Unitary states honestly seem worse in every way to Federal states unless somebody would like to convince me otherwise?

For some strange reason, most of the democracies in the world tend to be Unitary states, so there has to be something right about them over Federal states.

And for those of you who don't know, Unitary states are countries whose national Government makes all binding decisions. So countries like Greece, UK, and France are examples of Unitary states. While Federal states are countries who have both regional and national Governments who each have a set amount of power in making binding decisions. Countries like the US, Canada, and Germany are examples of Federal states.

I am talking about what tactics highly Authoritarian countries and rogue states use to keep their population docile and prevent them from rebelling against their regime.

Something I have noticed in common with nearly every major Authoritarian country (Russia, Uzbekistan, Syria, Iran, Eritrea, Sudan, North Korea off the top of my head) is that they always say that they're constantly at work at fighting an external enemy of some sort, and their rule is legitimized based on those claims. Let's take a look at who these countries/factions are "resisting"

Russia claims to be fighting against the US. Uzbekistan claims to be fighting against Islamic Extremism. Syria/Iran claim to be fighting against Israel. Eritrea claims to be fighting against Ethiopia. Sudan claims to be fighting the West. And North Korea claims to be fighting the US and South Korea.

With all of these countries mentioned aside from Uzbekistan, the country in question claims to be resisting another country of equal or greater strength.

So this is all leading into my real question... why is claiming to be resisting against a foreign power of equal or greater strength so effective at keeping the population you're ruling over largely docile?

I'm totally not in a competition against gootsby now.

Talk about anything you nigger faggots please.

For those of you don't know who Angela Merkel is, she's the Chancellor of Germany. And Chancellor functions the same as Prime Minister for all intents and purposes. And she's been Chancellor since 2005.

It's because her party (Christian Democratic Union) is so fucking popular, as evidenced by this opinion poll since the 2013 Elections.



And what I'm about to say may shock you guys, but I really hope that Merkel doesn't get any more terms as Chancellor at all. She's honestly kind of just riding on her reputation for apparently keeping Germany stable throughout the whole Eurozone crisis. That's it. She hasn't innovated, or made grand sweeping reforms, or done anything new at all other than maintain the status-quo. She's like Putin in the way that they both earned their reputation by simply riding on the economy. The Eurozone crisis is gonna hit Germany at one point or another, and they're gonna need a leader who can innovate and doesn't simply ride on stability.

Unfortunately, much of the German public has been duped into keeping on voting for the CDU, so Merkel's just gonna win another term in 2017. Lovely. Too bad I'm not a German citizen so I can't vote against her crappy party next Election. Since she's practically her own party by this point.

So I guess you can discuss anything relating to German politics since there hasn't been a thread about Germany politics. And I'll fucking shit myself if Godwin's Law is invoked in this thread.

I just want to know what you guys would think about this. Since this should be a touchy subject for some of you. Just read an article pretty much about what my second option describes, and the woman was kept alive long enough for the baby to become viable. Once she gave "birth" via C-section, she was nearly immediately taken off of life support.

Linky

Well..

This is seriously fucked. That's over 16,000,000 out of the pre-war population of 22,000,000 who are displaced.

Though this statistic should be taken with a few grains of salt, since only 6 months ago, 50% of the population was displaced. So it's more likely in between 50-75%

Islamic State versus Comms Officer is here! The final duel in Dabiq has arrived!!



VERSUS.....

Just a little thing I thought of looking at Sandtrap's thread. Since you have many users who use Fahrenheit, and many who know Celsius. So how many people here would know both (and can convert between the two obviously)?

So I went on a long day trip today, and something hit me today.

In the US, the same architecture and chains are copy-pasted all over the entire country. It was so fucking boring. Holy freaking shit, literally the same buildings were popping up all over where I went to. I can't think how often I said "Hey, this part is just like X in San Jose."

But other than that, it was a pretty nice day trip. Discuss this phenomenon of there being the same identical stores all over the country. And yes, I mean the entire country, since the same chains keep on appearing in the East Coast and the South as well.

Iran found the cure for faggotry nearly 10 years ago!!!!!

Where a candidate can win 40% of the popular vote, but less than 3% of the Electoral vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984

Murica #1!!!

(highest incarcerated persons per capita, highest military spending, highest wealth inequality out of western nations)

I just read this article on the BBC saying that the Nigerian Army has just rescued about 300 people captured by Boko Haram, and it got me thinking....

Many conventional Armies in this world are very poorly suited for launching effective counter-terror operations. And many of these countries have economic conditions which promote terrorist tactics. Some major examples I'm thinking of are Nigeria, Russia, and many Middle Eastern countries.

So....

What sorts of strategies or tactics do you think armies/countries which are more successful in counter-terror (say, the United States and Israel) or have that countries which are plagued with terrorism problems in their own borders like Russia and Nigeria. And these don't have to be just military tactics. These can also be domestic/international policies, economic conditions, etc.

And I mention the US and Israel (I know they are controversial) because given their scenarios, they have been far more effective in combating and stopping terrorist attacks than many other countries would be if they were in the same scenarios?

inb4hatetrain

Do I win a special medal now?

CAN'T MOSSAD THE ASSAD

t4r

What do you think of these findings? And the scales are 1:1.