• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US State Dept. - we do not support democracy under Obama


To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;


Furthermore; the United Nations Charter on Human Rights is, also, the Supreme Law of the Land:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwith-standing.

We can go after pirates, true. That has nothing to do with moral obligation towards spreading democracy across the globe. So I don't really know what the **** you were trying to convey there.

We are also allowed to sign treaty, and so long as war isn't declared that treaty is considered law of the land. Did we sign a treaty that said it is the United States moral obligation to police the world and bring democracy to all? Cause I think I missed that one if we did.

So two swings and two misses. What else?
 
We can go after pirates, true.

We can go after those who violate the laws of nations; such as, Iran.

That has nothing to do with moral obligation towards spreading democracy across the globe. So I don't really know what the **** you were trying to convey there.

We are also allowed to sign treaty, and so long as war isn't declared that treaty is considered law of the land. Did we sign a treaty that said it is the United States moral obligation to police the world and bring democracy to all? Cause I think I missed that one if we did.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Charter, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, etc.
 
We can go after those who violate the laws of nations; such as, Iran.

If they are aggressor, yes we can fight them. If they attack us or others, we may respond (depending on what treaty we have active and if the action warrants response). We are not obligated nor authorized to run around the globe bringing our version of "democracy" to other countries. Nowhere are we authorized with that. Not by We the People, and not through treaty of the UN.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Charter, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, etc.

It merely states "rights" and other crap. It's not an authorization of war. Nor should such a general authorization ever be looked at as legitimate.
 
Then they can revolt.

They did, and were shot by the dozens and beaten by the thousands in the streets.

They were then arrested en masse and tortured and murdered in the iranian prisons/gulags.
 
If they are aggressor, yes we can fight them. If they attack us or others, we may respond (depending on what treaty we have active and if the action warrants response). We are not obligated nor authorized to run around the globe bringing our version of "democracy" to other countries. Nowhere are we authorized with that. Not by We the People, and not through treaty of the UN.

Iran is responsible for maiming and murdering hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans. No country has killed more americans without a war than iran in american history. The US is LOOOOOOONG overdue in crushing that fascist, illegal dictatorship of thugs and murderers...
 
Iran is responsible for maiming and murdering hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans. No country has killed more americans without a war than iran in american history. The US is LOOOOOOONG overdue in crushing that fascist, illegal dictatorship of thugs and murderers...

No country has killed more people around the world (since 1945) than the US.
To be a superstate a country needs to have not only the biggest fist, but brains -- something the US policymakers are distinctly lacking. Since 1990-s the US lost all credibility it ever had.
 
No country has killed more people around the world (since 1945) than the US.
To be a superstate a country needs to have not only the biggest fist, but brains -- something the US policymakers are distinctly lacking. Since 1990-s the US lost all credibility it ever had.

From both of you: statistics and facts, please.
That's a huge time-span and a mega number and such numbers can be faulted and incorrect.
 
From both of you: statistics and facts, please.
That's a huge time-span and a mega number and such numbers can be faulted and incorrect.

Take every war, conflict and coup started or orchestrated by the US and put together the number of all the victims.
 
Take every war, conflict and coup started or orchestrated by the US and put together the number of all the victims.

But such a broad span really brings into question several different things:

How accurate are mortal-casualty reports from less-organized military and other factions? Example - If China was in a conflict and lost 50,000 servicement could we verify that in some way or asses it's accuracy?

Of reported numbers in those military and faction numbers - which are military and which are civilian? Even in a well organized military, if we're fighting a faction or other organized group how can we truly tell one from the other?

Of those reported numbers from such sources where accuracy might be in question what is from conflict, what is from their own friendly fire and what is from natural and other causes?

There are a lot of variables and often a lot of unreported casualties and so forth ... It's hard to get a clear picture.

And - from those other countries - what excursions have they commenced that we don't know about? How can we tell if those numbers aren't being reported with "casualties amid US-instigated conflict"

If we intercede into someone's civil war what of those mortal-casualties are from their current conflict, unrelated to us, and what are directly from us?

If we, as we've done in several operations and battles, side with allies who's to say just how many the British or the French have killed in comparison to the US?

You two are talking of the last 50 years - every country that we've ever *knowingly* been involved in.

I consider those statistics to be an unknown. . . especially when reports from some of those country have varied from 50,000 to 500,000 depending on who you talk to.
 
Last edited:
But such a broad span really brings into question several different things:

How accurate are mortal-casualty reports

If we intercede into someone's civil war

If we, ... side with allies

Take a middle figure...

The US does not simply "intercede into someone's civil war", it stirres the sh*t, trains, arms and politicaly supports one side against the other, and when the flames are high, the US directly "intercedes" on the side it was previously grooming for war (as it was in former Yugoslavia). In this case, the US bears the full responsibility for the harm done.

The US sided with the allies or the allies sided with the US?
 
And you don't know that they do.
I think we do, they are protesting the existing govt which is not democratic.

Iranian democracy activist Roya Boroumand, "Ask yourself why Iranians who protest in the street write things in English. They're not just practicing language skills."
So why don't you enlighten us all on what other kind of govt they might want.
 
Back
Top Bottom