Should people have a say on war ? - Page 2

my dear friends have kinda lost track of the topic .
the topic is having a say on the war,which means people have a right to speak for or against it,

the topic isnt "can people vote for/against war"

huh as if its very brainy to suggest voting when we have our neighbourhoods setting up on fire.

voting is not THE only way u can bring out your views

it is true we elect people and they have right to decide but masses today inspite of having right to speak dont speak up ,,,,,

i c why ...they so wisely think that we should "vote" and how do we do that ...perhaps we can take a walk by the "park" and if we find a polling booth ...lets c if our doggy does not run away then we will think to stop by it and say "no" to it ...or why "no" maybe we can walk more and think ............ 😆

huh voting ..... its "SAY" NO TO WAR ....

Originally posted by: cool_pooja

Actually voting for a war is not practical.. 😆 I mean america's is gonna bomb at u and u will go to a park to vote.. 😆

Not nitpicking here. But I feel what smarterdesikid meant was the people of the country having a say on the country starting a war, not whether it should retaliate or not in case of an attack.😊 For example whether there should've been a provision by which US citizens could've voted and stopped Bush from bombing Iraq, after poor Saddam submitted a 10,000 page report.😛

But still it's not practical as, 'too many cooks spoil the broth'. We cannot depend on common people for every decision and specially decisions which need some sort of specialised knowledge.😊 Moreover, the voting outcome in countries like India will always be in the favour of the politicians who have most influence over the people, i.e., the ruling party or you can say the party deciding the war. Not very useful IMHO.😊

Originally posted by: souro

Not nitpicking here. But I feel what smarterdesikid meant was the people of the country having a say on the country starting a war, not whether it should retaliate or not in case of an attack.😊 For example whether there should've been a provision by which US citizens could've voted and stopped Bush from bombing Iraq, after poor Saddam submitted a 10,000 page report.😛

But after his death,we can see saddam's image changing,he become a hero of lot of peoples mind...

But still it's not practical as, 'too many cooks spoil the broth'. We cannot depend on common people for every decision and specially decisions which need some sort of specialised knowledge.😊 Moreover, the voting outcome in countries like India will always be in the favour of the politicians who have most influence over the people, i.e., the ruling party or you can say the party deciding the war. Not very useful IMHO.😊

Voting for bombing its happen only US....If war is a crime...Bush is No one war criminal.😳

Love and war happen easly......Very difficult to stop...😊

Of course, people should have a say on war because they re the ones going to bear the brunt of it and not the fat cat politicians. But whether they actually have that right even in democracies is doubtful as the head honchos once they are in power usually forget the plebeian masses that voted them in and don't mind sacrificing innocent lives for the sake of their personal glory.

Yes americans cud have said something in the above situation, but the fact is dat the polticains know how to change their opionons..And usually in the asian countries ppl dunt have a choice since they are hardly the ones to start the war.. If someone is bombing u, u wunt exactly tell ur president not to bomb..

Originally posted by: sareg

In a democracy, People always have a say

take for example America and Iraq, many people pretend now as if they had nothing to do with the war.

During his first term, Congress and Senate gave him a full authority to persecute any war that he thought was fit to eradicate terrorism

who elected the congress and Senate? The citizens of America

Now at the time of the war, both the parties were in favor of going to war

When say you voted for a contestant, if he/she was always going to toe the party line on this issue and vote for anything his/her party decided, then it was your fault in voting for that person, now you cant say We didnt vote for the war.

So yes People have a say in the war

Wellsaid!! But what about the wars that take place after the election process! Is it true to that all the parties put all of their views 100% correctly before the pubilc at the time of elections!! Equations do change so also the policies ..so are the common people responsible for it!!

Originally posted by: SolidSnake

NO! War koi picnic hai ki public voting se decide hogi...waise bhi public voting ne bahut kabaada kiya hai iss desh kaa.

😆

Originally posted by: mythili_Kiran

Wellsaid!! But what about the wars that take place after the election process! Is it true to that all the parties put all of their views 100% correctly before the pubilc at the time of elections!! Equations do change so also the policies ..so are the common people responsible for it!!

I agree with you, equations do change after the elections, promises are broken 😡, new policies are made and of course the common people are not made a part of it. So, it's not correct to blame the common people for such acts.😊 However, sometimes common people do vote for candidates who promise them victories in great wars and also in many cases many candidates are re-elected after commiting all these blunders 🤢. In such cases all those who voted in favour are to be equally blamed for what happened.😡