The U.S. does not currently have the conditions for a true dictatorship to thrive. But if you want more authoritarian tendencies for awhile, you can start by removing term limits. FDR for instance would have served 4 terms. That's more than a lot of real dictators get. 

It's amazing how far a little fact checking can go. 

Do you see any such address on "Februeary 4.2013"?

I've seen this far more than once, especially when I was younger. Basically, observing a parody/homage of a particular faucet of popular culture before even having the original as a reference point. I think this is a definite contributor to the trope Seinfeld Is Unfunny, where one becomes so exposed to iconic material that it loses its appeal over time, and instead becomes quite trite and dull (or at least overused).

How often has this happened to you? 

Compare that to some of the near systemic excess found elsewhere in the financial markets and Wall St.

Or just read this article.

[QUOTE="MrPraline"]religion of peacePWSteal_Ldpinch

Only war against a clearly identified and external enemy, if even that. 

Story here.

Quite interesting and ominous, especially in the context of Syria next door, in which Maliki's government is at least passively supporting Assad (as well as allowing Iran to shuttle supplies/Revolutionary Guard personnel to his forces). We may very soon see massive new bouts of sectarian fighting all across the region (including Lebanon). Stay tuned.

[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="thebest31406"]one_plum

That's why the people took it to the streets to mourn Hitler's death after he shot himself...

To be fair, it's hard to mourn anyone when you have just been brutally defeated in war, your country is largely destroyed, and it is about to be essentially sliced up between competing powers. I would be interested in the possibilities of Hitler's death in the absence of WWII.

[QUOTE="mmwmwmmwmwmm"]

[QUOTE="thebest31406"]

 

Dictator?  I think not.

thebest31406

[spoiler]

[/spoiler]

lol

I guess he wasn't a dictator either. He was even democratically elected into his offices.

Do you have an exact source for the 9 million figure?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="lo_Pine"] There's other oil in the world for us. Venezuela depends on the US more than the US depends on Venezuela.lo_Pine

Stricly speaking the US imports more oil from Canada than any other country. Followed by Mexico. That isn't the point however. Whenever you hold one of the largest reserves of oil in the world that makes you significant.

Some pretty poor and non-nuclear states seem to take up a large amount of our attention and spending nowadays. But to answer your question more completely, a nation can be both oil rich and nuclear armed (Russia), one or the other (Pakistan/Iraq/Iran), or neither (Syria/Afghanistan), and still seem to dictate a lot of the U.S.'s foreign policy.

[QUOTE="Giancar"]Not gonna miss him. He destroyed Venezuela democratic institutions and economy. (and an infinity of idiotic things) And this is coming from someone that lives in South America, and has followed his government by more than 10 years.thebest31406

Pretty unstable macro-economic factors (declining oil production, double digit inflation, large spending deficits) for such an oil rich country. Actually, just study real cases of the "resource curse" and you'll see what Venezuela's future might hold.