Thread: Strike against Syria

Originally Posted by Johnus

Syria. Interesting that the only major nation that's interested in a military action against Syria is France. Now lets see, what other Wars did they get us into???
1776, 1812, 1898, 1917, 1944, 1960's.....

France is simply the only other country at this time that is willing to commit with Military force..

I don't know about AU any longer where they are at.


But many other countries are deciding what they should do while the UN finishes their report..


The issue for the US was Omoron's redline speech and the fact that he has not made friends out there, he has not tried ..

One more thing... If we as a nation are so interested in a Democracy as opposed to a Republic, and since times have changed so much, why not make it so? We certainly have the resources to do so.

I'm not trying to start an argument, I just think that if the debate is hinged on where we are in time and technology, we have the means. Personally, I think most folks are uneducated on the subject and don't know the difference.

Originally Posted by Vegita182

But I'm afraid we are missing an important issue. Congress and the executive branch overstep their boundaries because there is no longer any accountability. The American people are asleep from the feast of government assistance. Under Obama foodstamps are now issued to one in every three families. Keep filling a cats bowl up with food and he keeps eating. What family is going to risk losing assistance for bucking the system, our electing someone against it?

Certainly. That's why I pointed out laziness, ignorance and cowardice earlier.

Originally Posted by crouton976

The United States isn't a Democracy, but rather a Federal Republic, and a Constitutional Representative Democracy . Most citizens of the US wouldn't be able to tell you this, so if you didn't know before, don't feel bad. This basically means we have a large central Government, a Constitution and through a Democratic process elect officials to handle legislation, which is the only democratic part of our nation. The sad part is that while sometimes legislative matters may come to a vote the citizens can take part in, it is only to show the elected officials for their area the general consensus the people have. If the elected official doesn't agree with the majority vote of his or her constituents, they can certainly vote the opposite direction. That is not Democracy.

As you rightly say the USA is a republic however it employs a democratic system a.k.a. a democracy. The fact that an elected representative may vote opposite to the majority of their constituents wishes, or every constituent is not asked to cast a ballot to decide every issue doesn't mean it's no longer a democracy. You may not like this fact but it is irrefutable (see below). If in the future you don't have the right to elect your official representative you would then not have a democracy. Short of that ... you got a democracy. Period.

To borrow a phrase "what's absolutely astounding". To me it's the number of citizens who don't use the one most powerful tool they have in their hands (their vote) to affect democratic change. They don't seem to take it seriously. They think it makes no difference. This couldn't be farther from the truth. If you don't like the way your government is working then organize and communicate your displeasure to your elected representative. Do it effectively and continuously. Don't just complain about it or theorize why it doesn't or won't work. Ultimately use your collective vote to change it. After all it is a democracy.


de·moc·ra·cy

[dih-mok-ruh-see]
noun, plural de·moc·ra·cies.1.government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by
them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

France is simply the only other country at this time that is willing to commit with Military force..

Does this mean we can go back to calling them french fries??

Dunno but the rukus over the difference between a democracy and a republic seems like splitting hairs to me What is the difference between a republic and a democracy . There seems to be a few varieties of democracy of which a republic may or may not be one. Anyway, it does not matter if the checks and balances built into any democracy are circumvented or otherwise voided.

Bob

Originally Posted by Brenngun

As you rightly say the USA is a republic however it employs a democratic system a.k.a. a democracy. The fact that an elected representative may vote opposite to the majority of their constituents wishes, or every constituent is not asked to cast a ballot to decide every issue doesn't mean it's no longer a democracy. You may not like this fact but it is irrefutable (see below). If in the future you don't have the right to elect your official representative you would then not have a democracy. Short of that ... you got a democracy. Period.

To borrow a phrase "what's absolutely astounding". To me it's the number of citizens who don't use the one most powerful tool they have in their hands (their vote) to affect democratic change. They don't seem to take it seriously. They think it makes no difference. This couldn't be farther from the truth. If you don't like the way your government is working then organize and communicate your displeasure to your elected representative. Do it effectively and continuously. Don't just complain about it or theorize why it doesn't or won't work. Ultimately use your collective vote to change it. After all it is a democracy.


de·moc·ra·cy

[dih-mok-ruh-see]
noun, plural de·moc·ra·cies.1.government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by
them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

Wrong, sir.

re·pub·lic (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government
b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government
c : a usually specified republican government of a political unit
2
: a body of persons freely engaged in a specified activity
3
: a constituent political and territorial unit of the former nations of Czechoslovakia, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Yugoslavia

Hence my proclamation that the US is a Federal Republic, and a Constitutional Representative Democracy. The latter can be the former, but not the other way around. The main difference is the fact that a Democracy has no type of central leader role, such as a President, it only has a panel of representatives, who are bound to vote based on their constituents vote. A Republic, on the other hand, does have a central leadership role, such as a President, and it also has a panel of representatives, however, they are not forced to vote the way that the majority of their constituents do. A Democracy needs no central leadership role. A Republic does.

*Edit: Not trying to be mean or argue, just educate. I don't mean any offense and hope my post didn't come off as rude. I apologize if it did.

Originally Posted by Brenngun

Does this mean we can go back to calling them french fries??

I never didn't, and I wasn't aware Canada ever did

What I find most disconcerting is that the people in this thread asking questions about how the Government works in the US seem to be mostly Canadians our closest neighbor.. Whose citizens cross the border every day on my neck of the woods and yet you guys have no idea how our government actually works

I have taken the time to actually read how your government works and although I don't understand that totally I sure have a general idea...


It isn't an issue of how the US government works the issue with Syria is a President who's attitude is how to game the system, even when it isn't needed... He has every right due to the War Powers act to strike Syria, (unilaterally) the problem is he placed the entire country (perhaps the world) in jeopardy by drawing a line in the sand like a 6 year old in the playground, not thinking that somebody might step over it..

He has the most dangerous military ever built to back him up, but what he doesn't have is the will of the People or the blessing of the World because he didn't attain it...

This is an EGO problem not a Government problem, but he is trying to back peddle now and the whole world knows it..

Originally Posted by carlmaloschneider

Maybe EVERY country should be Sweden; neutral with lots of chocolate, nice mountains and interesting looking cows?

Stand corrected: They have no mountains. And maybe females even more interesting than cows (hear me, Alfhild!).