The Middle East, UN, or Democrats
2006-08-24 14:15:30 · 18 answers · asked by Walter D 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
DEMS! without a doubt!
2006-08-24 14:20:57 · answer #1 · answered by Riss 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, I would say our current political system needs an overhaul. It is becoming that which our founding fathers feared, large and unaccountable. But, I would not consider it dangerous (yet).
I would have to say for me there would be a tie between the UN and the Middle East. The corruption within the UN has been the catalyst for many of the problems around the world getting worse. No, I did not say they created them. I said they have made them worse.
The Middle East is a ticking time bomb. If we are not successful at helping the Iraqi people create a functioning democracy, I think that we will be in deep sh*t. That region of the world has always been unstable because of the beliefs these people have. Some are more extremist than others. But if they are true Muslims, they believe that the infidel must convert or die. Exactly how are we to negotiate with that as our starting point? There is no negotiating. So, my vote is for both the UN and Middle East.
2006-08-24 14:28:08 · answer #2 · answered by Camping Chick 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Middle East, as a region, has a far greater potential for either inducing, provoking or setting the stage for serious harm.
The UN can't do anything without help, and the Democrats as a party have shown themselves to be largely ineffectual (with a few dangerous exceptions).
2006-08-24 14:20:28 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Republicans that were the catalyst for the trouble with the UN and Middle East.
2006-08-24 14:20:51 · answer #4 · answered by TXChristDem 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the middle east
2006-08-24 14:23:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
there is no difference, for one party to exist in piece with it self it will require a goal of some sort to focus on and in many cases such goal is more likely to be a some sort of an enemy that a party would fight against to be united on most of the issues they will deal with.
2006-08-24 14:22:14 · answer #6 · answered by toolpro_2000 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gee!!! You left out the most dangerous thing on the planet!!!! ~ We have a nutcase, with a finger on the trigger of the worlds largest "Nuke-You-Ler" arsenal, in residence at our own White House!!!!
Doc
2006-08-24 14:21:48 · answer #7 · answered by Arbuckle Doc 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
people who think others are dangerous are the biggest source of danger
peace loving people are easy to get along with
we need a military to protect ourselves from others who think we are dangerous
2006-08-24 14:22:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
damnocrats who love terrorist and worship at the un
2006-08-24 14:24:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dems, oh G-D were going to die, this next election, their going to try and hold hands with the extremist's, and play huggie kissie with them. unless we get another Truman, and I don't see that happening.
2006-08-24 14:28:43 · answer #10 · answered by hexa 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Which is more idiotic? Your question, or George W. Bush. I think it's a tie, folks.
2006-08-24 14:20:56 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