politicartoons | (no subject)

johnraptor.livejournal.com posting in

politicartoons

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

kmilligan.livejournal.com

but how exactly does one impose democracy on a people? If democracy is, by it's nature, a form of government selected by its people, how can we impose that?

If you're suggesting they don't want democracy... how do you know? Has there ever been an election? What if, and maybe I'm crazy here, some of these countries just happened to end up ruled by whatever thug criminal family was willing to use the most terror to stay in power?

(deleted comment)

From:

kmilligan.livejournal.com

I acknowledge that people may fear we're trying to turn Iraqis into good little Americans, but I think the fear should be unfounded as long as the Iraqi people are free, through an elected government, to make their own choices.

I suspect we won't be entirely happy with some of the choies they make, but we have to let them make those choices. As long as there is an elected government, and a decent respect for basic human rights, I don't think we will have much too say.

From:

johnraptor.livejournal.com

"But, wow, thats an ugly comic..."
*Puts back of hand to forehead* Oh no! My fragile artist's heart is breakin'!

Seriously, political cartoons aren't meant to be pretty. In fact, most of them are pretty hideous, if you realy want to get critical. They're supposed to spur conversation (preferably intelligent conversation) on a particular subject, and judging from the quantity and quality of intelligent and thoughtful responses to this post, including yours, I'd say this 'ugly comic' has done it's job pretty well.

(deleted comment)

From:

johnraptor.livejournal.com

That's cool dude. I know my drawings aren't all that good, and I draw them under a thinly veiled pen-name/alter-ego, so I don't blame you for not knowing it was me, though I didn't think I'd actualy fool anyone.

From:

cydesho.livejournal.com

I believe that Donald Rumsfeld has stated that if during the elections, the people of Iraq voted to become an Islamic theocracy, the results would be annulled. So basically, if they choose a form of government other than democracy, we're gonna step in and stop them. Sounds like its being imposed to me.

From:

kmilligan.livejournal.com

If I'm recalling what you're referring to, I think what Rumself was saying was that an Islamic theocracy won't be allowed to come into power in Iraq. Not that the Iraqis can't freely chose an Islamic Republic. I don't think we'll have an issue with Iraq declaring themselves an Islamic Republic. Afghanistan effectively did that, and elections were allowed to proceed. Separation of church and state, as we understand it in the west, is a rather foreign concept in these societies, and not one I think we're going to actively impose.

It's been the case in history that dictatorships have been elected. What will be prevented from happening is elected theocrats subverting the democratic process so they can remain in power, much like Hitler subverted the Weimar Republic in order to keep the Nazis in power. Keeping the democratic process in place is the important part. They should be, and I think they will be, allowed to pick a government that we view as less than desireable, based on our own cultural preferences.

From:

itsjustkelly.livejournal.com

Rumself?

Anyway, that's definitely what Powell was saying at the time. The only quote I remember/can find from Rumsfeld is ambiguous... ""If you're suggesting, how would we feel about an Iranian-type government with a few clerics running everything in the country, the answer is: That isn't going to happen." Could be interpreted to mean an intervention... probably just poorly worded.