|
Post by wild on Jun 7, 2007 11:17:54 GMT -6
Who is responsible for the 70000+ deaths in Iraq? If a state launchs an unprovoked attack on another state are the citizens of the aggressor state responsible for the loss of life? Citizens share in the fortunes of the state.Patriotism and pride in nation are everywhere in evidence in the US.If the ups are shared then the downs must also be shared. The US has for over 4 years presided over the destruction of Iraq.During that 4 years all the institutions of the American state supported the war.Those institutions were staffed and operated by citizens.Without the entire apparatus of state functioning in support of the action taken by the executive it would not have been possible to have waged such a war.In my opinion the citizens of the US are by supporting , by association and by acquiescience answerable for the loss of 70000 lives.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Jun 7, 2007 11:24:51 GMT -6
Not every American agrees with the current administration's policies, foreign or domestic. Evidence is the Nov. elections when Republicans were thrown out. However, not enough of them for the Democrats to over-ride the president's veto's.
So when saying the citizens of the US are supporting those losses is incorrect . . . some are, many are not.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jun 7, 2007 11:41:23 GMT -6
A civil reply.Well thank you for that crzhs.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jun 7, 2007 14:59:35 GMT -6
Was the invason of Iraq a failure of democracy? In Britian the overwhelming majority were against it.Whatever about support for the war at the outset the overwhelming majority of Americans are against it now. In a functioning democracy where the chief executive/government has authority to use military force there are checks and balances.Democratic states are not expected to wage wars of aggression. So why did he checks and balances not kick in?Because the information on which these checks and balances react was tampered with....WMDs etc. I imagine when all tnis is over, Britian and the US will review it's proceedures and hopefuly put in place a system which will prevent the abuse of demotratic power ever happening again.
|
|
|
Post by markland on Jun 8, 2007 0:45:39 GMT -6
Wild, just so you do not misunderstand. I do not like you.I like you liam.You have contributed enormously to maintaining historical accuracy in our debates.I think I ran foul of you by posting my opinon on the issue of genocide .And obviously my opinions on US foreign policy does not go down well with you. These are two controvershial issues which can inject a certain amount of heat into a debate .It is a pity that someone who makes use of research and reliable evidence as debating tools should in this case rely on emotion. Slan You bastard, you are addictive, like a scab you keep picking! While I will rephrase my statements to state that I utterly despise your on-line persona, I somehow suspect that we could drink an adult beverage together in peace, unless you started babbling nonsensical political opinions. With that criteria, you now fit into the same category that George Bush, AKA, "Shrub" fits into. Regarding the war: crap happens. You plan for contingencies, you game plan for the worst-case; but in the end, there is always some poor innocent by-stander who gets nailed, whether because the regime in power put military stores in amongst a civilian population or whether Murphy's Law strikes. You have expended five minutes of my life tonight....feel grateful. Billy
|
|
|
Post by wild on Jun 8, 2007 7:43:32 GMT -6
You bastard, Unfortunately Billy only by inclination.
you are addictive, like a scab you keep picking! Ah! God loves a masochist come to repent.
While I will rephrase my statements to state that I utterly despise your on-line persona I can understand that reaction from a true son of America.Any issue calling into question the honor of a nation will trigger an emotional visceral response.
I somehow suspect that we could drink an adult beverage together in peace, I'v a couple of nice cool pints of Guinness on order. Slan
|
|
|
Post by mwkeogh on Jun 10, 2007 21:52:55 GMT -6
Have I entered the wrong room? I thought the subject of this thread was about "Wild I"!
|
|
|
Post by wild on Mar 9, 2008 3:00:26 GMT -6
Who is responsible for the 70000+ deaths in Iraq? If a state launchs an unprovoked attack on another state are the citizens of the aggressor state responsible for the loss of life? Citizens share in the fortunes of the state.Patriotism and pride in nation are everywhere in evidence in the US.If the ups are shared then the downs must also be shared. The US has for over 4 years presided over the destruction of Iraq.During that 4 years all the institutions of the American state supported the war.Those institutions were staffed and operated by citizens.Without the entire apparatus of state functioning in support of the action taken by the executive it would not have been possible to have waged such a war.In my opinion the citizens of the US are by supporting , by association and by acquiescience answerable for the loss of 70000 lives
The only thing that has changed since I posted the above is that the death toll has risen 10 fold.And yes I nearly forgot DC no longer debates with me. So just to revisit the question again---- Are individual citizens of a democatic state responsible for the actions of it's government?
