Will Dictatorships of the World be Toppled?

[Lakimina]

Bombing a country when the crisis of ISIS is happening when one of your mortal enemies considers allying with you *cough Iran cough Saudi Arabia cough Qatar*, not the best idea.

Calling my statement to be pure sarcasm is not helping your argument. At all.

[The United Peoples-]

Yes, because like all dictatorships, they fall. They fall because, there is no choice for the people and the most importanat thing in a country is its people. So all of the dictatorships in the world will fall someday.

That's like asking if all fruit will be gone one day, and saying "Yes, because all apples decay" while ignoring the rest.

All governments, including democratic governments, will probably fall one day, or, be reincarnated into a different government.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

And kill more innocents, more than would be killed by the leaders?

This seems to be the logic behind the US bombing campaign against ISIS.

Doesn't mean you do it against a town of innocent people. The ISIS bombings are generally against actual military targets.

[Hinsa]

Vietnam, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. That's it.

Wars not caused by America: Korea, World Wars, Yugoslav Wars, Boer war, Syrian Civil War, Sino-Japanese War, Russo-Japanese War, Russian Civil War, Palestine War, etc

Need I go on?

By the way, it's not a war, but add in the Ayatollahs of Iran. Without overthrowing Mossadegh in 1953, we don't have the corrupt Shah. Without the Shah...less impetus for harsh religious rule. Also, see:

We came, we saw, we destroyed, we forgot
The Anti-Empire Report
by William Blum |  July 29, 2011

An updated summary of the charming record of US foreign policy. Since the end of the Second World War, the United States of America has …

Attempted to overthrow more than 50 governments, most of which were democratically-elected.[1]
Attempted to suppress a populist or nationalist movement in 20 countries.[2]
Grossly interfered in democratic elections in at least 30 countries.[3]
Dropped bombs on the people of more than 30 countries.[4]
Attempted to assassinate more than 50 foreign leaders.[5]

In total: Since 1945, the United States has carried out one or more of the above actions, on one or more occasions, in the following 69 countries (more than one-third of the countries of the world):

Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Angola
Australia
Bolivia
Bosnia
Brazil
British Guiana (now Guyana)
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Congo (also as Zaire)
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Fiji
France
Germany (plus East Germany)
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guatemala
Honduras
India
Indonesia
Iran



Iraq
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Kuwait
Laos
Lebanon
Libya
Mongolia
Morocco
Nepal
Nicaragua
North Korea
Pakistan
Palestine
Panama
Peru
Philippines
Portugal
Russia
Seychelles
Slovakia
Somalia
South Africa
Soviet Union
Sudan
Suriname
Syria
Thailand
Uruguay
Venezuela
Vietnam (plus North Vietnam)
Yemen (plus South Yemen)
Yugoslavia

Source: http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/201 ... we-forgot/
See also a map: http://www.buzzfeed.com/provincialeliti ... rld#4iik7u

Nice, no need for me to point out the truth then.

[Naxalistan]

Calling my statement to be pure sarcasm is not helping your argument. At all.

I'm saying my statement was sarcasm.

Do try to keep up.

[Lakimina]

Calling my statement to be pure sarcasm is not helping your argument. At all.

I'm saying my statement was sarcasm.

Do try to keep up.

Then do try to put the [sarcasm][/sarcasm] code. If you're going to talk to me to keep up, you should be able to too.

Yes, because like all dictatorships, they fall. They fall because, there is no choice for the people and the most importanat thing in a country is its people. So all of the dictatorships in the world will fall someday.

That's like asking if all fruit will be gone one day, and saying "Yes, because all apples decay" while ignoring the rest.

All governments, including democratic governments, will probably fall one day, or, be reincarnated into a different government.

It's still more likely that dictatorships are still going to topple earlier than a democratic government, but never totally.

[United Marxist Nations]

1) You forgot North Korea.
2) Calling Russia and Iraq dictatorships is a bit over-the-top.

[Alcase]

Yes, because like all dictatorships, they fall. They fall because, there is no choice for the people and the most importanat thing in a country is its people. So all of the dictatorships in the world will fall someday.

So will all nations, as they had tended to do in the past.

[United Marxist Nations]

Yes, because like all dictatorships, they fall. They fall because, there is no choice for the people and the most importanat thing in a country is its people. So all of the dictatorships in the world will fall someday.

The longest existing state in history was a dictatorship for most of its history (and the one period it wasn't, the oligarchy was pretty solidly entrenched).

[Bezkoshtovnya]

Yes, because like all dictatorships, they fall. They fall because, there is no choice for the people and the most importanat thing in a country is its people. So all of the dictatorships in the world will fall someday.

The longest existing state in history was a dictatorship for most of its history (and the one period it wasn't, the oligarchy was pretty solidly entrenched).

To be fair, that was also a time where human civilization was generally centered around one central leader. Democracy has since then superseded that trend.

[United Marxist Nations]

The longest existing state in history was a dictatorship for most of its history (and the one period it wasn't, the oligarchy was pretty solidly entrenched).

To be fair, that was also a time where human civilization was generally centered around one central leader. Democracy has since then superseded that trend.

