If the Iraq war is put to a vote, the citizens of Spain, UK, and Australia would reject it. The only country where it might pass is the U.S. and that's only because Bush has been lying to us about Iraq's association with Al Qaeda and lying about how Iraq was trying to acquire nuclear weapons from Niger.
We have a misled public supporting this war and a coalition of the very unwilling. The Canadian government told their public their non-participation in this war to a standing ovation. Same thing happened in the UK when Robin Cook, the leader of the Commons and former foreign secretary, resigned in protest. Our staunchest allies have populations that are overwhelmingly opposed to this war.
What's this about representing and spreading Democracy?
Comments (2)
Hey, we haven't been in a democracy ever since Bush became president. I know there are people out there who will disagree, but what kind of democracy pushes for a war when half of its population is against it? And what kind of democratic representative give favors to his friends at the expense of the majority? What happened to the definition of "ruled by the majority"? When did it become "ruled by what the president wants at the expense of the majority"? No, we've been in a dictatorship since Bush has been in charge, don't call this a democracy.
Posted by lisa | March 18, 2003 6:54 AM
Posted on March 18, 2003 06:54
i think pointing out the undemocratic nature of the bush administration is simpler than all that - HE WON LESS VOTES THAN GORE. don't expect a non-democratically elected head of state to act democratically - you wouldnt expect Saddam to do that, so at least be realistic about your own nation's leaders.
Posted by disident-P | January 7, 2004 11:13 AM
Posted on January 7, 2004 11:13