Discussion in 'Politics' started by bsparkyman, Dec 29, 2006.
Gerald Ford, James Brown, Sadamm.... God bless the two of them.
Let it be known that all three were excellent dancers. Except Ford.
all three shared parents that gave them common names...but their special attributes came out in the end..
Saddam did accomplish one thing that no other person or country has been able to do...he united Iraq. Now without Saddam, its turned into a killing zone on the brink of civil war.
If I had to choose between two evils, I would have rather left Iraq alone and Saddam in control.
Sometimes you have to just leave "bad enough" alone or otherwise deal with far greater consequences...
All of this did not stop America in their beginnings? What if our cival war stopped us? Some people prefer democarcy over anarchy...
Please excuse the reply...this is a Wall Street News thread and I am posting off-topic..
One has to come to the realization that what works in the United States may not work elsewhere in the world. To impose US culture and government on other countries is wrong and will only land the Americans in greater trouble.
In Great Britain, its guilty until proven innocent, where as in the United States, its innocent until proven guilty. An American who commits a crime in Great Britain might be shocked that he is presumed guilty.
This legal system does not seem very fair or part of the Democratic ideal from an American's standpoint. However, the men in Great Britain's jails have actually committed the crimes they are accused of where as its a mystery in America's jails if the men actually committed the crime.
Although the American system seems democratic from the outside, other systems may work more efficiently in other parts of the world. When mentioning the American ideals of Democracy, you cannot forget the 2 million men that are imprisoned there, most who are black and may be innocent.
You cannot forget that in every US election, there seems to be only two choices. Democrat and Republican. Is this a Democratic system where you only have two choices? The elections held in other countries produce a menu of choices, not just two, where the citizens have a variety of different choices. Can we say that other countries are more Democratic then the United States if the citizens have more of a choice besides just two guys? Two guys that they had very little say in picking in the first place?
What it comes down to is what the people want...do they want the American system or something different. If they do not want the American system then it should not be imposed on them.
The Democracy in the United States is not really a Democracy anyway. You have your pick of two choices and there is no in-between. The last election was between two mediocre choices, Kerry and Bush. The voters had to decide who would be the better evil. To myself, this is a false sense of Democracy and not the real deal.
What? Where did you get this info?
This info at the end of 2005:
2,193,798 prisoners were held in Federal or State prisons or in local jails.
At year end 2005 there were 3,145 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,244 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 471 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.
black male: 3,145/100,000 = 3.145%
3.145% out of the entire prison population of 2,193,798 would be about 689,968 black male.
You will have to triple that number to get to 2 million
Most of them inncent? Who are you kidding?
This is the reason the US democracy is not good?
This has to be the funniest post of the year.
I'm not in prison... I'm white... and even I'm guilty
Yes, if you have a choice, you would have choose evil instead of do the right thing.
Saddam was only killing his own people... He was just taking back Kuwait, which belong to Iraq... Who care..
Yes, this is the same logic, when Hitler invaded Poland. Who care!!!
What kind of logic is this? Blind eye logic.
Separate names with a comma.