Should nations be able to remove governments to install friendly democracies?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

To answer the OP:

1) Of course its meddling in a country's internal affairs.

2) It's only win-win if it works, which it doesn't; right now, with the single and wholly anomoulous example of Japan, there's no evidence that democracy can actually be imposed upon another country from the outside.

3) So, yes, it's immoral -- not on its face, but because it does something wrong (interferring with another country's sovereignty) without producing a greater good (like a sustainable democracy).

[Kuciwalker]

Specifically, it's absurd because, in WWI, one country attacked us and the other declared war on us shortly thereafter.

[gogf]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


I can't believe you bit, Zkrib; the Germany/Japan analogy so beloved of neocons is historically absurd.

Specifically, it's absurd because, in WWI, one country attacked us and the other declared war on us shortly thereafter. It's not like we unilaterally invaded them in 1937 because we didn't like where things seemed to be going. There is no moral equivalence between our fight with the Axis and the scenario proposed in the OP.

Consider how many lives could have been saved if someone had done something about Hitler in the '30s.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Specifically, it's absurd because, in WWI, one country attacked us and the other declared war on us shortly thereafter.

Sorry, fixed (before Ned gets here and starts spinning a theory out from that assertion)

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by gogf


Consider how many lives could have been saved if someone had done something about Hitler in the '30s.

Plenty, perhaps, but assassinating Hitler is not the same as invading Germany in order to restore democracy -- something that, arguably, would have increased popular support for an ultranationalist group like the Nazis.

[Admiral]

To answer the OP: no. And not even because, in the current international climate, our attempts at intervention have met with stunning failure.

First, the idea of imposing democracy at gunpoint is absurd. Second, there can be no meaningful system of international relations wherein one country can invade another and install a friendly regime. Third, there is no guarantee of a correlation between democratic states and Western-friendly states: Iran is the most democratic state in the middle east with the exception of Israel, and is at the top of our invade list. Fourth, the very premise of the question is predicated upon the belief that the West is morally superior to the rest of the world.

So no.

[Kuciwalker]

Second, there can be no meaningful system of international relations wherein one country can invade another and install a friendly regime.

The current system is meaningless?

[Kuciwalker]

Fourth, the very premise of the question is predicated upon the belief that the West is morally superior to the rest of the world.

Of course we are.

[Frozzy]

The real question is are they able to? In the case of Japan, the leaders were not so much toppled as gave way to the inevitable, and so the people did not fight. In the Middle East the leaders were toppled through force, and vowed to continue the struggle. When the people are being led by resistors fighting the "the evil West", by definition there cannot be a democracy since the people are not willing to embrace it.

Instead of the people seeing it as a "democracy versus totalitarianism" battle or a "freedom versus oppression" battle they see it as a "us versus the West" battle, and when its the West trying to bring democracy in, there is no chance it will stand.

Any moral argument is irrelevant.

[Last Conformist]

Who cares if it's moral? It doesn't work.

[Cort Haus]

In addition to all the good points above opposing intervention, there is the tendency for propagandists to go overboard in demonising an opponent to justify a war. In which case the moral authority of the interventionists evaporates.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
2) It's only win-win if it works, which it doesn't; right now, with the single and wholly anomoulous example of Japan, there's no evidence that democracy can actually be imposed upon another country from the outside.

democracy? we are talking about japan, the country ruled by the same party for the last 50 years, right?

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by MarkG
democracy? we are talking about japan, the country ruled by the same party for the last 50 years, right?

Actually, they had an opposition party in power for a while in the '90s.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Actually, they had an opposition party in power for a while in the '90s.

yeah, for like a year or so

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MarkG
democracy? we are talking about japan, the country ruled by the same party for the last 50 years, right?

How's that any different from Italy and the Christian Democrats or Sweden and the SPD?