Corruption
"Whatever your views on what has happened in Iraq over the last few years, it is fair to say that a lot of money was spent by Saddam's 'regime' on things such as fancy palaces and keeping the family happy. This money might have been spent on things like hospitals in a democracy. Thus Western governments are right to try and pressure (or maybe encourage is a better word) Third World countries to become democracies."
Well, personally, alternativenation, although there is a good point in that paragraph, it is completely lost under the rubble of another hugely undeveloped point, barely backed up by a sparse amount of evidence. "Encourage" may be a much better word.... If it was the state of the world. I don't think that "pressure" really covers what happened either. Now maybe this would have been a fantastic point with a different example... But Iraq? Anyone who has any sense knows that George Bush just wanted to be a big boy with his pretty little gun, a spoiled child in 'need' of more oil so that he can make even more money and, to quote another point (not in the above paragraph) heighten the corrupt opinion that he forces upon all of us by being President of the United States.
(To view the full article - some of which made some good points - http://www.alternativenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=78711
bottom of the page, under "Corruption.")
I'm not denying that Saddam Hussein was a fully-fledged corrupt dictator and don't misinterpret me; I'm not, by any means, sticking up for him, but I certainly don't believe that the Western governments were "right to pressure" this third world country in the way that they did.
Also, this article starts with "This may come as a shock but some governments are only interested in holding onto power and don't really care about the people in their country." I really, really hope that was supposed to be sarcastic... Yes, a massive surprise.
Edit: "Thus Western governments are right to try and pressure (or maybe encourage is a better word) Third World countries to become democracies." So he's used one point about one country and one war to seemingly justify ("thus... etc") every move of the Western governments in terms of third world countries. Yeah... right.
Well, personally, alternativenation, although there is a good point in that paragraph, it is completely lost under the rubble of another hugely undeveloped point, barely backed up by a sparse amount of evidence. "Encourage" may be a much better word.... If it was the state of the world. I don't think that "pressure" really covers what happened either. Now maybe this would have been a fantastic point with a different example... But Iraq? Anyone who has any sense knows that George Bush just wanted to be a big boy with his pretty little gun, a spoiled child in 'need' of more oil so that he can make even more money and, to quote another point (not in the above paragraph) heighten the corrupt opinion that he forces upon all of us by being President of the United States.
(To view the full article - some of which made some good points - http://www.alternativenation.net/forums/showthread.php?t=78711
bottom of the page, under "Corruption.")
I'm not denying that Saddam Hussein was a fully-fledged corrupt dictator and don't misinterpret me; I'm not, by any means, sticking up for him, but I certainly don't believe that the Western governments were "right to pressure" this third world country in the way that they did.
Also, this article starts with "This may come as a shock but some governments are only interested in holding onto power and don't really care about the people in their country." I really, really hope that was supposed to be sarcastic... Yes, a massive surprise.
Edit: "Thus Western governments are right to try and pressure (or maybe encourage is a better word) Third World countries to become democracies." So he's used one point about one country and one war to seemingly justify ("thus... etc") every move of the Western governments in terms of third world countries. Yeah... right.