World: not U.S. role to spread democracy

[CptStern]

"A majority of people in Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain said they thought it should not be the U.S. role to spread democracy, according to AP-Ipsos polls. A majority of those living in Canada, Mexico and South Korea also disagreed with that role"


curiously enough:


"In the United States, a slight majority, 53 percent, said the United States should not be trying to spread democracy, while 45 percent said the United States should play that role"

what do you think? can a single country police the world against the wishes of the people? when does "for the good of nation" supercede "for the good of the people"? can a country spread democracy without asking for something in return?


please,no flaming, no knee-jerk reactions ..this thread is more about superpowers policing other countries than US bashing so please try to keep it civil

 

[Tr0n]

I do see a problem with the fact that we ain't really doing it "for the good of the people"....but more like "if every country was a democracy that would mean more money and control for us".Yea sure I like the fact that that we are "freeing" people, but I don't like the intentions behind it.



Disclaimer: That was an opinion not a fact.

 

[clarky003]

I always believed you cant force anyone to do anything, although I always believe people can aspire to be better, forcing the issue I always believe had alterior motives behind it anyway. The only reason behind what has happened is flawed, Iraq although not in the best condition was 'judged' people where blamed on false allegation's or lies, its all a nifty little capitalist expanse to tip world power balance, if they really cared, they wouldnt go bombing the crap out of bagdad with such contempt for the civilian population.. it just wasnt needed, it seemed almost out of spite. and Bin Laden, well.. Afghanistan ... hmm touchy ground really considering the aid the US government gave Bin Laden and co during the conflicts against communist Russia.

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

If this thread is about super power policies what's a Canadian doing starting it? lol

US job is not to spread Democracy... Our Federal Govts job is strictly national defense. And it would be a crime if we fought our battles on our own shores...

In recent times that has meant we have had to topple a couple luantic Governments. The result was that their popluace formed democracies in the void of dictatorship.

It's not been a job to0 form Democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's been a result... Good ends towards defense.

Google me 50 pages in rebute or speak your mind skipper.

 

[CptStern]

spreading democracy has never been the goal ..I can cite a half-dozen cases where the US toppled a democratically elected government only to install a dictatorship ...but I digress

it's not all so one sided, I truely believe the issues are far more complicated than security or democracy ...you dont pour billions of $ to receive nothing in return.

 

[RZAL]

You have a good point Stern, and no it’s not the United States job to spread democracy. That’s not to say we should ignore moral obligations if the circumstances should arise.

 

[CptStern]

You have a good point Stern, and no it’s not the United States job to spread democracy. That’s not to say we should ignore moral obligations if the circumstances should arise.

I agree, but I dont think it's the place of any country to force a type of government ..I truely believe humanitarian intervention is a moral obligation but there's a fine line between servicing and self-service

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

You have a good point Stern, and no it’s not the United States job to spread democracy. That’s not to say we should ignore moral obligations if the circumstances should arise.

Like I said... And I'm the opposition... It's not our job... If you want to interpret what's been going on as a US desire to spread democracy than your a very creative conspiracy theorist.

Very creative... Autistic... Idiot savant...

 

[CptStern]

are you actually trying to get banned? can the insults, dont participate if you cant come up with something worthwhile to say

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

are you actually trying to get banned? can the insults, dont participate if you cant come up with something worthwhile to say

Can the conspiracy and address my response or move along Captian Jack.

 

[Tr0n]

it's not all so one sided, I truely believe the issues are far more complicated than security or democracy ...you dont pour billions of $ to receive nothing in return.

QFT.

damn6charlimit

 

[bliink]

Can the conspiracy and address my response or move along Captian Jack.

Stop with the little remarks... "Captain Jack" "Autistic" etc...

 

[CptStern]

Can the conspiracy and address my response or move along Captian Jack.

i've answered it

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

i've answered it

With more Un-reality

 

[seinfeldrules]

People whine now, but say we leave NK and they invade SK. Who will the world call upon then? That is just the most likely scenario at the moment, if the US completely isolates itself it wouldnt suprise me if many other scenarios sprung up.

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

People whine now, but say we leave NK and they invade SK. Who will the world call upon then? That is just the most likely scenario at the moment, if the US completely isolates itself it wouldnt suprise me if many other scenarios sprung up.

Sterns beef is that we should mop these idiots up who threaten us and leave their populations wallowing in anarchy rather than helping them form a government of their own chosing.

Keep up.

