Imperialism's return-- ok?

Great Debates
1

Is it time to use the heavy hand of established governments to reinstate some form of imperialism/colonialism in the more disputed areas of the world?

I’ve always had a personal concern over terrorism all over the world, whether it was religious fundamentalists or IRA-style politically motivated attacks… in the end I agree with one thing, however. Terrorism is possible because of freedom. The more freedom there is, the easier it is to be a terrorist. And in a state of political turmoil there is maximum freedom coupled with maximum fear from a keen lack of personal security— a recipe for irrationality and disaster if ever there was one.

So, the question: in response to puppet dictators, violent and temporary coups, and other such turmoil in and around Africa/Middle East, is it ethically defensible to launch a campaign of imperialism?

Consider some of the states that would be involved, per my suggestion. We would have America, China, and the European states. (preferably, the european states would act as a confederacy for more power, but whatever).

Before anyone flies off the handle and responds to this, understand the motivation for this request: demanding freedom and non-wiolence. This is entirely similar to internal police force. Right now, however, world politics forbid external policing without some sort of group discussion on the matter. What has that truly achieved? Has it stopped terrorism? Has it saved lives in the long term?

So what I suggest is an external enactment of internal policing. Physical conquest of dangerous countries. A consolidation of world power in the hands of nations whose primary goals have been freedom and justice (I include china because I swear they are trying… and because no one could hope to conquer them anyway-- but I doubt they could mount much of a force to conquer anyone else either).

That is, we (EU and US) are often accused of continued imperialism… so should we go ahead and just do it anyway?

QUESTIONS:
**Is it ethically viable in regards to likely consequences of inaction?

Is it practically workable with regards to successful colonization?

If both of the above have ‘no’ for an answer, are there any other general methods available to us?**

2

Okay, I’ll bite.

Such as?

Let’s do this geographically.

North America.

Nah, Canada’s been pretty good lately.

Central America.

Has Fox got those Yucatan guerillas under control? Maybe we oughta go in there, give him a hand?

El Salvador? Are they still at war with Honduras?

South America.

Peru, Ecuador, Shining Path nutcases, lock 'em up.
Colombia, oh yeah, definitely, get them Medellin cartel drug dealers outta there.

Europe.

Northern Ireland? Be a bit difficult to explain to the Queen Mum, wouldn’t it? “So sorry, we just don’t happen to think you’re going a terribly good job, so we’ll just take it away from you before you hurt yourself…”

Russia? Yeah, they might remember how to work the missile silos, we’d better take over.

The Mideast.

Palestine/Israel? Definitely.
Virtually every Arab country except Turkey and Jordan, who have been very good boys lately.
Iraq? Duh.

Asia.

Pakistan? Uh-huh.
Afghanistan? Ditto.

Africa.

All of Africa except the tourist part in Kenya.

So, you’re saying we should just sort of conquer all of Africa, most of the Mideast, and large chunks of Asia and South America.

Just one question–how? With guns and soldiers? What soldiers? The U.S. Army is an all-volunteer group now, and it’s hard enough to get people to volunteer to go shoot at Saddam Hussein and liberate Grenada. How you gonna get people to help you turn back the clock a hundred years? “Bye, Mom, I’m going to help Uncle Sam conquer Africa…”

To answer your questions:

Is it ethically viable? Not in the slightest. Why is it any of our business how the people of the sovereign nation of Afghanistan choose to run their country?

Is it practically workable? Nope. Doubt if we could hold that much land territory with the limited materiel we’ve got. And what are we gonna do, threaten to nuke them if they don’t sit still? They’ll laugh in our faces–they know the EPA won’t allow it.

Are there any other general methods available to us? Sure. Massive serious economic sanctions would make the Bad Boys shape up faster than anything. No more Britney Spears CDs, no more food aid, no more tourist dollars. No more markets for their hand-caught tropical marine fish for saltwater hobbyists in the U.S., no more markets for their 100% cotton polo shirts, no more markets for their coffee or bananas or Ford Escorts or Reeboks or frozen broccoli…

Money talks.

3

What you seem to be advocating is a Capitalist / Christian Crusade against the entire Muslim world – what century is this ?

4

Well, I wouldn’t be said to advocate imperialism, but it was hard to phrase the OP in any other manner :frowning:

DDG, you’re right, of course… there’s just to much strife in the world to assume that force itself is the answer… which is somewhat paradoxical in that force is what is going to solve those issues (largely, though I’ll give some points for diplomacy). But:

Well, obviously, because they or their allies make up listen.

sigh what little faith I have in the world’s population deteriorates year after year.

5

Our attempts at Imperialism are what got us into this mess into the first place!

The United States of America helped the Taliban gain power, in order to keep out the Russians. The United States of America helps keep the Saudi Arabian royal family in power, despite the fact that the people of Saudi Arabia have zero confidence in them. This fuels serious resentment. America’s hand is all over the Middle East, and as you can tell, it has done us a lot of harm and little good. All around the globe, the United States of America works hard to ensure that people are ruled by governments that are favorable to their interests. Half the time, we just end up kicking ourselves in our own face.

People have a fundamental right to self governement. Perhaps if we respected that we would get in less trouble.

6

I must clarify- we did not directly help the Taliban gain power, but we did fund the war against the USSR, and the resulting government opened the way to extremism.

7

I think you’d find that the Queen Mum, as well as the majority of people on this island, would breathe a huge sigh of relief.

8

Heh. :smiley:

Yeah, but then there’s the question of who we could get to run the place.

I’m leaning towards Vince McMahon, myself.