"The dramatic wish of Romanians... was to be occupied by Americans, not Russians"

[Pekka]

The 'invasion' of Japan was a success from start to beginning, when the US started to build Japan and renew it's political life and other sectors as well. Interestingly enough I just read a lengthy study of this. Pretty impressive.

[StarLightDeath]

I think the fact that we dropped 2 nuclear bombs on them and then turned them into an economic powerhouse says it all. No other country conquers another country and then turns around and builds them back up. We are trying to do the same in Iraq, but I'm not sure Iraq is capable of doing what Japan and Germany did.

[DanS]

Too bad we were never as successful in the Phillipines.

[Pekka]

SLD, the invasion of Iraq and Japan has very little similarities. I persoally find none, except that there was a war going on first.

[StarLightDeath]

Yes, and no. Both governments for the most part were toppled and rebuilt. Iraq actually has it much easier because they didn't go through the bombings that Japan did...regardless of all the terrorist attacks going on now. The big difference is the difference in culture. Japan was extremely open to western ideas and as a result they prospered from it. Iraq, while it has taken to some ideas of democracy, is very different in their views on the western world and ideals. I think Iraq is going to prove whether or not Islam is fully compatible with Democracy.

[Pekka]

Culture is one factor, and US did take that into account in Japan. They also removed troubling politicians. They also removed whole bunch of organizations that were troublesome. Many Japanese did think the westerners and US in particular were extremely brutal and kind of evil, almost animals. But that turned away quite quickly, they had the emperor by the balls and politicians as well, but yet they acted behind the scenes and changed the structures of the society.

This I don't see happening in Iraq. Then again, if you start removing everyone, grabbing imams by the balls, and basically saying screw your system here's our system now you will do it, well... It might play out differently than in Japan.

[StarLightDeath]

This I don't see happening in Iraq. Then again, if you start removing everyone, grabbing imams by the balls, and basically saying screw your system here's our system now you will do it, well... It might play out differently than in Japan.

The thing is we can't do that because Islam is so deeply rooted in government in the middle east. Writing a cartoon erupts in violence, imagine removing an imam? We can't touch them and they know it. I really don't see Iraq ending well. It was well intentioned, and it makes strategic sense to try and spread Democracy, but I just don't think Islam is compatible with it. The only way to remove Islam from government is for the people to want it and too small a minority wants that. It's very telling that many muslims in western countries would prefer to live under the Sharia. It's also very telling when these people say that they are more loyal to Islam than the country they are living in. If Democracy fails in Iraq we are going to have to forget about nation building and focus on destroying the military capabilities of our enemies. At some point we are going to have to decide it is either them or us and if the west doesn't unite then I see Islam continuing to spread and our problems getting worse. Hopefully Iraq will pull a Japan and be some shining beacon in the Middle East, but I find that unlikely.

[Pekka]

Yeah I know it can't be done like that. That's why I said I don't see much similarities with this and the case of Japan

[StarLightDeath]

Controlling the politicians isn't what rebuilt Japan. It was the openess to western society and the desire for change that allowed Japan to build up so fast. Change comes from the people, not politicians. While only the hardest left will claim that the Iraqis were happier under Saddam, there is also the fact that a probable majority of Iraqis aren't looking for a western style Democracy. They want to be ruled by Imams and at the very least to have a strong Islamic presence in the government which means that change isn't going to happen until they decide they want a secular society. So my answer is still yes and no.

[Pekka]

It was one thing. And it was not bottom up, it was from up to down operation. It meant controlling all parties, who then made the changes that people applied, it was forced democracy, because they had no idea what a democracy is. Then again, they didn't have much against it, but some conservative parties took huge hits. This included being worried about the anti-communist state the Japanese conservative parties had etc. It was definitely nto bottom up type of operation, which is usually waht many people consider is the only way to bring democracy.

However that was JApan and it was a different setting.

[StarLightDeath]

It doesn't matter if you control the politicians if the people aren't open to the ideas being imposed on them. It also doesn't matter what the people want if those in control don't allow it. It has to be done on all levels.

[germanos]

Originally posted by StarLightDeath
Controlling the politicians isn't what rebuilt Japan. It was the openess to western society and the desire for change that allowed Japan to build up so fast. Change comes from the people, not politicians. While only the hardest left will claim that the Iraqis were happier under Saddam, there is also the fact that a probable majority of Iraqis aren't looking for a western style Democracy. They want to be ruled by Imams and at the very least to have a strong Islamic presence in the government which means that change isn't going to happen until they decide they want a secular society. So my answer is still yes and no.

There is really no comparison between Japan and Iraq exept that the US conquered both.

One of the major differences is that Japan was brought on its knees with brutal force and its occupation was set out to be forcefull chance of its society.
In Iraq it was beleived the US would be welcomed with flowers and the Iraqi's themselves were all set to take on democracy and western values by themselves.

[Timexwatch]

Why is it taboo to just say that the Russians were royal ****** to the people on the other side of the Iron Curtain and that 50 years of prosperity in Western Europe looks better than 50 years of stagnation?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Timexwatch
Why is it taboo to just say that the Russians were royal ****** to the people on the other side of the Iron Curtain and that 50 years of prosperity in Western Europe looks better than 50 years of stagnation?

I fully acknowledge the evil things the USSR did to its own people, and to foreign populations they had under their control.


Why are there still Americans who ignore the things United States has done in some Latin American countries?

Every country has some of their own citizens who can't face up to their country's real history in some aspects.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Timexwatch
Why is it taboo to just say that the Russians were royal ****** to the people on the other side of the Iron Curtain and that 50 years of prosperity in Western Europe looks better than 50 years of stagnation?

It's not taboo, it's just irrelevant as to why Rumanians would have prefered to've been occupied by the Yanks sixty years ago.