WA Delegate (non-executive): The Republic of HUFS (elected 61 days ago)
Founder: The Commonwealth of Whipjangle
Regional Power: Moderate
Today's World Census Report
The Most Politically Free in libertarian
These nations allow citizens the greatest amount of freedom to select their own government.
As a region, libertarian is ranked 3,208th in the world for Most Politically Free.
|31.||The Nomadic Peoples of Pacalas||Scandinavian Liberal Paradise||“Faru kion vi volas!”|
|32.||The Holy Empire of Riders of Revelation||Capitalist Paradise||“Not Dead”|
|33.||The Empire of Snifkowoland||Benevolent Dictatorship||“You Will Respect My Authoritah!”|
|34.||The Community of Libermalia||Benevolent Dictatorship||“If you hate the government, move to Libermalia”|
|35.||The Republic of Totoso_Mussolini||Corporate Police State||“O Poder é meu”|
- 1 day 2 hours ago: The Nomadic Peoples of New gypsystan departed this region for Commonwealth of Liberty.
- 1 day 2 hours ago: The Nomadic Peoples of New gypsystan arrived from Chill Nation Base Camp 2.
- 1 day 2 hours ago: The Territory of The Forestavian Islands arrived from Chill Nation Base Camp 2.
- 2 days 2 hours ago: The Republic of Left-Libertarian Colonies arrived from Balder.
- 2 days 4 hours ago: The Republic of Left-Libertarian Colonies ceased to exist.
- 2 days 10 hours ago: The Holy Roman Empire of Caligom arrived from Lazarus.
- 8 days ago: The Federation of The Bezrat Corporation ceased to exist.
- 9 days ago: The Democratic Republic of Greenfort arrived from REATO.
- 13 days ago: The Free Land of Voluntara ceased to exist.
- 13 days ago: The Community of Libermalia arrived from The North Pacific.
Libertarian Regional Message Board
I was also opposed to MIddle East involvement, due primarily to the regions history. However, when the decision was made, we (the US) was obligated to actually do something, unlike Viet Nam. The scenes in Iraq are eerily remniscent of the fall of Saigon - I'm just waiting for the copters to pull the last remnants of the American presence off the embassy roof and the slaughter of the innocents to begin (no re-education camps here).
But this is what you get with an Administration that does not understand (or rejects) geo-politics and the role of the military and has no idea on how military forc should be used. The fall of Saigon took place under a weak President (Ford) with an overacting Congress that was definitely anti-military, as pesonified by the late Senator Frank Church and the other usual suspects (Teddy, et. al). We now have a relatively ineffective Congress with a weak teflon President (militarily at least)
The cut off of air support and supplies in Indochina led to millions of civilians being murdered in Laos, South Vietnam and Cambodia (Cambodia was the worst of all - where pro Mao, rather than pro Soviet, Communists came to power). What happened in 1975 (and after) was a terrible crime (a betrayal) and the "anti war" crowd have the blood of millions of innocent civilians (people the United States had sworn to defend) on their hands. This is the exact opposite of what the education-system and the media teach.
However, and with the greatest respect, I think the situation in Iraq (and the rest of the Islamic world) is FUNDEMENTALLY different.
As I (and others) tried to explain some years ago (and got "racist" screamed at us for our pains) the population of somewhere like Iraq are NOT (unlike, say, most people in Vietnam) essentially apolitical - on the contrary, they (the people of somewhere like Iraq) have a political ideology - ISLAM. Islam is a philosophy that covers every aspect of life and death - to treat it the flippant way that modern "educated" Westerners treat religion is a terrible mistake. And nor can Mohammed be treated as if he was Jesus of Buddha.
Mohammed was a politician and soldier of genius (his ruthlessness was like a well balanced sword), he was nothing like Jesus or Buddha (or anyone else a university type would think of a "religious figure"). And the "peace" he offered was the peace of SUBMISSION. But also a quiet conscience - people are tormented in war (the faces of the those they kill torment them - years afterwards), Islam offers a release (no more regrets - no more waking up in a cold sweat) as ANYTHING one does for Allah is morally justified BY DEFINITON.
As for his followers in Iraq........
They are indeed divided (Sunni, Shia) but they are no vast numbers of apolitical "innocent people" (one does find many innocent types in the Middle East).
Even the Kurds are not apolitical types - although (thankfully) their Kurdish nationalism trumps their Islam.
Going into Iraq looking for innocents is an error - remember the same people who are slaughtered by one side, would happily be the slaughterers if things went their way. They crave the skulls of their enemies far more than they want the schools-and-hospitals that well meaning Western aid offers. And it is not "ignorance" or "stupidity" - many of those involved in the worst deeds are highly intelligent and with a good technical education (they know all about modern technology).
The same is true in Syria (where Sunni and Shia are also in a death match).
American diplomats (and others) always come to the Middle East with the same misconceptions.
"Most people just want to get a long - if only it was not for a few extremists....".
Sadly just not true.
Peace in the Middle East is not an option - it is just unachievable.
Which is why sending Americans (or others) in is wrong.
Sending people to their deaths on an IMPOSSIBLE mission is not acceptable.
The only chance for stable Iraq would be bringing back Hashemite dynasty - the relatives of Jordan King.
That is because in arab/muslim culture, a tribal/dynastic system with a King figure (not neccessarily outright monarchy, but also a regime like Syrian Assads) backed by his entire extended family, a "clan", is only viable alternative to outright theocracy like the one in Iran, or old Taliban Afghanistan.
But American leadership fails to realise, that western style democracy is just not possible there. You can have secular tribalism (Jordan, Syria, Saddams Iraq), theocratic republic (iran), or theocratic tribalism (Saudis), but not a secular republic.
"As a region, libertarian is ranked 2,978th in the world for Most Politically Free."
Just looked at a couple of pages of the Regions listed as "Most Politically Free" and all have just one or two NationStates within them. Kind of skews things...
Snifkowoland - yes the old Kings (and tribal elders) are the least bad option in these countries.
The world contains 113,911 nations in 17,619 regions. As a region, libertarian is ranked 17,515th in the world for Highest Average Tax Rates. (bottom 0.6%, only 104 regions scored lower)
Out of 35 nations, 30 are in the bottom 50%, 27 are in the bottom 10%, 25 are in the bottom 5%, and 12 are in the bottom 1%. Well done!
So really big news on gun rights.
After many years, Forestavia returns to visit its previous home: The Libertarian Region.
So what's the diffrence between you and libraians?