 

[CptStern]

With more Un-reality

"I can cite a half-dozen cases where the US toppled a democratically elected government only to install a dictatorship"


you want to try to disprove that?


seinfeldrules: it's not. I was answering shellback's post

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

"I can cite a half-dozen cases where the US toppled a democratically elected government only to install a dictatorship"


you want to try to disprove that?

Nope... For a teacher you have a hard time reading... Even after you clicked REPORT POST 30 times.... I've been agreeing with you...

EDIT: Sorry if you were all googled up an ready to respond. But yeah. The US's job is not to instal Democracy.

For those that don't have it. Sucks to be you.

 

[Tr0n]

Nope... For a teacher you have a hard time reading... Even after you clicked REPORT POST 30 times.... I've been agreeing with you...

EDIT: Sorry if you were all googled up an ready to respond. But yeah. The US's job is not to instal Democracy.

For those that don't have it. Sucks to be you.

Well then why does Bush and the past presidents say "Oh freedom this" and "Democracy that"?

Why does bush start a war and say it's to spread democracy when it's not our job to do so?

 

[bliink]

Even after you clicked REPORT POST 30 times....

Noones reported anything.. You're drawing enough attention to yourself as it is.

 

[Volatilesquirrel]

A few thoughts

It sure is easy to sit on a computer in a nice cozy home in a free socitey and discuss something that is far away and seemingly unimportant.

Most people that disaprove of the USA's actions in the middle east know only the garbage that is fed to them through television and radio. The media for most part reports the negative, that's what's neccesary to get people to watch and listen. If all that you hear about is the neagative and not the positive, then anything would look bad. I have a friend that spent 14 months in Iraq, and fortunately he was allowed a cell phone. I would call him frequently and tell him what we were being told back in the cozy United States, and he usually became upset because all I knew about was the suicide bombings, people dying, and the chaos. He would tell me about all of the good things that were going on and the scale would seem to level itself out. Most people that are against the war do not have any direct contacts in Iraq or afghanistan(soldiers, relatives) and have really no clue as to what is truly going on.

As far as other countries are concerned (germany, france, russia), Their hands are soiled in the 'oil for food' program, which recent reports have shown that there may have been some corruption involved, so their personal gains seem to cloud their judgement. The US is proceeding with this war mostly(imo) due to the need to secure its interests, being oil. So there really seems to be no difference in the interests of any of the powers. The US approach to securing its interest in oil is a better one, in that getting rid of crazy ass dictators will lead to stabilization in the middle east. Placement of rational goverments, in theory, should help to eliminate terrorists, stop needless warring, and keep oil in all of our vehicles so that our society doen't break out into utter chaos. Most of you out there probably don't realize what would actually happen if our oil supply was cut off- oh and engines powered off of hydrogen is not going to work due to the fact that it requires 3 units of energy to produce 1unit of hydrogen energy. I could go on forever but i'll spare you all.

Sorry for the tirade

 

[bliink]

Okay, I cleaned up the off-topic posts a little.
Next batch will get warnings.

 

[CptStern]

screw it, not worth the effort, thanks guys :|

 

[Icarusintel]

The topic of this thread is highly misleading, it's not the general opinion of the "World" at all, it's of a few nations that were polled, most of which have beef with the US in one way or another anyway, hardly unbiased and proving of a systemic disapproval of US policy in the spread of democracy, which, actually isn;t a bad thing, if the entire world was full of democracies we may actually reach a time of peace at some point in the future, but I guess that never really figured in, did it?

 

[Kebean PFC]

The problem is weather its right or wrong, the U.S. is currently too intwined to isolate itself. If it did, little rootypoop "countries" out in the middle of nowhere would began to kick off against each other. Not to mention coutries like NK who would take it as a sign of weakness and may began to fight.

Back on topic...
I do not belive that the US has to spread Democracy and "freedom," to everyone. Ironically (as metioned above) it is a viscious cycle, we will be paying for our arrogance for a long time.

 

[Icarusintel]

The problem is weather its right or wrong, the U.S. is currently too intwined to isolate itself. If it did, little rootypoop "countries" out in the middle of nowhere would began to kick off against each other. Not to mention coutries like NK who would take it as a sign of weakness and may began to fight.

Back on topic...
I do not belive that the US has to spread Democracy and "freedom," to everyone. Ironically (as metioned above) it is a viscious cycle, we will be paying for our arrogance for a long time.

