with a bloody coup when they can just get everything they want through Bush?

You make my point for me too easily . The current military isn't too happy at all with Rumsfeld's new ideas for modernizing the military. And Rummy has Bush's ear more than the military.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Why bother with a bloody coup when they can just get everything they want through Bush?

You make my point for me too easily . The current military isn't too happy at all with Rumsfeld's new ideas for modernizing the military. And Rummy has Bush's ear more than the military.

I mean seriously, look at what the Bush administration is doing. It's very obvious that they are not interested in the good of the people, but rather the good of those who gave them the money to buy the votes. Obviously the votes were not bought directly, but through campaign spending. In order for this country to have a functioning democratic system, it needs campaign finance reform and possibly a less apathetic population (Hey, it'd be cheaper to outsource all the voting to Canada).

[Whaleboy]

" The 'mechanics of the policies' are integral to the perception of any government. Because of the fear Saddam provoked in the Iraqi people, their perception of him will be fundamentally different from the British perception of Tony Blair"

Yes of course, but not to a relevant degree in this argument. My point is that the Iraqis could tolerate Saddam, whereas they cannot tolerate the Americans.

" When it comes down to it, Saddam would not have tolerated a full scale revolt. Whether the Americans helped the Iraqi people in their revolt before is irrelevant. The Iraqi people did not revolt because they knew they would be crushed"

It is entirely relevant because it shows the thinking in the government and civil service circles. Pretty much the same people in power now as then (in terms of thinking).

The fear of being crushed is of course important, but then I doubt the Iraqi army could have coped with a civilian revolt. It was underfunded and underequipped, suffering from years of sanctions etc. The Americans can attest to that, in battle. The republican guard was vastly overestimated. The population on the other hand had guns freely available to them. You see cases on the TV of 10 year old kids with shotguns, an