- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 610682
Originally posted by StarValleyWyGood point Star. While we are a minority in forums, we are a majority in the real world.
I reject your attempt at sophistry. GW represents the views and actions approved by about 75% of us. We knew what we were doing in bringing down a ruthless dictator. Your inane world view is silly. Is that about plain enough for you? And if you think you can say that we "thank god each day for 911" as you say our ELECTED, SUPPORTED AND WELL LOVED LEAD ...[text shortened]... ns" bs... you must think we are idots. think about it.. you are with us or you are against us.
Originally posted by belgianfreakFron Webster's Dictionary
serious question - can anyone give me the official defenition of a dictator?
Dic-ta-tor-ship
1: the office of Dictator
2: autocratic rule, control, or leadership
3a: a from of government in which absolute power is conentrated in a dictator or a small clique.
3b: a government organization or group in which absolute power is so conentrated.
3c: a despotic state.
hope that helps
Originally posted by belgianfreakSeriously... read the novel "1984" by Eric Blair. <alias George Orwell, and yes it is a great uncle or some such> then read "Why Orwell Matters" then take a two week holliday in North Korea, which is the most obvious example of what a dictatorship is. You should have a much better understanding at that point.
serious question - can anyone give me the official defenition of a dictator?
Originally posted by UncleAdamThanks, but I was looking less for a dictionary defenition of the word and more for an explanation of exactly what constitutes a dictatorship. I guess points 3a & 3b cover some of it, that it is a govenment with absolute power concentrated into a very small group. I was just trying to assess what chriteria a leadership must fullfill to be a dictatorship & are they a dictatorship from everybodies perspective or is it subjective? Also, although it is very likely to be or to turn into, is a dictatorship necessarily a bad thing?
Fron Webster's Dictionary
Dic-ta-tor-ship
1: the office of Dictator
2: autocratic rule, control, or leadership
3a: a from of government in which absolute power is conentrated in a dictator or a small clique.
3b: a government organization or group in which absolute power is so conentrated.
3c: a despotic state.
hope that helps
Originally posted by belgianfreakWell I guess the best why to figuer that out would be to vist a country ruled be a dictator and see what is diffrent, good and bad
Thanks, but I was looking less for a dictionary defenition of the word and more for an explanation of exactly what constitutes a dictatorship. I guess points 3a & 3b cover some of it, that it is a govenment with absolute power concentrated into a very small group. I was just trying to assess what chriteria a leadership must fullfill to be a dictatorship ...[text shortened]... o, although it is very likely to be or to turn into, is a dictatorship necessarily a bad thing?
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI'm not being funny here, but is this sarcasm?
GWB and 75% of us ARE ONE. UNITED. INVIVISIBLE. OF THE SAME MIND. in agreement. how much clearer could it be. you don't understand democracy. one nation with one elected leader in charge of our army. majority point of view rules for all. 75% to 25%. our point of view is GWB's point of view. period. nothing else could be simpler. if we don't like wha ...[text shortened]... he does, we vote him out. 75% of us will re-elect him by a landslide because we agree with him.
As Winston Churchill said, democracy may not be perfect, but it's the best we've got.
Presidents can do stuff after they are elected that you didn't expect them to and don't agree with.
I voted for Blair, but I wouldn't again because I disagree with what he does (not specifically the war).
We cannot just 'get rid' of our leaders, we have to wait for election time.
Originally posted by Vargits not sarcasm, he is talking about if we dont like we dont vote for him next election or if we do like him we do vote for him.
I'm not being funny here, but is this sarcasm?
As Winston Churchill said, democracy may not be perfect, but it's the best we've got.
Presidents can do stuff after they are elected that you didn't expect them to and don't agree with.
I voted for Blair, but I wouldn't again because I disagree with what he does (not specifically the war).
We cannot just 'get rid' of our leaders, we have to wait for election time.
Originally posted by UncleAdamSo do you believe that everybody who supports GWB is one and united?
its not sarcasm, he is talking about if we dont like we dont vote for him next election or if we do like him we do vote for him.
Maybe so.
But something like 60% in Britain were opposed to the war. Now it has started it is maybe 25%. So not everybody who supports the war supports iit for the same reasons or is 100% behind it.
And if we decide we don't like our leaders, are we traitors until the next election?
Originally posted by Varggood question!
So do you believe that everybody who supports GWB is one and united?
Maybe so.
But something like 60% in Britain were opposed to the war. Now it has started it is maybe 25%. So not everybody who supports the war supports iit for the same reasons or is 100% behind it.
And if we decide we don't like our leaders, are we traitors until the next election?
Originally posted by VargMaby not the exact same reasons, but basicly yes.
So do you believe that everybody who supports GWB is one and united?
Maybe so.
But something like 60% in Britain were opposed to the war. Now it has started it is maybe 25%. So not everybody who supports the war supports iit for the same reasons or is 100% behind it.
And if we decide we don't like our leaders, are we traitors until the next election?
no your not traitors because you may or may not have voted for thar person, and he may have done things that you didnt agree with, and you are alowed to change your mind
Originally posted by UncleAdamBut that's why I object to all this 'if you are not with us you are against us' stuff.
Maby not the exact same reasons, but basicly yes.
no your not traitors because you may or may not have voted for thar person, and he may have done things that you didnt agree with, and you are alowed to change your mind
It is everone's right (in a democracy) to disagree with their leaders without being labelled a traitor.
What i do is to hear both bells and later i make my own opinion. With the news you receive in Us I assure you are not real updated because there are many things that they dont show. I like to look foward the real truth no what others want me to think. It would help to read www.aljazeera.net/english and cnn.com you can judge by yourself.
Originally posted by VargNot everyone here subsribes to the 'love it or leave it' school of thought. You really ought not take too much from these polls, while a substantial number of people support military action, many others did not support the war prior to the attack and do so now merely because they feel they must 'support the troops'. This is very common, in almost all conflicts the people rally in support of the administration while the conflict in underway, unless casualties begin to mount. It would also be a mistake to think that just because there is widespread support for Bush Jr. currently, this will translate to a victory in the mext presidential election. Bush Sr. had something ridiculous like 90+% approval ratings after the end of the first Gulf War, and he failed to regain the presidency primarily because of wideapread dissatisfaction with the domestic economy. If things continue here the way they've been going for last couple years, the same fate may befall Bush Jr.
But that's why I object to all this 'if you are not with us you are against us' stuff.
It is everone's right (in a democracy) to disagree with their leaders without being labelled a traitor.