If you have a problem grasping the idea of hypothetical questions, please go elsewhere.

There is a country - The Republic of Slobovia. It is a horrifying evil dictatorship. It is clear that nobody can overthrow the dictator - several attempts have been made, and all crushed. Many hundreds of thousands of the people of Slobovia have been killed by the dictator. The democratic nations contemplate this country: It is rather weak compared to first world countries. Should they liberate the country, they wonder. They think they can do that in relatively low cost of life, but they are concerned that a conflict between ethnic groups will break out in the aftermath, with fairly large loss of life. On the one hand, if they leave the dictator alone, and he and his successors kill people by the hundred thousand endlessly into the future.

What should the democratic countries do, and why?

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

I feel much the same way about the concept of "debate forum".

Since Slobovia is a hypothetical country much of the political baggage associated
with similar debates over current events cant be set aside.

If Slobovia existed in a World similar to ours it would stand side by side with
equally repressive, and violent, nations such as N. Korea. If I were confronted with
a decision to liberate Slobovia I would have to ask "why not N. Korea?". If the
motivation is purely humanitarian why is it being selectively applied?

__________________
"Terrorists can frighten us, nations can cripple us, only our government can destroy us."
~bb~

That's simple: war is expensive, and only so much can be done by the democratic countries because of the cost.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

How much money are we to take from Slobovia after we have suppressed the voices of her majority?

__________________
"We've been blowin up, we're the issue, we're ammunition" Switchfoot

Yes, I almost resonded to that point in advance, but I decided it would be
more interesting to see if it was presented as an argument.

If the liberators can "only do what we can do" it would be more economical
in expenditure, and result, to invade a N. Korea that does not have the added
problem of domestic sectarian factions prone to infighting. Choosing Slobovia
would invite extended loss of human life in the forecasted civil conflict, and
added cost in American assets and life to mediate the problem.

In a purely humanitarian effort to wisely use limited assets N. Korea would
offer a better opportunity. Unless you are factoring in some added American
benefit in choosing Slobovia.

__________________
"Terrorists can frighten us, nations can cripple us, only our government can destroy us."
~bb~

does slobovia have a history of representative government, or an iron glove leader, or something else?
trying to determine whether the people acquiesce to the strong man government as long accepted by the culture or whether it is one which was previously representative and is now subject to the tyrant despite strong internal opposition to his rule

__________________
“Mayor Palin fails to have a firm grasp of something very simple: the truth.”

[Frontiersman editorial, 2/7/97]

Slobovia has not seen representative government.

Slobovian government has been both [traditional] theocratic, and pure secular
dictatorship.

__________________
"Terrorists can frighten us, nations can cripple us, only our government can destroy us."
~bb~

Slobovia has no "majority voice", or substantial ownership of assets, beyond
its current secular dictator.

__________________
"Terrorists can frighten us, nations can cripple us, only our government can destroy us."
~bb~

One factor is, as I said, that Slobovia is weak - it's soldiers have a record of being uninterested in dying for the Leader. N. Korea, on the other hand, has a huge, tough, well-prepared military.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

Thank you for bringing that point up. A frontal assault against military targets
is exactly where American power is most effective.

It's a protracted policing of a civil war that is more destructive to humanitarian
goals, and the preservation of American assets and life.

__________________
"Terrorists can frighten us, nations can cripple us, only our government can destroy us."
~bb~