It really wasn't, ruling bureaucracies tended to be the ruling bodies in most states, as is the case today. Never, in the whole of history, has a single person actually held absolute power in a state of any substantial size.

[Yulis]

Because the majority of wars in history are all America's fault.

Maybe not EVERY war ever, but the vast majority of wars in the 20th and 21st centuries lead back to American influence, so his statement isn't entirely unfounded.

Excuse me, but neither of the World Wars were caused by America. Yes, America was involved in both, but they were only the cause of the Pacific part of the Second World War and had very little to do with the beginnings of the war in Europe.

[Anglia and Francia]

To be fair, that was also a time where human civilization was generally centered around one central leader. Democracy has since then superseded that trend.

It really wasn't, ruling bureaucracies tended to be the ruling bodies in most states, as is the case today. Never, in the whole of history, has a single person actually held absolute power in a state of any substantial size.

You're 100% correct brother. The myth of the all powerful in human history is false.

[Bezkoshtovnya]

To be fair, that was also a time where human civilization was generally centered around one central leader. Democracy has since then superseded that trend.

It really wasn't, ruling bureaucracies tended to be the ruling bodies in most states, as is the case today. Never, in the whole of history, has a single person actually held absolute power in a state of any substantial size.

I mean that humans were generally okay believing they were ruled with absolute authority by one or a few people. If they were in practicality ruled by more than one, there was still generally one central figure they perceived as their leader.

[Pope Joan]

"War Crimes" is such a tired and tedious refrain.

Let's start by prosecuting the governments of the West for their constant depredations.

[United Marxist Nations]

It really wasn't, ruling bureaucracies tended to be the ruling bodies in most states, as is the case today. Never, in the whole of history, has a single person actually held absolute power in a state of any substantial size.

I mean that humans were generally okay believing they were ruled with absolute authority by one or a few people. If they were in practicality ruled by more than one, there was still generally one central figure they perceived as their leader.

Not necessarily. Take, for example, the Roman Republic, where the Senate held most authority. Most of the Celtic tribes were also ruled by councils, the Greek city states were ruled mainly by oligarchic councils. China, while nominally ruled by an Emperor, was subject to an all-encompassing bureaucracy; Persia was a collection of various regional governments all swearing fealty to a central government. To think that history moves in a progression of people becoming more accepting of democracy the further in history is very simplistic and outright wrong. Autocracy is a myth.

[Rio Cana]

Russia is not a dictatorship.Damn Amerikanski

You comment above in color reminds me of this song from Colombia. It was composed around the time that the Soviets were always on tv news.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7Tk6r21OQw

[Glorious Freedonia]

I'm going to put this out on the table and then I want to point out that world dictatorships are getting out of control and torture and death runs rampant in the countries. I'm going to list some countries that should be fined for their war crimes.

Uzbekistan
Nepal
Iran
Eritrea
China
Iraq
Myanmar
Fiji (so far no violence against the people is yet documented)
Sudan
Turkmenistan
Russia
Belarus
Zimbabwe


I need more opinions on which dictatorships of the world should be invaded by NATO Forces or the World Powers. Should there be foreign help? Should other governments arm the oppressed?

Ideally yes. The tough part is making sure that the new boss is not just like the old boss.

[Geilinor]

An invasion will generally not be needed. Revolutions begin all the time without invasion.

[Union Of Canadorian Socialists Republic]

I'm going to put this out on the table and then I want to point out that world dictatorships are getting out of control and torture and death runs rampant in the countries. I'm going to list some countries that should be fined for their war crimes.

Uzbekistan
Nepal
Iran
Eritrea
China
Iraq
Myanmar
Fiji (so far no violence against the people is yet documented)
Sudan
Turkmenistan
Russia
Belarus
Zimbabwe


I need more opinions on which dictatorships of the world should be invaded by NATO Forces or the World Powers. Should there be foreign help? Should other governments arm the oppressed?

None of them. That's not how NATO works.

[ESTU]

I am staunchly non-interventionist. It's not my fight nor is it my place to say whether it is right or wrong the way someone is running their country. I wouldn't expect Russia to come rushing to my aid if the American government got out of control. I'm just asking for a new master. If the people of "insert_name_here" want a "free" society, they can fight for it, just like the first democracies had to. Freedom is worth nothing if you don't fight for it imo. Honestly though, I think the number of dictatorships in the world will increase if nothing else. People look to strong leaders, good or bad, under duress in a hostile world for protection. It's natural human nature. That's why I'm a monarchist. I realize this and decide that it would be more effective to focus at making sure that you have a good leader in power, than making sure everyone has a voting card.

[The Serbian Empire]

Nope, and if you watch the money in the duopoly of the US... the democracy is illusory. Still, I would say that overthrowing dictators would destabilize the countries far worse than anything I'd desire to see.

[Freiheit Reich]

If the people really want it to happen, it will happen. It only takes one bullet to kill a bad leader.

[The House of Xavier]

You left out North Korea, the most infamous one. Also, your OP is lacking. The mods may lock it.

I'm surprised they haven't.

[The House of Xavier]

An invasion will generally not be needed. Revolutions begin all the time without invasion.

And they usually end poorly.