This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.
This discussion is closed: you can't post new comments.

Reply to comment

MarciaMarcia

5 August 2008 - 12:53am

Quote:

Another substantial discussion, right Candace? "...creating the new international institutions necessary to advance the peace and freedoms we cherish..." is clearly a reference to his proposed League of Democracies which you dislike, but never refute beyond "..load of crap" Wow, that really clears up any confusion.

You mean you dont see the irony there? Are you pretending to be stupid in order to troll me or are you just trying to troll me?

" Perhaps above all, leadership in today’s world means accepting and fulfilling our responsibilities as a great nation." (JM speech)

Candace wrote:

Responsibility to Americans first! He continually implies >fix America by fixing all the countries that do not think like us< which is outrageously stupid.

and then you said

IM wrote:

Your interpretation, not mine. The US is one of the great world superpowers. There is a responsibility that comes with that status, if that status is to be retained. You can lead, follow, or get out of the way. Only if you lead, can you influence the direction of the path.

The best way to lead is by example not by force.

And why do we need a league of democracies? There is no need for it - unless you need an institution to help promote war when ou encounter resistance.

Is the league of democracies going to decide when we go to war?

If we have a problem with our democracy then we need to fix it at home. Our problems are not a result of democracy missing in other countries.

IM wrote:

Advance our values" refers to the promotion of democratic values. Methods are first and foremost peaceful.

until theres resistance.

IM wrote:

In areas of the world where there is a "common belief we're immoral" that judgment is often based in ignorance, religious bias, and medias that are manipulated for political agendas.

And you neocons dont have any beliefs about the middle east based on your religion or polical agendas?

IM wrote:

The fact is, when it comes to democratic freedoms, you have to accept the fact that some people will make a free choice for immorality. Any truly democratic society will have to deal with the consequences of free will--immorality.

So you are going to impose a society that states its ok to do the wrong thing in the Middle East [i]peacefully[/i]? The land of social conservatism? What if popular opinion disagrees with you? Then what happens to their democratic rights?

Candace wrote:

What about the collective will of Middle Eastern countries and any others that don't want to be like us? Do we need to listen to their views and respect them?

you said:

IM wrote:

Absolutely! And as long as they don't try to kill us,

In other words: anyone who resists is a terrorist

IM wrote:

then we can afford to live and let live. But the fact remains that many of these countries have few resources EXCEPT their oil and they cannot eat it; they have to trade with the world community if they want our goods and services.That means they need to listen to OUR views and respect them.

How haven't they? Who's threatening our democracy?