Give Force a Chance

[Woodmonkey]

Give Force a Chance

"Many in the U.S. are now learning that democracy cannot be imposed by military force."

--German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, speaking at an international security forum in Munich on Feb. 10

It's always good to be reminded by our German friends that democracy can't be imposed by military force. Perhaps the Japanese would like to weigh in too? Actually, they wouldn't. Living next door to nuclear-armed dictatorships, and not having succumbed as thoroughly to postmodern otherworldliness, the Japanese democracy is in fact building up its military and strengthening its U.S. alliance. Still, the German Foreign Minister was simply expressing, in a particularly un-self-reflective way, an increasingly common point of view on both sides of the Atlantic.

Indeed, on the same day Steinmeier was speaking in Munich, Barack Obama was launching his presidential campaign in Springfield, Ill. His speech had two paragraphs on foreign policy. In the first, Obama acknowledged the importance of a strong military in the key task of this generation--to "confront" and "track down" terrorists. In the second, he urged that "we bring an end to this war in Iraq" by sending our combat troops home. "It's time," he said, "to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else's civil war." Obama anticipated the obvious objection that giving up on the attempt to resolve someone else's civil war isn't the same thing as actually bringing that war to an end. So he concluded with this sentence: "Letting the Iraqis know that we will not be there forever is our last, best hope to pressure the Sunni and Shia to come to the table and find peace."

But this is less a hope than a pipe dream. Obama, like many other Americans, wants to get our troops out of Iraq, whatever the consequences. And some in Congress are so worried that the Bush Administration is even thinking of using military force against Iran that they're discussing legislation prohibiting Bush from doing it. So it's worth asking straightforwardly, Is a propensity to rely on military force a vice to which we Americans are prone? And doesn't the Bush Administration need to learn a lesson about the danger of using military force in pursuit of foreign policy goals?

No.

The Source

[Chrisj]

It is a valid point democracy can not be imposed by force but force is sometimes needed to create the conditions for true democracy to develop. The current European obsession with talks and sanctions to solve all the worlds ills is naive to say the least, if there is no credible threat of force then unless you are prepared to starve a country into submission (which Europe is not) the sanctions can usually be treated as a minor irritant.

Listening to the comments of most of the European polititians it is easy to imagine the Roman Senate debating endlessly what to do about the approaching barbarian hordes and never reaching a decission other than we will talk about it again tomorrow.

As far as Iraq is concerned there needs to be a clear goal in place and a plan to achieve it. An open ended commitment does no one any good, a clear target gives those involved something to work towards. Perhaps the US is a little too reliant on force rather than diplomacy but it is a difficult decission to make and if everything goes right the politician is a hero if not they are a target for vilification. Talk can not solve every diplomatic crisis and at least the threat of force by the US is a believable threat, threat of force by Europe can be dismissed as hot air.

[Woodmonkey]

Originally Posted by Chrisj

As far as Iraq is concerned there needs to be a clear goal in place and a plan to achieve it. An open ended commitment does no one any good, a clear target gives those involved something to work towards. Perhaps the US is a little too reliant on force rather than diplomacy but it is a difficult decission to make and if everything goes right the politician is a hero if not they are a target for vilification. Talk can not solve every diplomatic crisis and at least the threat of force by the US is a believable threat, threat of force by Europe can be dismissed as hot air.

All true, Chris.

[Shooterman]

Originally Posted by Chrisj

It is a valid point democracy can not be imposed by force but force is sometimes needed to create the conditions for true democracy to develop.

We are headed for a true democracy. God help us!

As far as Iraq is concerned there needs to be a clear goal in place and a plan to achieve it.

If, no a big IF. If we were percieved to have had a clear goal in mind at the outset of this mess, we may have been 110% better off. We went out for revenge, and quickly let the Neocon boys like Wolfowitz, Gaffney, and Perl, turn it into a democracy ( so they said ) exporting machine at the cost of the lives of good men and untold billions of dollars. Posterity will urinate on our graves and rightly so.

An open ended commitment does no one any good, a clear target gives those involved something to work towards.

The clear target was that fella that masterminded and financed the attack on 9-11. What was his name? How quickly we forgot.

This government, whether PUB or DIM always has to have Bogey Men to drive foreign policy. It has been like this for a lot time.