A Government by, for, and, of the people?

From "Great Tales from English History" by Robert Lacey - Little Brown and Company c2006)
(page 11)
"By then, people were coming to see that Locke had put into words the essential values of the Glorious Revolution--and particularly in his Two Treatises on Civil Government that he published anonymously in 1690. Government, he wrote, may not 'levy taxes on the people' without 'the consent...of their representatives'. No government, he argued, could be considered legitimate unless grounded in the consent of the people--any ruler who attempted to exercise abitrary power 'is to be considered the Common enemy and Pest of mankind and is to be treated accordingly'."

The problem is our leadership.

I belive we had no right to go to a foreign country and kill innocents in the name of finding and bringing to justice certain "terrorists," e.g. those resonsible for 9-11 and other attacks around the world. The problem with war is that it doesn't discriminate between the real culprits and innocent bystanders. Finding those responsible should be conducted like a criminal investigation--not simply shooting idly into a crowd merely hoping you will hit the criminal element. For some reason, Kent State comes to mind. The military seems to have that kind of mentality: "Shoot first, ask questions later."