Posted by: iLLumination August 30, 2013
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
Britain has shown that it is more democratic than the US by allowing parliament to vote for or against Syria war. The outcome of the voting was against war and they are going to respect this decision.
Whereas in the US, there is no sign of any voting, it is more or less a unilateral decision by the President's office. What is the point of having Senate and Congress if they cannot make any important decisions that could change the face of the earth.
The rhetorics of war has always been one sided towards the aggressor. The aggressor justifies attack because Syria supposedly killed 1000 people, but the imposed war could kill 100,000 people or more like was the case in Iraq/ Afganisthan.
So ultimately the US rhetorics of war is this. You are not democratic, you killed 1000 of your citizens, now we will bomb you to depose your government even if 100,000 are killed.
Whereas in the US, there is no sign of any voting, it is more or less a unilateral decision by the President's office. What is the point of having Senate and Congress if they cannot make any important decisions that could change the face of the earth.
The rhetorics of war has always been one sided towards the aggressor. The aggressor justifies attack because Syria supposedly killed 1000 people, but the imposed war could kill 100,000 people or more like was the case in Iraq/ Afganisthan.
So ultimately the US rhetorics of war is this. You are not democratic, you killed 1000 of your citizens, now we will bomb you to depose your government even if 100,000 are killed.