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Mar 10, 2008 19:50:56 GMT -6
I will offer my opinion on the above question without having done more than skim the preceding diatribes. I think citizens of a democracy are responsible for voting in every single election that they qualify for, without exception. I haven't missed one since my 21st birthday. I certainly intend to vote in the next one, and it's definitely gonna be one to tell our grandchildren about! I can only hope that a reasonably morally responsible government will be elected, and I will do my best to see that it is.
|
|
|
Post by stevewilk on Mar 10, 2008 23:53:52 GMT -6
Except, Melani, that we live (or should live, anyway) in a Republic, not a democracy. The term "democracy" does not appear anywhere in our Constitution, nor in any of the constitutions of the fifty state republics.
There also is no "right" to vote in our Constitution. There are simply amendments preventing certain persons from being denied the vote.
Being qualified to vote does not necessarily mean one should do so. How many voters out there do you think can summarize any of the amendments comprising the Bill of Rights? Hell, today's high school or college senior couldn't even find Washington DC on a map let alone explain the functions of government. Recall the recent debate where Hillary is asked about driver's licenses to illegal aliens.....uh, the Federal govt. has NOTHING to do with a driver's license. The states issue these, but neither she nor Obama could figure this out. Scary.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Mar 11, 2008 1:07:10 GMT -6
In my personal opinion, not nearly as scary as what's going on now. I never said anything about the "right" to vote. I said "responsibility." That includes being informed on the issues.
|
|
|
Post by wild on Mar 11, 2008 3:00:08 GMT -6
Stevewilk/Melani
My question could be construed as trolling but I'm really genuinely interested in how Americans would answer the question.
The method used by the USA to bring about change in Iraq was war.The cost of that war is being mainly paid by innocent Iraqis.5 Years of war in which they have seen their country destroyed hundreds of thousands dead, hundreds of thousands driven from their homes, 5 years of ruination. I'm reading that Americans are now bored with the whole thing and but for you two good people my question would have gone unanswered. The entity which is the US,the sum total of its citizens waged war,are the citizens of that entity responsible for the human and material destruction resulting from the war?
|
|
|
Post by clw on Mar 11, 2008 8:00:58 GMT -6
After reading the comments on the various Indian apology threads, both on these boards and elsewhere, most people don't seem to feel responsible for the acts of their government. I'm not making a judgment, just stating a fact.
|
|
|
Post by Diane Merkel on Mar 11, 2008 12:03:02 GMT -6
And the government representatives seldom listen to the people they represent. There is definitely a trend towards ignoring the masses because those in power believe they know best. The one recent exception to that was the proposed immigation bill last year, yet the lawmakers continue to try to get it through in bits and pieces. A great is example of "they know best" is the Democrat's Super Delegate system. Forget how the little people voted; the Super Delegates could override the primaries and nominate whoever they want.
Governments are not alone in this. Most organizations -- and probably corporations -- are the same way.
|
|
|
Post by markland on Mar 11, 2008 13:08:42 GMT -6
<snip> Recall the recent debate where Hillary is asked about driver's licenses to illegal aliens.....uh, the Federal govt. has NOTHING to do with a driver's license. The states issue these, but neither she nor Obama could figure this out. Scary. Steve, there is something afoot were the Federal government is mandating some type of universal driver's license, ostensibly in the interest of "Homeland Security." And they are using Federal highway funds as well as the threat of not allowing citizens of non-compliant states to pass security checkpoints as clubs to force the states to adopt the plan. Be good, Billy
|
|