Creating democracy around the World

[Bergslagstroll]

Even if few people believe that creating democracy have been the main goal of Iraq and Afganisthan it's still have been a very much used punch line of the Bush administration. Like for example Bush said that one of his greatest accomplishment was creating democracy for 50 millions of people. But it has been very little discussion and debate of the most efficient ways of creating democracy.

That you have on one hand full out war to overthrow a dictator. Ecpecially Iraq have shown the enormous problems with that strategy. That the cost in both dollars and life have been much higher then expectate and the war have contribute a lot to USA national debt. That at the same time the cost for the Iraqies have been enormous with over hundered of thousand dead and millions of people being refugees. That at the same time is still not clear what the end result will be.

So if you seriuse goal is to create solide democracy their can maybee be more efficient ways. Like for example that countries can gain peace and democracy with out foreign invasion, recent example is East Timor and Liberia. Diplomacy and internationall pressure can be a tool to help improve that process. Even more important is those countries often lack the resources to rebuild their countries, they often also need expertise help and also help with creating security.

So a countinius Marshall plan could be a good thing if you want to promote democracy around the world. That then a country reach democracy and peace the international system steps in with aid, expertise and if needed peace keeping troop to secure the positive development. Their already exist UN mission like that around the world. The problem is that the commitment from the USA, EU and other countries are to little. But if you truelly belive in creating democracy aroud the world it is a much more cost effective and also less risky then it comes to bad sides effetcs way to promote demorcray.

 

[Red_Dave]

Even if few people believe that creating democracy have been the main goal of Iraq and Afganisthan it's still have been a very much used punch line of the Bush administration. Like for example Bush said that one of his greatest accomplishment was creating democracy for 50 millions of people. But it has been very little discussion and debate of the most efficient ways of creating democracy.

That you have on one hand full out war to overthrow a dictator. Ecpecially Iraq have shown the enormous problems with that strategy. That the cost in both dollars and life have been much higher then expectate and the war have contribute a lot to USA national debt. That at the same time the cost for the Iraqies have been enormous with over hundered of thousand dead and millions of people being refugees. That at the same time is still not clear what the end result will be.

So if you seriuse goal is to create solide democracy their can maybee be more efficient ways. Like for example that countries can gain peace and democracy with out foreign invasion, recent example is East Timor and Liberia. Diplomacy and internationall pressure can be a tool to help improve that process. Even more important is those countries often lack the resources to rebuild their countries, they often also need expertise help and also help with creating security.

So a countinius Marshall plan could be a good thing if you want to promote democracy around the world. That then a country reach democracy and peace the international system steps in with aid, expertise and if needed peace keeping troop to secure the positive development. Their already exist UN mission like that around the world. The problem is that the commitment from the USA, EU and other countries are to little. But if you truelly belive in creating democracy aroud the world it is a much more cost effective and also less risky then it comes to bad sides effetcs way to promote demorcray.

YouTube - Thomas Barnett: The Pentagon's new map for war and peace
I think this covers the topic quite well [eventually]

 

[bhkad]

Even if few people believe that creating democracy have been the main goal of Iraq and Afganisthan it's still have been a very much used punch line of the Bush administration. Like for example Bush said that one of his greatest accomplishment was creating democracy for 50 millions of people. But it has been very little discussion and debate of the most efficient ways of creating democracy.

That you have on one hand full out war to overthrow a dictator. Ecpecially Iraq have shown the enormous problems with that strategy. That the cost in both dollars and life have been much higher then expectate and the war have contribute a lot to USA national debt. That at the same time the cost for the Iraqies have been enormous with over hundered of thousand dead and millions of people being refugees. That at the same time is still not clear what the end result will be.

So if you seriuse goal is to create solide democracy their can maybee be more efficient ways. Like for example that countries can gain peace and democracy with out foreign invasion, recent example is East Timor and Liberia. Diplomacy and internationall pressure can be a tool to help improve that process. Even more important is those countries often lack the resources to rebuild their countries, they often also need expertise help and also help with creating security.

So a countinius Marshall plan could be a good thing if you want to promote democracy around the world. That then a country reach democracy and peace the international system steps in with aid, expertise and if needed peace keeping troop to secure the positive development. Their already exist UN mission like that around the world. The problem is that the commitment from the USA, EU and other countries are to little. But if you truelly belive in creating democracy aroud the world it is a much more cost effective and also less risky then it comes to bad sides effetcs way to promote demorcray.

Just curious, what has your country done to help liberate anyone?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Democracy as it is, is quite retarded.

 

[Edify_Always_In_All_Ways]

Democracy as it is, is quite retarded.

And if it were up to Europe, I guess we'd have monarchy still? With a few extra centuries of inbreeding, the absolute rulers of whatever nation you'd happen to inhabit would more than likely be "quite retarded" as well.

The key to democracy is an informed populace. Any change in government must be accompanied by a good public education system or it is useless in the end.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

And if it were up to Europe, I guess we'd have monarchy still? With a few extra centuries of inbreeding, the absolute rulers of whatever nation you'd happen to inhabit would more than likely be "quite retarded" as well.

The key to democracy is an informed populace. Any change in government must be accompanied by a good public education system or it is useless in the end.

Would you say the democratic situation in the US today and the last decade(s) is healthy? Where can you see it going in the future?

I am not saying monarchy is the solution, why the hell do you think that? We live in 2008 ffs, its time we come up with NEW structural solutions, because politics of today is quite silly and petty.