BloodyPepperoni
King
Yup, I've had a course on U.S electoral system on College, thus I know how it works. Electoral college is supposed to vote according to population choice.
Top 10 Worst Dictators in today's world
- Thread starter Kamilian
- Start date
- Status
Yup, I've had a course on U.S electoral system on College, thus I know how it works. Electoral college is supposed to vote according to population choice.
Greadius
:yeah:
Where is AoA? 
Stile
Emperor
Each state has a certain number of electoral college votes. They, for the most part, all go to the winner of the population's vote. It's not too hard to imagine a scenario where Gore wins a state by a large percentage and loses others narrowly to lose the election. It's happened before 2000 and it will happen again.
Alcibiaties of Athenae
Imperator
Moderator Action: This US trolling is going to stop.
NOW.
The NEXT poster, ANYWHERE IN MY AREAS OF MODERATION that calls GW Bush a dictator will be suspended.
This is just an attempt to annoy Americans, NOT a valid discussion issue, and I will not have this nonsense ANY further.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
NOW.
The NEXT poster, ANYWHERE IN MY AREAS OF MODERATION that calls GW Bush a dictator will be suspended.
This is just an attempt to annoy Americans, NOT a valid discussion issue, and I will not have this nonsense ANY further.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Alcibiaties of Athenae
Imperator
Thread closed while I edit this nonsense.
Alcibiaties of Athenae
Imperator
I was busy today Gradius.Originally posted by Greadius
Where is AoA?
HOWEVER, this bull just promted a new forum rule, I will now post.
Thread reopened, but I will be watching.
BloodyPepperoni
King
Agreed.
OT :btw, being against war DOES NOT means being primary anti-american,communist-extrmist anti Bush. Please, AoA, don't treat people that don't believe in war all the same way. War is not in my values, and that don't make a Saddam hardcore fan of me. That don't make an anti-american person of me, neither. I've been to U.S already, I've lived there for a short period of time and I've enjoyed it. I may strongly disagree with Bush's views, but I don't blame american people. And there's ONE person that called Bush a dictator out of 3 pages of posts. This is not dramatic. If he's ignorant enough to believe United States are a dictatorship, then he ridiculizes himself.
Zcylen
Moonlight Rambler
@ SeanLindstorm 
I guess castro is just a wallpaper dictator, he's already too old and he no longer has the power in Cuba.
Last year he came to my city and when he was about to leave someone asked about what he thought and he replied:
ah, am very glad to be...er...(whispers... "Monterrey, Sir")
oh, yeah in Monterrey
I guess castro is just a wallpaper dictator, he's already too old and he no longer has the power in Cuba.
Last year he came to my city and when he was about to leave someone asked about what he thought and he replied:
ah, am very glad to be...er...(whispers... "Monterrey, Sir")
oh, yeah in Monterrey
Archbob
Ancient CFC Guardian
Don't blame iraq, blame America itself after all, we put Saddam and the Talaband in power. We should just stay out of other people's business cause we always manage to screw things up more.
Bush will ignore the UN and commit the US to action, thats saying "screw the UN". Those of you like AoA who think Bush is unfallable seem too patriotic to think that US 'Humanitarian' actions can be wrong, when in fact, many of them later reveal to be completely wrong.
If Bush ignores the UN and goes ahead then there might as well not be a UN and in terms of diplomacy between countries it might as well be "might makes right". Bush is in control of the most powerful country in the world, so I guess that gives him to do to other countries whatever he likes, right?
Bush will ignore the UN and commit the US to action, thats saying "screw the UN". Those of you like AoA who think Bush is unfallable seem too patriotic to think that US 'Humanitarian' actions can be wrong, when in fact, many of them later reveal to be completely wrong.
If Bush ignores the UN and goes ahead then there might as well not be a UN and in terms of diplomacy between countries it might as well be "might makes right". Bush is in control of the most powerful country in the world, so I guess that gives him to do to other countries whatever he likes, right?
philippe
FYI, I chase trains.
hmmm
I dont know thier names but just 10 African presidents and/or rebel leaders is enough.
Where is the war on terrorism against them?
I dont know thier names but just 10 African presidents and/or rebel leaders is enough.
