When terrorists organizations like Hamas & Hezbollah can gain great influence or take over a national Govt. by legally getting voted in through democracy, is an aggressive approach of promoting democracy in the Mideast (such as the US is doing) such a good idea?
Who's to say that Iraq won't vote in a radical anti-US Govt. if/when the US leaves Iraq?
2007-06-18 02:55:44 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
No it is not the best government for the mentality of the culture. But we "Americans" deal in absolutes. -Absolute contradictions. -Our way or the highway. Or we could several billion in re-education camps. My sarcasm is frustration and every time i get my pay and 25% has gone to all these ridiculous notion’s of "free" society and solution's to 1,000 year wars
2007-06-18 03:05:37 · answer #1 · answered by ROCKET 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
THERE ARE NO DEMOCRACIES ANYWHERE IN THIS WORLD!!!!
That is the first thing you MUST understand
The U.S.A. is NOT a Democracy.
It is a Republic with a Constitution.
The citizens democratically elect representatives who are sworn to uphold the Constitution.
Those representatives cannot do just ANYTHING they wish . They have violated the law if they do things that are disallowed under the framework of the Constitution.
The Middle East can have this type of "Democracy" if they establish an AGREED UPON Constitution and method of Governing PRIOR to their first elections and have a government with LIMITED powers. The military must be commanded by leaders who, likewise agree to and are sworn to uphold the constitution.
Their power must be limited also.
If the Constitution cannot be agreed upon first?
Forget it.
It won't work.
Elected representatives of the various groups must sit down FIRST, work out the details and agree upon an accepted method of governing. That requires the ability to compromise. If the citizens REFUSE to compromise? Again, it will never happen.
Once that is done, they will then have the legal authority to enforce it.
2007-06-18 10:31:05 · answer #2 · answered by Philip H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's the risk with representative government. I would argue democracy is the best form of government in general because it allows those most affected by its actions to decide whether or not to keep the same leadership. The downside is the chance of electing radicals. A strong democracy is probably the best for any nation but it may not be the most realistic to aquire.
2007-06-18 23:32:39 · answer #3 · answered by bridge man 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's too soon to tell for sure, but I think Democracies might be a good idea. Hezbollah is in the minority in Lebanon and the Iraqis elected a moderate government. Hamas won in the last election in the Palestinian territories, but I suspect they'll lose in the next election, now that the voters have seen how bad it is to have them in power.
2007-06-18 12:12:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gee, from all the rebellion they're doing I'd take it as a pretty good sign the answer is NOOOOOOO!!!!!!
What if they came to America and forced Muslim onto you? Come on. It's the BEST form of Government. You steal they cut your hand off, you cheat they stone you to death. I'd say it's a pretty peaceful existance. Hey whine all you want but Muslim rules...how do you like those apples?
And if you start causing trouble a few martyrs for the cause will put you in your place fast enough...okee dokee?
Getting the picture?
And you got that right hotel. That field of grey is much bigger than it's white or black extremes.
And Hugh, you forgot to tag US to that list. Then we're in full agreement. People were so desperate they took the rebels on as leaders...would you call that winning a war? I'd call it oops we're screwed now.
JUNTO...that's the problem deary, they can't seem to take a hint. You remember the old saying take an inch they want an arm? America's help does not come without great expectations in return. Imagine backing dictators...then when things don't go your way? Maybe that's what really went on with Iraq. Saddy didn't want to play...he got greedy.
2007-06-18 10:02:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Hamas was a freely elected government, in an election supervised for fairness by no less than Jimmy Carter. Hezbollah is largely a political party with distributes social services and charity to people in Southern Lebanon. Neither party would exist if it hadn't been for the stupidty, greed, and aggression of Israelis.
2007-06-18 10:00:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This sort of thing has happened often in US history. The US brings democracy to a nation only to have it elect an anti-US government. That is why the US has backed so many dictators and military coups in the past - to ensure that governments friendly to US business interests are protected.
A guy has written a great book about it. I will try to find a link.
2007-06-18 09:59:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's good that you see how foolish and implausible it is. It may have worked for the Greeks, being different but civil, but it isn't going to work for those who can easily pressure the populous through fear.
It isn't working out that great for America right now is it? Bush pressured us all to fear the claimed impending doom and we all bought it. Now look at the mess we are in. We voted a radical government into power, so most likely they will too.
Ridiculous isn't it?
2007-06-18 10:02:26 · answer #8 · answered by Rothwyn 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's a feudalistic economy...kings and such. Free enterprise democracy cannot work...but you can't tell big dick, or small george that.
2007-06-18 09:59:19 · answer #9 · answered by Thomas Paine 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They might, or, more than likely, the current govt will get overthrown as soon as we leave.
2007-06-18 09:59:07 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