As much as right and wrong are said to exist they're entirely arbitrary and while I can see it ending up as a vicious cycle, the wholesale embrace of democracy is truly the only way to peace, either that or wholesale slaughter

 

[CadetFrench]

If a group of people or nation is being supressed or in need of help then it is the responsibility for anyone who is able to help, to help that group of people or nation. Unfortunetely many nations and people in the world do not care enough about others and are not willing to step up and help the helpless. In the United States military we believe this, "if you are able- then it is your responsibility to help" policy and we are ready to help or protect anyone in need from the terrors of the world. We will even protect or help those who hate us and/or disagree with our ways, i.e.- we are willing to die to help even the Iraqies who hate us and want us to leave,we still protect all the people in the US who oppose the war, and if Great Britain needed our assistance, we would come, even though you all hate us. This whole belief of helping others and selflessness is the reason that we are better than you all.
EDIT: Almost forgot: we also have the right to hunt down any terrorists in the middle east for what they did on 9/11, and anyone that did not see ground zero in NYC right after it happened, does not have any room to say sh*t.

 

[Icarusintel]

If a group of people or nation is being supressed or in need of help then it is the responsibility for anyone who is able to help, to help that group of people or nation. In the United States military we believe this, "if you are able- then it is your responsibility to help" policy and we are ready to help or protect anyone in need from the terrors of the world. We will even protect or help those who hate us and/or disagree with our ways. EDIT: Almost forgot: we also have the right to hunt down any terrorists in the middle east for what they did on 9/11, and anyone that did not see ground zero in NYC right after it happened, does not have any room to say sh*t.

I would tend to agree with your points here, though saying we're better than everyone else is debatable. We are the most powerful nation in the world right now, that is undisputable, but there are certainly many reputable nations who are doing a lot of good for the world, like the Australians, Japanese, British, etc. so you can't say we're the best. We just like to help keep balance in the world by whatever means necessary, which I agree with, if we can work toward a world without war, a world that is completely democratic, then isn;t it worth the cost?
You say "in the military" just wondering, are you in the military? I'm planning on going in, but I have to finish up college first

 

[CptStern]

If a group of people or nation is being supressed or in need of help then it is the responsibility for anyone who is able to help, to help that group of people or nation. Unfortunetely many nations and people in the world do not care enough about others and are not willing to step up and help the helpless. In the United States military we believe this, "if you are able- then it is your responsibility to help" policy and we are ready to help or protect anyone in need from the terrors of the world.

you pick and choose which countries are worth humanitarian aid ..you ignored rwanda, sudan, you caused Haiti, you caused panama, honduras, niceragua, el salvador the list goes on and on and on and on

We will even protect or help those who hate us and/or disagree with our ways, i.e.- we are willing to die to help even the Iraqies who hate us and want us to leave,we still protect all the people in the US who oppose the war, and if Great Britain needed our assistance, we would come, even though you all hate us. This whole belief of helping others and selflessness is the reason that we are better than you all.

please dont use the word "selflessness" cuz that's not true. Again I can give you dozens of cases where you were detrimental to the people of iraq. I truely believe there are quite a few US soldiers believe you're doing the right thing by occupying iraq ...but selflessness was never a motivation. You're new here so I'll direct you to this thread

post # 232 onward

EDIT: Almost forgot: we also have the right to hunt down any terrorists in the middle east for what they did on 9/11, and anyone that did not see ground zero in NYC right after it happened, does not have any room to say sh*t.

show me one shred of evidence that saddam was involved with 9/11. Seems to me you should be concentrating on finding osama ...how's that going?

 

[clarky003]

I agree with you Stern, like you said, especially in a capitalist society, quite extreme in the case of the US, then you dont just go spending billions for national security, its more than that, .. cry conspiracey if you want to, do any of us really know whats going on behind the scenes?, are any of us personally envolved in the decision process? , if you say yes your a liar, because everyone knows that governments dont disclose all their information, especially if its morally wrong, or classified , in order to prevent public uproar. any operation that is classified and/or not publically talked about is a conspiracey, conspiracey is part of life, it is always a considerable possibility, even more so when people are telling lies, to do what they need to do, also when questions are avoided with less than satisfactory explainations by elitest rulers.

 

[CptStern]

ya, we'll probably never now ..I was listening to an interview on cbc radio with an editor in an iraqi newspapaer who said the US is behind some of the terrorist attacks ..ok before you patriotic meatheads jump all over my back ..I havent been able to verify it ..but as they say "truth is stranger than fiction"

apparently there was an assisination of a prominent sunni leader last year with suspicious circumstances ..apparently he was a well respected figure in all circles ..no group but the US had a motivation to assisinate him ...not too mention that the circumstances around his death were strange to say the least. I cant remember his name but the journalist said there was some credible evidence saying the US had been tracking his movements days before the assination ...these sort of events are rarely ever exposed but they are commonplace (niceragua, el salvador, congo, haiti etc etc etc)

 

[GhostFox]

I know someone who thinks that Saddam sent West Nile mosquitoes over to NA as a method of terrorism.

