Crosswords3 mins ago
Apparently We Waded Into Quite A Few Wars Under The Pretence Of "dictators Bringing Hell To Their People" And So "we're The World Police" Caper
If that was the case then could someone please explain to me why we haven't invaded North Korea or Iran?
This is not a rhetorical question, i would genuinely love to know thge answer.
This is not a rhetorical question, i would genuinely love to know thge answer.
Answers
1 to 20 of 20
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Quangoid. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I can't think of any examples of us invading a country just because of "dictators Bringing Hell To Their People"
The nearest I can think of is Libya, and that wasn't an invasion.
Sierra Leone was a succcessful operation in the early years of the first Blair govt, but that was to defeat rebels.
Invading N Korea or Iran, or Syria etc would be very stupid.
And before you mention Iraq, that wasn't done for reasons of altruism, but because rightly or wrongly their dictator was seen as a threat to regional stability. And he was a relatively easy target.
The nearest I can think of is Libya, and that wasn't an invasion.
Sierra Leone was a succcessful operation in the early years of the first Blair govt, but that was to defeat rebels.
Invading N Korea or Iran, or Syria etc would be very stupid.
And before you mention Iraq, that wasn't done for reasons of altruism, but because rightly or wrongly their dictator was seen as a threat to regional stability. And he was a relatively easy target.
Some of our foreign policy is simply national arrogance - the unshakeable belief that democracy is the only form of government any country should have, and we force it on them by military means.
Some is economically based - the government feels it will gain financial advantage by supporting this or that regime, or alternately destroying this or that regime.
And some of it is politicians wanting to carve their place in history.
In the Middle Ages, if you wanted your name to live on, you financed a cathedral. The modern equivalent is a Millennium Dome, or HS2, or war, if you can get one going.
The common thread that runs through all these scenarios is the effect of power on an arrogant mind - history shows it has always been the same.
Some is economically based - the government feels it will gain financial advantage by supporting this or that regime, or alternately destroying this or that regime.
And some of it is politicians wanting to carve their place in history.
In the Middle Ages, if you wanted your name to live on, you financed a cathedral. The modern equivalent is a Millennium Dome, or HS2, or war, if you can get one going.
The common thread that runs through all these scenarios is the effect of power on an arrogant mind - history shows it has always been the same.
When you see how other forms of government work, usually by ignoring the needs of the masses, then it becomes clear that democracy is the only reasonable form of government for a society that believes everyone should count. Naturally not all societies are advanced enough to realise that; but it is a good thing that, where an area is failing to govern well and the people are suffering as a result, encouragement to civilise is given. It is just a pity that we have yet to see proper democracy anywhere; but until tech solves the issues associated with large national populations, there has to be compromise.
Old_Geezer - you make an excellent point, and seen from the perspective of someone who enjoys the benefits of democracy, it's difficult to argue.
But if you only know a twelfth-century feudal system, then the imposition of an unknown rule by military force must represent a terrifying invasion of everything you know and understand.
It's not the bringing of democracy to the world that I have trouble with, it's the forceful military invasion used to do it that is entirely wrong.
But if you only know a twelfth-century feudal system, then the imposition of an unknown rule by military force must represent a terrifying invasion of everything you know and understand.
It's not the bringing of democracy to the world that I have trouble with, it's the forceful military invasion used to do it that is entirely wrong.
1 to 20 of 20
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.