Subject pretty much says it all. I mean a democracy in deed, not just word.
Maybe not, if you’re one of those who insist that the US is a republic.
Peace,
mangeorge
Some people have argued that the U.S. policy in Vietnam under Presidents Johnson and Nixon should be categorized as an “invasion”.
That aside, the U.S. made numerous invasions in the 20th Century, including ones in The Philippines, The DOminican Republic, Panama, and Grenada.
I assume we are overlooking situations such as the invasions by U.S. and British forces during World War II of such places as France, Morocco and Italy.
Why should we overlook the invasion of Morocco, slipster? The U.S. was technically neutral re Vichy France. In his book, Crusade in Europe, Dwight Eisenhower noted U.S.officials were very nervous on the eve of the initial North African invasion because they knew the U.S. was invading a neutral nation without declaring war. In his 6-volume memoirs of WW2, Winston Churchill pointed out that the U.S. and U.K. went to great lengths to present the invasion as a primarily American operation because Vichy France enjoyed good relations with America, but had been exchanging some shots with the U.K.
Also, the United States occupied Iceland during WW2.
The Peyote Coyote’s point about Morocco is well taken. My point (which I guess I didn’t really make) is that the examples I gave were of instances in which we entered a country by force to attack the troops of a nation with which we were already at war, rather than instances of initiating hostilities against a nation by attacking that nation.
The U.S. has invaded many nations in the name of performing “peace-keeping” but not with the overt intent of usurping control of said nation. We’ve also given aid and support to nations seeking to overthrow governments of other nations, but again, not with the objective of usurping control of said nation.
The fact that we may have, as a by-product to our peace-keeping, helped to install and support governments sympathetic and friendly to our interests doesn’t count, does it?
Yea I meant an invasion more in the spirit of an aggressive territory/resources grab, though I’m sure many would argue that some invasions already cited fit that bill.
Well, you may not belive ther was “intent,” but the U.S. clearly exercised that usurpation of control on many occasions. In the following cases, it was pretty overt. In numerous other occasions in Central America the effect of “protecting our interests” was making sure that the “right” people were installed in power.
The following are limited to U.S. invasions with the explicit attempt to maintain control:
Nicaragua: 1912 - 1933
Haiti: 1914 - 1934
Russia: 1918 - 1922 (Unsuccessful)
Panama: 1989
In addition, Honduras, Guatemals, Nicaragua, Haiti, Panama, the Philipines, and several other countries have been “protected” into the U.S. hegemony on multiple occasions.
(Mind you, I have limited this to military intervention. CIA destruction of other national governments would increase the list to Iran, Chile, Indonesia, and quite a few more.
Technically, these would count, I suppose:
Six-Day War (1967): Not sure about this, since Israel and the Arab countries had never signed any real peace treaty, I suppose you can argue it’s a continuation of the original war. But if you accept that there was a de-facto peace in place, then Israel invaded Egypt (albeit with significant provocation).
Indo-Pakistan War/Bangladesh Independence (1971): India invaded East Pakistan because some 10 million refugees had crossed its borders (figures are disputed by some).
Oops. I didn’t mean to imply that either of those were territory grabs. If that’s the question, then probably those don’t count.
It is also worth noting that Britain, France & Japan sent troops into the USSR.
Israel invaded Lebanon & held onto seized buffer territory … there were reasons, I’m not an Israel basher just saying.
India invaded East Pakistan and created Bangladesh
Hitler was elected democratically in a Democracy, with a plurality (tho not majority) of the votes. Things changed rather quickly once he was in – was Nazi Germany a “Democracy” by the mid-30’s? Certainly not. Still it is very close to the spirit of the OP …
South Africa invaded Namibia in WWI and kept control of it for decades. They invaded Angola to crush rebels and support a client government. Again it is debatable whether SA was a “democracy” – I’d argue it was if you were white
I got some more for India (and I’m Indian, so nobody jump on me):
1961 - Annexation of Goa: Goa is on the Indian subcontinent, and the Portuguese refused to cede it, so India occupied it. Fighting was minimal though, and a year later, Portugal recognized India’s claim to Goa.
1947 - Annexation of Hyderabad: This is a little muddy, since it’s part of India’s transition to independence, but as I interpret the British Law of Ascencion, at the time Hyderabad was annexed, it was technically an independent state. There are several other principalities which were also annexed during this period (such as Jungadh, if I remember correctly). Whether or not India had the right to do this at the time is disputed by some, but I don’t think most people view this as some type of land grab. Technically, though, they did acquire land, so it meets the definition.
Are you saying it isn’t?
And he said “democratic”, not democracy - you can have a democratic Republic.
Hmm… Engaland and Argentina in the Falklands?
I think the main reason there are so few is simply because the times when conquest was profitable simply do not co-incide with the times democracys are around.
Shalmanese, when Argentina invaded the Falklands it wasn’t a democracy (that is Argentina wasn’t a democracy). The UK recaptured it shortly afterwards, but this could hardly be described as an invasion as it was a UK territory anyway.
On a more technical basis, in April 1965 the Australian government (under Bob Menzies) sent combat troops to South Vietnam without a request from the US Government or an invitation from the South Vietnamese regime. :smack:
Italian invasian of ethiopia.
although it was under mussolini, he was an elected leader.
Hitler was an elected leader too, sort of.
As an undergrad I prepared for a course on international relations the argument that democratic nations do not cease to be aggressive, but merely that their aggression goes from overt to covert. The US’s overthrow of the democratically elected and appreciated Arbenz government in Guatemala in 1954 wasn’t a “war” with publically known movement of armies, but rather a hush-hush CIA-led operation. But it led to the eventual death of 165,000 people, more than most wars.
UnuMondo