 

[CadetFrench]

please dont use the word "selflessness" cuz that's not true. Again I can give you dozens of cases where you were detrimental to the people of iraq. I truely believe there are quite a few US soldiers believe you're doing the right thing by occupying iraq ...but selflessness was never a motivation. You're new here so I'll direct you to this thread

post # 232 onward




show me one shred of evidence that saddam was involved with 9/11. Seems to me you should be concentrating on finding osama ...how's that going?

Here it goes:
I will use the word selflessness whenever I damn well please because I am in the military and I know what the soldiers are like and that selflessness is a moral that we hold to. The few ones that were detrimental to Iraqis do not represent the majority of the military and were wrong in what they did. So do not f*cking tell me that I cannot use the word selflessness because you are not in the military and you do not know what we believe in. It is true that we (majority of the military) selfless, thats why we are fricking willing to die to protect our country and fight terrorism. BTW, I am not new here and that thread is bias.

Also, maybe you blinked when you read what I said. I did not say that Saddam was involved in 9/11 whatsoever. I said terrorists!! There are terrorists in Iraq. Way to go twisting my words around like that.

BTW: Icar: I am in the Army. ROTC Green Terror Battalion

 

[CptStern]

Here it goes:
I will use the word selflessness whenever I damn well please because I am in the military and I know what the soldiers are like and that selflessness is a moral that we hold to. The few ones that were detrimental to Iraqis do not represent the majority of the military and were wrong in what they did.

I'm not talking about individual soldiers I'm talking about the US govt. read post 232 all the evidence is there

So do not f*cking tell me that I cannot use the word selflessness because you are not in the military and you do not know what we believe in. It is true that we (majority of the military) selfless, thats why we are fricking willing to die to protect our country and fight terrorism.

ya cuz that's why you're in iraq right?

BTW, I am not new here and that thread is bias.

bias? you want to try and dispute any of the facts I've presented ..so far nobody has been able to. read post 232 all the evidence is there for you to dispute. I had to read your post ..the least you can do is read what's already been discussed a thousand times by many of our members. I dont want to have to rehash everything that's been said every single time some knee-jerk patriot finds his way to the politics forum

Also, maybe you blinked when you read what I said. I did not say that Saddam was involved in 9/11 whatsoever. I said terrorists!! There are terrorists in Iraq. Way to go twisting my words around like that.

funny, there wasnt any before you moved in

 

[jondy]

CadetFrench, don't use emotive reasoning to come to factual conclusions

 

[CadetFrench]

I was not referring to the US govt as selfless, I was referring to the military. Read my f*cking post.

I did not say that is why we are in Iraq, I said we are willing to die for that. Read my f*cking post.

Ive read that thread, I was a major player in it. There are a bunch of Brits on these forums that hate the US. Thats all that thread proves, no other "facts" as you refer to.

Your response to my last quote does not even address how you f*cked up changing my words around. And wtf do you mean moved in? BTW, even if the US was the cause of terrorism does not mean that terrorism is right. Jesus, do you like agree with what they are doing or something?

 

[^Ben]

The mystic ball predicts if CadetFrech attitude does not change soon he is going to find himself banned.

Just a freindly tip.

 

[The Monkey]

History, if anything, has shown us that you don't obtain democracy by an invasion. There are a huge amout of dictatorships in the world, but they don't interest you at all, do they?

 

[CptStern]

I was not referring to the US govt as selfless, I was referring to the military. Read my f*cking post.

I did not say that is why we are in Iraq, I said we are willing to die for that. Read my f*cking post.

Ive read that thread, I was a major player in it. There are a bunch of Brits on these forums that hate the US. Thats all that thread proves, no other "facts" as you refer to.

Your response to my last quote does not even address how you f*cked up changing my words around. And wtf do you mean moved in? BTW, even if the US was the cause of terrorism does not mean that terrorism is right. Jesus, do you like agree with what they are doing or something?

can the attitude tough guy :upstare:

Ive read that thread, I was a major player in it.

what do you mean? you just joined how could you have been a "major player" in the thread?

 

[^Ben]

Maybe he was someone who just got banned, or who is on the verge of getting banned.