why do western government think they have the right to force their views on the rest of the world?

Question

when america was attacked in 9/11, one of osama bin ladens messages was that "america is the biggest terrorist in the world". when britain was attacked on 7th july 05, the terrorists said that the terrorism would continue until brits stopped attacking muslims. considering this, i wonder why we continue to get involved with countries that dont actually concern us (such as iraq.) why havent we learnt from past mistakes such as vietnam? and who are we to say that democracy is right? why do we have the right to force our beliefs on other countries? iraqis dont want democracy. it just seems to me that a lot of the problems caused today are rooted in the west's over-involvement. and for those of you who say we are helping or liberating people.. where were our caring governments during the genocide in rwanda, for example? it seems like if you get involved in things that dont concern you, you get more bad than good. the statistics for troops dying in iraq arent good.
all answers welcome

Answer 1

Well, first, there is a flaw with your question - All governments, not just western governments, feel that they have the right to force their views on the rest of the world.

It would seem that the natural human condition is to believe that you are right and that everyone else should agree with you. Not everybody feels this way, obviously, but by and large it seems that most people do.

That having been said, historically, Muslim conquerors (once they finished with their conquering atrocities), generally (though not always) seemed content to let Christians and Jews continue practicing their faiths, where Christians historically were the least inclined to allow other religions to even exist in the same area.

Additionally, I would like to point out that I don't think western governments believe that have the right to force their views on the rest of the world. Instead, I believe they feel they have the OBLIGATION to do so. While this may seem a trifling thing, I believe why they feel they have OBLIGATION to do so stems from the fact that the western world is predominantly Christian.

Now, I'm not well versed on the Muslim tradition, so I can't speak about it, but I know that Christianity requires proselytizing. And, unfortunately, that obligation to proselytize grew into an obligation of conversion. We as westerners have lived with this more or less ingrained into our psyches and so much so that it spreads beyond religion - many people have all or nothing attitudes towards many things. This oversimplification makes things like right and wrong that much simpler. Unfortunately, it also makes right and wrong that much more subjective.

As such, if we believe we are right, then that means that other people are wrong, and because of our OBLIGATION to help others who are, in our opinion, doing it wrong, we can't leave it alone.

And THAT is why you have problems like... well... most of them these days...

Answer 2

Iraq and other major Mideast countries have oil. We need oil. The West must therefore impose control over countries such as Iraq who have never been properly settled. The people of Iraq have always been at each other's throats - you can see evidence of this at the execution of Saddam. It was his direct enemies who placed the noose around his neck and the same bunch of idiots who shouted slogans from the pit below. By introducing a form of democracy to Iraq, it was hoped that this would help the people of Iraq settle their differences in a more peaceful manner. Advanced countries like UK, USA and France, have highly sophisticated forms of government which allow the common people to have their say and to vote for a party or person of their choice. It was argued, rightly in my view, that if such a system of government could be imported or even imposed upon the people of Iraq, then things would become much quieter. This has not happened and it is because the people of Iraq do not consider themselves to be Iraqis. Most of them are more interested in their narrow tribal allegiances and hold on to that so tightly they cannot let go.

Answer 3

The USA think they are the world police,but i want to know who
polices the police.Rwanda has no oil so they are not worthy of
any help.

Iraq had no wmds

Iraq had no terrorists,Ive heard people on here say Iraqis were
responsible for flying planes into the world trade centre.That is
complete bollox.

Where are these terrorists from,Saudi,north Africa,and lots of
other places.I don't see the US invading osama bin ladens
country(because they are the USAs allies).

This war is about controlling the peak oil in Iraq,and changing
the oil for euros back to dollars as this hurt the US economy
when Saddam changed from selling oil for dollars.

It is not a coincidence that as soon as the USA invaded Iraq
they immediately changed the selling of Iraqi oil back to the
dollar.

