Spreading Democracy through the barrel of a gun doesn't seem to be working.
Like the establishment of a Democratic Republic of the United States of America doesn't it require desire of the people of any country to accomplish this?
It doesn't seem the Iraqi's and the Afghan's are ready.
2007-09-02 07:40:23 · 10 answers · asked by Kelly B 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
What is this need to spread our type of democracy? It's like trying to spread your brand of religion. Shouldn't we be the example of a cohesive, peaceful country. So before we try spreading something. Let's first make it in our own country. Once we have achieved this then and only then should we seek to share it with those interested. It will be accomplished thru peace. At the end of a gun barrel just pisses people off. I think we've done enough of that.
2007-09-02 08:25:35 · answer #1 · answered by gone 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Gun barrel diplomacy rarely achieves the desired outcome. But in some cases, oppressed peoples need to be rid of the oppressor before they can move on. If the dictator controls the army, secret police, etc. it's difficult to overcome by ordinary citizens.
The people of Iraq/Afghanistan may not be ready. I'm not sure many in the middle east are ready. They may have to continue killing each other for many years to come before any changes are made. An age old problem.
But I'm pretty sure the folks in Saddams' torture cells are somewhat thankful? And the Kurds that were gassed to death would've probably welcomed some intervention a little earlier.
2007-09-02 10:08:11 · answer #2 · answered by poolplayer 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
specific. almost each monarchy in background collapsed using fact somebody desperate "hiya, i do in comparison to this guy, enable's do away with him." A coup, at the same time as no longer what springs directly to ideas, continues to be a civil conflict, because it rather is a rustic struggling with itself. For a stable occasion, attempt Libya. Or Egypt. EDIT: to boot, this is nicely worth noting that there has in no way been an extremely absolute monarchy. each us of a ever dictated has had mires of forms working under the exterior, and at the same time as the guy (or woman) on the precise has the appropriate say, this is been the job of white and blue collared workers to deal with the actually ruling of countries in day by day affairs.
2016-12-31 10:07:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The counterargument is we can't, simply because bombing our nations twin towers didn't make Americans stop to think of becoming radical muslims.
We're using force for Iraqi's to accept a way of life that's entirely new to them. Imagine the terrorists who would wish ti impose their radical thinking on our nation through terrorism. It won't work.
It's a set of differences that, ultimately, will never find a middle ground. There is no grey area in this case.
2007-09-02 07:47:16 · answer #4 · answered by Glen B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We can't "spread" our way of doing anything. Either people in various countries want it themselves, or they don't.
I bet most people in Iraq and Afghanistan right now feel they were better off before their countries were invaded.
2007-09-02 07:50:44 · answer #5 · answered by sudonym x 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You cannot. War in inevitable. There will always be someone whose idea of peace is the weaker submitting to the stronger.
2007-09-02 09:09:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Setting the example. Who says everyone HAS to be democratic?
2007-09-02 07:47:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Lead by example, practice what we preach. Maybe someday, eh?
2007-09-02 11:30:53 · answer #8 · answered by Col. Forbin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about spreading it with peace?
2007-09-02 07:46:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Capitalism
its what we did in russia, and are doing in china
2007-09-02 08:59:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