Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
The authoritarian Stalin made a war-winning decision(moving troops from Siberia to Stalingrad) based on the intelligence(that the Japanese would attack the US, not Siberia) he recieved from his spy in the Japanese court.Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
There is always an exception to every rule and he ignored spies who told him Nazi Germany was about to invade.
Anyway it doesnt matter the point is if there is to be a war you chances of winning go up if your democratic which we both agree on.
They slew him with poison afaid to meet him with the steel
a gallant son of eireann was Owen Roe o'Neill.
Internet is a bad place for info Gaelic Cowboy
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
Yes, but remember that it's 00:18 here and I'm dilusional from writing a paper for the last way-too-many-hours.....
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
IMO the main basis for the democratic success in wars idea is the fact they are meritocratic. Dictators tend to mess up their militaries either through nepotism, or by deliberately crippling them to reduce the threat of a coup by dividing them into different factions (often ethnic based, eg Syria in the 60's), or by completely confusing the chain of command so nobody knows who takes orders from who (eg Argentinian junta). Better just to have a democratic system where the military is accountable to the people, and is given the necessary freedom to do its job properly.
Heh, I often have similar problems writing on these boards.
At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
The armies of the 20th Centuary were democratic. Is this a long term trend or a blip?
New Model Army: run by a dictator, but efficient
Napoleon: An autocratic Emperor, but won battles
Roman Empire: worked under both a republic and an Emperor; Byzantine empire was there for hundreds more years
Japanese armies: under a Monarchy. Yes, they lost WW2, but they won most things before that and I don't think being a democracy suddenly makes one beat America.
Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Peter the Great...
Vietnamese: Communist
Cambodian: Communist
Red Army (post revolution): Communist
So, loads of autocratic regimes have been whipping all foes before them for hundreds of years.
An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
"If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
Democracy is better at peace, democratic countries usually don't go to war with other democratic countries
@Hax, book is meant for the layman
Last edited by Fragony; 11-25-2010 at 10:55.
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
Rather a broad brush. America has been in "kinetic situations" for years now, tirelesly helping other countries by "sending the Marines". Britain isn't much better on that score.
An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
"If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
When a dictator fights a dictator, one of them will of course win.The armies of the 20th Centuary were democratic. Is this a long term trend or a blip?
New Model Army: run by a dictator, but efficient
Napoleon: An autocratic Emperor, but won battles
Roman Empire: worked under both a republic and an Emperor; Byzantine empire was there for hundreds more years
Japanese armies: under a Monarchy. Yes, they lost WW2, but they won most things before that and I don't think being a democracy suddenly makes one beat America.
Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Peter the Great...
Vietnamese: Communist
Cambodian: Communist
Red Army (post revolution): Communist
So, loads of autocratic regimes have been whipping all foes before them for hundreds of years.
I fail to see how stating the obvious is an argument though.
Still maintain that crying on the pitch should warrant a 3 match ban
Re: This Week's Evil Islam Thread
Don't get too carried away. Being a democracy doesn't make you invincible, you can't take the democratic success idea to be an absolute rule. The form of government is a moderately-important factor when weighed up against other things in determining how a war will come out. Most studies show democracy to be the best form in this respect, although there is also a tendency for the most authoritarian regimes to do pretty well, so the consolidation of the government in question has also got a lot to do with things.
At the end of the day politics is just trash compared to the Gospel.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks