Would You Support A War Of Liberation?

RyoOhki · February 2004

<div class="IPBDescription">Examining the debate from the other side</div> This topic is a follow-on from Monse's topic on citizens of a dictatorship supporting an invasion of their country in order to oust their government. The scenario is as follows:

The country in question is similar to quite a number of African nations though it will remain nameless. The government is a dictatorship, and a rather brutal one at that. A police state exists that crushes almost all dissent, and the jails are filled with political prisoners. The country has a smallish army and has not been aggressive since the dictator took over some 15 years ago. The country poses no real militaristic or economic threat to the outside world, though it's human rights record has prompted sanctions from both the UN and the US. It's economy is in a pretty poor shape, and only a few diamond and silver mines provide a measure of commerce. Most of the wealth in concentrated in the hands of the government.

Would you, as a citizen of a western democratic nation, support an invasion of this hypothetical nation with the purpose of freeing it's people and ushering in a democratic government?

Marine0I · February 2004

I put my hand up for the crushing of Mugabe uhhhhh "Hypothetical" Zimbab..... ummmm nation.

Liberation for all - but take it slowly, one step at a time. We still havent completely sorted out the Iraqi problem yet, but once that stabilises, on to the next dictator I say.

CommunistWithAGun · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Feb 14 2004, 05:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> This topic is a follow-on from Monse's topic on citizens of a dictatorship supporting an invasion of their country in order to oust their government. The scenario is as follows:

The country in question is similar to quite a number of African nations though it will remain nameless. The government is a dictatorship, and a rather brutal one at that. A police state exists that crushes almost all dissent, and the jails are filled with political prisoners. The country has a smallish army and has not been aggressive since the dictator took over some 15 years ago. The country poses no real militaristic or economic threat to the outside world, though it's human rights record has prompted sanctions from both the UN and the US. It's economy is in a pretty poor shape, and only a few diamond and silver mines provide a measure of commerce. Most of the wealth in concentrated in the hands of the government.

Would you, as a citizen of a western democratic nation, support an invasion of this hypothetical nation with the purpose of freeing it's people and ushering in a democratic government?  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
No. I don't see how destroying a country that poses NO threat helps.

WE SHOULD FIX OUR OWN COUNTRY BEFORE TRYING TO FIX OTHERS

Vulgar_Menace · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Feb 14 2004, 08:01 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
WE SHOULD FIX OUR OWN COUNTRY BEFORE TRYING TO FIX OTHERS  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Amen.

RyoOhki · February 2004

Even though I started this thread, I wish to add my opinion. I hope that's cool with everyone <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

I would much rather see the tax dollars that would be spent on such a war going towards helping the citizens who are paying them. There are a lot of people within democratic western nations, and a lot of services, that need funding and frankly their needs should come first. Governments in such countries are elected by their citizens to put their own citizens first, and wars should only occur if there is a threat to those citizens.

As CWAG said, we should fix our own countries first. The needs of our own citizens must come first.

Stakhanov · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ryo-Ohki @ Feb 14 2004, 02:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Even though I started this thread, I wish to add my opinion. I hope that's cool with everyone <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' />

I would much rather see the tax dollars that would be spent on such a war going towards helping the citizens who are paying them. There are a lot of people within democratic western nations, and a lot of services, that need funding and frankly their needs should come first. Governments in such countries are elected by their citizens to put their own citizens first, and wars should only occur if there is a threat to those citizens.

As CWAG said, we should fix our own countries first. The needs of our own citizens must come first.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
I disagree with this. Foreign people have the same right as we to live decently , and helping third world countries can be far less expensive than generalizing free healthcare for our gluttonous citizen.

I think what CWAG meant is that we should fix the political system of our own country before forcing it on other nations.

And indeed , a "democracy" waging war for futile reasons needs to be fixed before it is a model for the rest of the world...

Vulgar_Menace · February 2004

Wow! Americans are bombing my cities, and they've convinced me that its probobly OK!

RyoOhki · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I disagree with this. Foreign people have the same right as we to live decently , and helping third world countries can be far less expensive than generalizing free healthcare for our gluttonous citizen.
</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

But foreign people arn't paying the taxes which fund the war. I ask you: why should foreigners come first? Look how much the Iraq war has cost and what could instead be done with that money: <a href='http://costofwar.com/' target='_blank'>100 billion that could go a long way to helping Americans</a>

Crisqo · February 2004

Exactly, why should Australians care about how much money the U.S. spends on it's own affairs? The U.S. is still better off then pretty much every country on the planet. I think we can "throw money away to 'foreigners'" when we've got so much to spend.

"Foreigners come first" because they need the help more than we do. Let's see... We can either get better roads, have more welfare programs, throw more money at public education (which is a joke anyways...unless you live in Massachusetts.) OR, we could help out our fellow man, rid a brutal dictator, get cheaper oil (if it was a middle eastern country like Iraq,) and get some much needed good PR for the U.S.

...I'd go with the liberating.

Dread · February 2004

The way I see it, there's 3 reasons to attack in said scenario:

1) Your country is perfect and you might as well go there.
2) Your country gets something in return. Either the african country poses a threat or you get something for attacking(resources, pr, military influence)
3) Politics. Meaning: politicians who represent you, are doing it only to help themselves(pr, monetary gain), not the people.

In short, if your country attacks in said situation = you are being butt-violated, as in the leaders are either caring too much for theirselves or the other nation, whos government has failed.

Nations are not charity-organizations. The only reason for a nation to exist, is to secure the life of the people who live in it. Not to help others.

Answer: no I would not.

Sirus · February 2004

I would say yes, assuming that we honorably commit ourselves to helping. We sit here in our own countries and take so many things for granted. As one of the most powerful countries it should be our responsibility of helping people where they need help. I don't think it's right that to idly sit by and let people die and be tortured simply because we can't be bothered to do anything because we have so many domestic issues.

I don't think it matters if we recieve anything in turn, that's not the point. It's not about credit claiming or anything else, it's about helping people because they need help and I'm definitely not saying that anything that isn't a democratic government is evil, but many third world governments are corrupt, violent oligarchies or violent dictatorships. Governments are there to protect people, as soon as it is used as a tool to gain power for certain people at the expense of citizens (Iraq for example) it's justified to help overthrow a government and help put up a government that protects their natural rights (Locke, Life, land and property) regardless of the way that government achieves it, even if it is a monarchy, or constitutional monarchy.

We need to stop being so selfish, you need to understand that you are one of the most fortunate persons in the world to live the way you live. The sheer fact that you have a computer and internet places you above billions and billions of people.

In the words of Winston Churchill "The price of greatness is responsibility"

Handman · February 2004

We cannot ignore the problems of the world to fix the problems at home. We have done this before and it leads to more problems. While the dictator might not affect us at the current time, twenty years down the line a lot can change. Isolationism is a hirrible policy, as we are a part of the world and the events of the world do affect us at home.

That said, why should the people of the country continue to suffer when we can do something about it now. We are fortunate to be born in a free country. We had aid in our liberation (though the french had ulterior motives, they were mad at great britian), it is only right that we aid others who are being opressed.

I completely agree with Sirus.

<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/pudgy.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='pudgy.gif' />

Dread · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Handman @ Feb 14 2004, 08:12 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> We cannot ignore the problems of the world to fix the problems at home. We have done this before and it leads to more problems.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
The keywords here are: not <b>our</b> problems. Really, why should we care? Because we are members of the same race? Doesn't hold water in my cup. You were born in a country with crazy dictator in lead, tough guano.

I'm part of this society I live in. We have poor people, we have sick people. This country pools resources from all the individuals so we could help each other: the people who live in this country. That's what this is all about. I don't pay taxes or go to work, so that those resources could be taken from OUR poor and OUR sick people to those who live in a less fortunate place. It's really about first fixing our own problems, and there's a lot to be fixed before we can even start thinking about using our resources for others. Politicians have betrayed me when they start using funds on a large scale to help other countries.

Life is not fair. Nor it should be.

Sirus · February 2004

Dread that's the epitomical statement of selfishness. I really can't explain what I think about that, but suffice to say, that's by far the worst attitude and it's that attitude that makes everybody's life worse.

CommunistWithAGun · February 2004

When the United states dosen't have every 6 of 10 children in poverty I will support fixing other nations

Handman · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The keywords here are: not our problems. Really, why should we care? Because we are members of the same race? Doesn't hold water in my cup. You were born in a country with crazy dictator in lead, tough guano.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

Dread,

I can use this same arguement to say tough cookies to our poor, or those unfortunate enough to come down with a terminal illness. I don't, we have institutions in our country that help. Not all our problems can be solved by throwing money at them, some of them are cultural problems.

ElectricSheep · February 2004

Support that statistic CWAG. If the US, the country with the second highest Income Per Person, has 6 out of 10 kids in poverty than what does the nation with the brutal dictator have.

Dread · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Sirus @ Feb 14 2004, 09:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Dread that's the epitomical statement of selfishness. I really can't explain what I think about that, but suffice to say, that's by far the worst attitude and it's that attitude that makes everybody's life worse. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
If I would be truely selfish, I wouldn't care about others, but behold, I do. As long as they have some sort of impact on me(my friends, people in the same country, people in western countries). Do I care if little green men die in Mars? No. Does that make me a horrible person? No, I've never met them and I never will. They have no impact on me whatsoever. Do I care if people in overpopulated Africa die? No. Does that make me a horrible person? Apparently yes, because they share some genetic code or DNA with me. So does monkeys and flies, and yet I don't cry for those. Where the line goes? Should I care about rocks, as they are made out of same atoms as I am? *sniff sniff* Do I smell a doublestandard-cake with hypocricy on top?

The point is: fix your own problems before you try to fix others. Nations are founded to help the people who are part of it. Your nation should help _you_ before trying to help others. I want my country to use its resources to help our people, before going out to help others. I repeat: your politicians are not doing their duties if they value people in other nations over you.

I'm just saying what most of the people are thinking about. And I see at least Ryo and CWAG agrees.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Handman)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I can use this same arguement to say tough cookies to our poor, or those unfortunate enough to come down with a terminal illness. I don't, we have institutions in our country that help. Not all our problems can be solved by throwing money at them, some of them are cultural problems.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

I'm fine with that as long as the resources of your country are used for it. Or would you like that those money that now help your poor and your sick would be used for some other nation?

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (ElectricSheep)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Support that statistic CWAG. If the US, the country with the second highest Income Per Person, has 6 out of 10 kids in poverty than what does the nation with the brutal dictator have. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

I'm not commenting the statistics but it comes down to how evenly the wealth is distributed. It has nothing to do with Incomes/pers.

Edit: Allow me to quote myself here:
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><span style='font-size:13pt;line-height:100%'><b>Life is not fair. Nor it should be.</b></span></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
I'm starting remember my "Why should I care" thread <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' />

MonsieurEvil · February 2004

Before I reply, I do want to make one side-note from my readings of this thread:

Don't you think it's a bit selfish that nearly everyone here posted in the other topic that they would want to be liberated, but in here that they do not want to liberate others? Says a little something about greed and empathy, I guess, and it's really quite disapointing to me to see it. "Save me! Oh wait, save others? Screw those guys".

Oh well, my opinions on this generation were again reinforced. I'll post later directly to this topic, I did not mean to OT it.

Dread · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Feb 14 2004, 11:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> "Save me! Oh wait, save others? Screw those guys".  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Ever heard of human nature? That's what your quote is about. I'm sure it'll kick in for you too.

Imo there are two kinds of people: dead and selfish.

PS. Nighty night everyone. I'm kind of scared of what I'm going to find tomorrow here <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' />

Crisqo · February 2004

WHAT!? 6/10 children are born into poverty!? EGADS man! That's like 60% of the U.S. is in poverty!

Fortunatly, the real number is nowhere near that. Crazy exaggerating communist.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The official poverty rate in 2002 was 12.1 percent, up from 11.7 percent in 2001. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

<a href='http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html' target='_blank'>http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html</a>

So really, the number is more like 1.2/10 households.
...6/10 where did you find THAT number? Did you make it up? You made it up didn't you? Sigh...

SO anyways... Now that the poverty level is down you're all for the liberating of other countries, right?

ElectricSheep · February 2004

Well CWAG is the Resident Propaganda Guy

Sirus · February 2004

You can still be entirely selfish if you care for people who can help you back. Then you're just putting on an act until they no longer benefit you.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Ever heard of human nature? That's what your quote is about. I'm sure it'll kick in for you too. Imo there are two kinds of people: dead and selfish.</td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

You must be living on a different plane. Not to mention, your opinion doesn't really make any sense. If everyone was selfish, everyone would be dead, including you. If your mother was selfish, and didn't love you, you would probably dead. She could've had an abortion, and you would be dead, or she could have given birth to you and drowned you, or left along the side of a road... et cetera et cetera. It's easier on a mother to not have children if they're truely self-centered.

The only reason people ever have a chance to live and let live is because of selflessness.

Legionnaired · February 2004

Yes, I would express overwhelming support for a liberating war, to the point of contemplating enlistment in the armed forces.

I'm not really sure where to start addressing your comments Dread, but I think MonsE summed it up pretty well. If you lived over there, you'd change your tune.

Burncycle · February 2004

It is my opinion that we should help others, if we have the capability, and not only when it serves our interests.

So, yes.

CommunistWithAGun · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Crisqo @ Feb 14 2004, 05:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> WHAT!? 6/10 children are born into poverty!? EGADS man! That's like 60% of the U.S. is in poverty!

Fortunatly, the real number is nowhere near that. Crazy exaggerating communist.

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>The official poverty rate in 2002 was 12.1 percent, up from 11.7 percent in 2001. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>

<a href='http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html' target='_blank'>http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html</a>

So really, the number is more like 1.2/10 households.
...6/10 where did you find THAT number? Did you make it up? You made it up didn't you? Sigh...

SO anyways... Now that the poverty level is down you're all for the liberating of other countries, right?  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Newsweek.

Crisqo · February 2004

Yeah, sure you did.

Government census > newsweek anyways.

MonsieurEvil · February 2004

CWAG - do you really believe that a majority of American children live in poverty? Because if so, you need to get out of the house and look around a bit. Hell, even our people in poverty over here would be like <i>Kings</i> in most countries. It's all relative...

Some of the follow on posts have helped reinforce a small faith in humanity.But the majority still disgust me. I guess we should not intervene in Kosovo, in Rwanda, in Liberia, in Haiti - and those just in the last 10 years. After all, let the mudpeople of the earth die, what do we care after all, it doesn't affect us at all. They probably deserved it anyways - I bet they want a strong dictatorship to keep their lives rigid and controlled too. You know, the same way a tiger likes living in a zoo cage. Perfectly natural.

Marine0I · February 2004

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Feb 15 2004, 03:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Some of the follow on posts have helped reinforce a small faith in humanity.But the majority still disgust me. I guess we should not intervene in Kosovo, in Rwanda, in Liberia, in Haiti - and those just in the last 10 years. After all, let the mudpeople of the earth die, what do we care after all, it doesn't affect us at all. They probably deserved it anyways - I bet they want a strong dictatorship to keep their lives rigid and controlled too. You know, the same way a tiger likes living in a zoo cage. Perfectly natural.  </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> 
Come on MonsE, this is a very small spectrum here. There are plenty of people who are a lot more empathetic in the world. Look at the aftermath of the Iraq war. In Australia, roughly 50% feel that the war was still justified despite no weapons etc because the Iraqi people have been freed.

There are plenty of caring people in this world, and I bet half these supposed callous posters here wouldnt hesitate to donate money to Amnesty international and other charities for the third world.

I think they've just given up hope that anything can be done for these people. Their lives are miserable and hell, but its of their own creation, and bringing them more misery from our massive armies is just going to create more destruction. They dont feel that even if we win we can effect the changes that would be good for these countries, and write the whole concept off as a failure before its begun.

Thats not how I view it of course, I'm a "Freedom from the business end of an m16" man, but thats just my impression of the "screw everyone else, lets take care of us" posters.

UltimaGecko · February 2004

I'd actually be for sending in a couple squads of commandos to help out any resistance present in the country (if it were a vile dictatorship...it's not like France or Germany needs to have dudes running around in the backwoods).

Of course, that can end up being more expensive, in lives, so it's generally not a good plan unless there's a lot of resistance ot the dictator. I'd also be for liberating them, if the human rights were violated that much, if their country has a poverty line less than ours, and there's still more people under it than our own, well then, we should help them.

If we have 30 homeless people in a city of 100,000, because those people are lazy/can't find work, and then 12,000 who just don't earn enough to buy much more than food and shelter; and then there's another country where homeless people are shot, and a city of 100,000 has 80,000 below the poverty line, and can only afford shelter, because food is to scare, I think we should help them.

Of course, I'm also slightly against it, because than lots of people that don't always need to be killed get killed. Or the country we're trying to help starts hating us, ala Somalia.

I'm also not selfish enough. I always help people out the first time, unless I learn that they're just coming to me because they're lazy. Once I find out they're MUCH lazier than me...well,then they should start helping themselves.

And, whoever just insulted my High School should re-evaluate their own. My High School was awesome, even though it could have just been the best in the state. If you want terrible school systems, go down to Arkansas (which is one of the worst funded school systems in the country) or Florida. My school was great (well the teachers were good at teaching, the school in general was dumb, because school is boring).

Jammer · February 2004

I'm going to have to say no, but only for logistical purposes. It is impossible for the US (or any nation) travel the world, removing all crappy governments and spreading democracy and freedom. As cool as that would be, it would just be impossible.

I beleive our core of our foreign policy and economic alliances should be to encourage and increase liberalization of the world. If a country poses a threat, liberation simply adds to the case for war. I would also support a war for liberation for extraordinary circumstances. For example, the Holocaust itself (had the US known it it's extent) should have been motivation for war, but the isolationists in the US kept us out.

Monse, I think your observations are dead on. We're all fortunate to live the top 10% (5%? 2%? We all have computer access after all) of ALL PEOPLE in the WORLD. Think about that for a second. It is easy for us to say "Oh, that sucks." Think about it from the other side. If I lived in Iraq or Iran or France (badabish) I'd like to be liberated.

Would You Support A War Of Liberation?

Comments