[Professor S]

Originally Posted by Typhoid

The fact that there was a high turnout, doesnt change the fact you're trying to change their government. That's what I'm getting at, and I made that completely clear, and you know I did.

100% of the people of Iraq could have voted, and yet it would still be forcing Democracy on them. Your country went in there. Your country 'said' "Change this, it's better." Despite the fact a large number voted, gun-to-head or not, it still won't work completely, as it should. As I said, you cannot force Democracy. A high turnout does not equate a working system.

1) If people are willingly voting and choosing their own form of democracy, how is it being forced? You still haven't answered that simple question. The Iraqi people are taking advantage of a situation that they never had the luxury of having, but by the sheer fact that the US facilitated it, I guess it means imperialism to you.

2) Even if we are "forcing" democracy, IT HAS WORKED BEFORE. Its called post WW2 Germany. First West, and eventually East.

Stop being so literal, and stop acting so high and mighty, and just for a second, just one, think about something that is said that doesn't suit your standard.
I realize it's an oxymoron. It was meant to be. I would call it an Anarchistic Democracy because while you have a democratic form set up in the country, it's still pretty much almost under seemingly martial law.

Its called a demcracy trying to form, not and anarchistic one. You imply, whether you mean it or not, that the chaos is welcome and encouraged. Its not and in fact most hate it because it comes from outside the country.

Show me where I said Democracy wouldn't work, hands down in Iraq?
I said it wont work properly with the intervention of an outside source making it change.

79.6. I never said the percent would be low, and I never said they wouldn't vote. I said it wouldn't work.

Nuff said.

And really, insult me all you want.
90% of the other posters on this site grew out of that phase years ago, yet there you are, still holding strong. If it makes you feel special, and snicker to yourself, who am I to argue with your childish sense of humour.

90% of poster grew out of posting uninformed opinion. Its called "growth".

Also:
With such a large grasp on the English language that you have, I would have thought someone may have taught you to never follow up a sentence of "I think" with one you are trying to pass off as fact.

And for the record, no - I don't avoid informed opinion. But I have yet to see any. You do the same thing I do, yet you don't notice it. Neither of us use facts. And you know why? Because we debate. You don't need to bring out facts, and slam down quotes when you're talking of personal opinions.

That entire section is utterly amazing. The sheer amount of links and citations that have been posted on these forums by political commentators counts in the HUNDREDS if not THOUSANDS.

Also, you keep saying that fact and opinion are separate, but opinion that it respected and makes sense is forever connected to fact and logic. You cannot have a respected opinion if you never bother to respect it by challenging it with information.

Doctors have opinions, Typhoid. Would you care about their opinion about your appendix if your doctor never bothered to read a textbook? Hey, its still an opinion, right? Worht arguing about?

No, ita not, and neither are yours. Stop allowing others to tell you what your opinion is, and trust me they do, and get an opinion of your own.

I'm done with this pathetic little circle we've danced for the past few years. Its hopeless.