There are few things more dangerous in a democracy than allowing a President to wage secret wars without the knowledge of the country.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
In real danger sometimes even a democracy can really keep a secret.
There is a danger in democracy itself.
The war waged against terror since September 11 puts a strain on democracy itself, because it is mostly waged in secret, using means that are at the edge of both law and morality. Yet democracies have shown themselves capable of keeping the secret exercise of power under control.
The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
It would be extremely naive to conclude anything other than the following: America's most vital secrets are in the hands of our adversaries because Secretary Clinton intentionally avoided using official government communication systems.
The president doesn't order the military to seize political opponents. He doesn't order his intelligence community to lie about national security for political purposes. He uses the military or intelligence communities to protect the United States and our citizens, not to help him win elections.
The better the information it has, the better democracy works. Silence and secrecy are never good for it.
Nothing can be more abhorrent to democracy than to imprison a person or keep him in prison because he is unpopular. This is really the test of civilization.
Would it not be much better to have a president who deliberately lied to the people because he thought a war was essential than to have one who was so dumb as to be taken in by intelligence agencies, especially those who told him what he wanted to hear?
We have a war dictator who was not elected, he snuck in. so he punishes people that threaten him in any way, or even say something he doesn't like. It has no resemblance to democracy.