Where is the war on terrorism against them?
Greadius
:yeah:
Really, I wish you would. This defering to Bush like he has a dominion over American opinions, or is even going against them in his policy creation is false.
Holy pseudo-troll! Both Saddam and the Taliban came to power independant of U.S. support or interest. Prove me wrong or rescind your troll.
Bush isn't a dictator. He was legally elected, even if I(we) think it was wrong, or the system is flawed.
But first we must define dictator. Saddam claims that everyone in Iraq voted for him...who are we to say they didn't?
Anyway...there are checks and balances in the US system...unfortuntally, they don't all work when all levels of government are controlled by the same group. Which is why some people get the feeling that the US is a dictatorship. If anything it's a dictatorship of Republicans. Of a group, not an individual.
But first we must define dictator. Saddam claims that everyone in Iraq voted for him...who are we to say they didn't?
Anyway...there are checks and balances in the US system...unfortuntally, they don't all work when all levels of government are controlled by the same group. Which is why some people get the feeling that the US is a dictatorship. If anything it's a dictatorship of Republicans. Of a group, not an individual.
Taliban: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/asia/afghanistan/afghan_12-27-85.html
"and the United States still stands with the Afghan freedom fighters against them."
The Taliban were part of the Afghan freedom fighters during the Soviet Occupation.
Greadius
:yeah:
Thats BS, even that load is the closest you can get to it.
The Taliban formed in 1994, over 5 years after the United States had left the territory entirely.
The vast majority of leaders and troops trained by the United States were members of the Northern Alliance; you know, those guys that fought the Taliban. Most of the member of the Taliban, particularly the ideological leaders like Mullah Omar, never fought against the Soviets but hid in Pakistan recruiting orphans for their religious school.
They came to power of their own regard. If the best connection you can make is some of the people who fought the Soviet invasion joined the Taliban 5 years later its not remotely a casual link.
I said prove how America helped the Taliban come to power, and you've told me that they helped the Afghan Freedom fighters. Its an insult to those brave men to call them the same as the Taliban, when like I said, MOST of them fought AGAINST the Taliban. The Taliban's campaign to overthrow the sitting government (made up and supported by most of those freedom fighters) was completely ignored by the United States, unless you can provide any evidence of aid.
Do you honestly believe that crap or did you just decide you could get in a cheap troll before you get to bed?
BloodyPepperoni
King
There were manifestations against the war in U.S, too. They are the americans than I agree with.
A true debater, Greadius, you know US funds went to those Pakistani religious schools, the Taliban just being another wave of graduates after the Soviet withdrawal. It is true that CIA training camps for the graduates of those schools (among others *cough* bin Laden *cough*) in Afghanistan were immediately abandoned to their own resources upon the Soviet withdrawal.
BTW, Mullah Omar was born, raised, and educated in Afghanistan, to my knowledge. I could be wrong.
Here.
BTW, Mullah Omar was born, raised, and educated in Afghanistan, to my knowledge. I could be wrong.
Here.
Kinniken
Riding with William
I do not believe I can come up with a precise order, but still (and since Im too lazy to check the spelling of the names, I'll give the countries name instead 
):
#1: North Korea
#1: Irak (can't choose)
#3: Zimbabwe
#4: Saudi Arabia
Those are the four that deserve special mention; after that, they are just too many of them
Oh, and a special mention for two "dictators in training": Putin (Russia) and Gbagbo.
Both of them were elected in suspicious conditions, and are behaving more like dictators than democratic leaders.
Note to rmsharp: I'll like to know your list, especialy looking at your status line. Am I to understand that Hussein is yesterday's news for you?
):#1: North Korea
#1: Irak (can't choose)
#3: Zimbabwe
#4: Saudi Arabia
Those are the four that deserve special mention; after that, they are just too many of them
Oh, and a special mention for two "dictators in training": Putin (Russia) and Gbagbo.
Both of them were elected in suspicious conditions, and are behaving more like dictators than democratic leaders.
Note to rmsharp: I'll like to know your list, especialy looking at your status line. Am I to understand that Hussein is yesterday's news for you?
- Status
Similar threads