OUR SOLDIERS ARE DYING FOR OIL AND MONEY

Answer 4

First, it doesn't matter which side you claim to be on (neutral doesn't count, ask Spain) the terrorist are going to attack those who will not accept their religion. Second, there is a such thing as a world wide economy. What is said and done over in those little countries affects billions of people across the world. While I don't agree with everything that has been done, the fact that we are doing something is a start. As far as your statistics, the death count isn't a drop in the bucket compared to the first day of the Normandy invasion.

Answer 5

Obviously with your future seeing powers you can tell who is and who iasn't a threat.
Of course Sadam was just about to stop all his murdering, HE never really attacked other countries like Kuwait and IRan destabalising the area.
He NEVER really used chemical weapons and certainly wasn't looking around for WMD.
We may have been fed some mistruths, but the guy was a nut hell bent on creating more problems for the world.
Ditto with Afghanistan; the Taliban were origionally put in place to get rid of the Russinas, but they started training terrorists for other means.
America and UK as terrorists, you ought to buy a dictionary. Protection of a sovereign state (and I don't believe in pre emptive strikes) is the right of any country.
Sept 11th was perpetrated by those conforming to ideology and teachings from Madras in Afghanistan and other countries. I see it as no different that if they had used a B52 and a few bombs.

Answer 6

By the "western governments" I believe that you mean the USA.

It appears that the US government sees itself as the only "super power" and now rules the world. Just watch GW walk. Does he not walk as if he were the emperor of the world?

If one country rules the world and somehow a country opposes that rule, well, they will just invade on false premises like Iraq. Only invade if the country cannot defend itself.

Who brought Sadam to power? Gave him WMD against the Iranian and Kurds? He was the pupet at that time.

I really don't think it is imposing their views but wanting all other countries subservient. Do what I say or else.

Answer 7

Could it be because countries like USA and even UK if it comes to that - (once an Empire but barely able to hang onto UNITED Kingdom since Scotland now have its own Parliament to govern it's own Country; Wales have its own Assembly to govern its own Country; Northern Ireland.. well, "still to pass driving test yet, but getting there" in order to follow Scotland and Wales; and aas for england - well even Yorkshire and Cornwall would love to govern thier own COUNTIES which for the benefit of many, are english counties !!) THINK they are better than everyone else and therefore "deserve" to run the world or any country it chooses ?

Could it be because they think money will buy them anything they want?

Could it be because some media moguls start printing out dis-information to mould the public to its' leaders' way of thinking..(eg like concentrating on the conflict in Iraq instead of the REAL reason for getting embroiled in the terrorism conflict - a result of the aftermath of the 9/11 attrocities allegedly carried out by alleged terrorists that allegedly were/are being trained and hidden in caves and bunkers in AFGHANISTAN... NOT Iraq as the media would have you all believe...)

Shall I go on?

It's the media moguls who are responsible for "electing" our so called "Leaders".. by confusing the good general public with thier daily drivel and dis-information in all media outputs.

Most heirarchies were established by men, who now monopolise the upper levels (eg George W Bush, Tony Bliar (sic) etc), thus denying women of thier rightful share of incompetence !!

Answer 8

The US has limited resources. Maybe if we cut welfare we could afford to go to Rwanda. We go where the priority is. Also, you Socialists don't have the charity or the stomach to help anyone. Clinton tried Somalia, but he didn't have the guts to do what was necessary. None of you do.
If we went into Rwanda, you Socialist would shout justice and common sense down like you always do. The Conservatives need to rise up and pull are voting power. Elect a President who has ba*lls, brains, AND charisma.
GW has two of those.

Answer 9

We negotiate until it is no longer an option then we invade for what we want .
We will install leaders of nations if need be and as long as things go well then we will be happy .Saddam our boy since the 60's screwed the pooch when he invaded Kuwaiti oil fields and set them on fire .
That would be like going in front of a group of crack heads with 20 pounds of rock and flushing down a toilet .
If the crack heads all had guns would you want to do something that stupid .
Saddam did and paid with his life .

Answer 10

We need a democracy in Iraq because if they devolve into a Theocracy, you will have another terrorist state like Iran or Syria.

Not only would it be another terrorist state it would also control a good percentage of the oil supply.

Both of these things have a very large impact on our country's security.