In light of all the Iraq threads, I was hesitent about starting a new one. Anyhow, it seems like just about the rest of the world is against the US going to war with Iraq. That does not change the fact that just about everyone also believes that Sadaam is an evil dictator.
So the question:
Why does the world insist on allowing dictators like Sadaam to stay in power?
It just seems to me that rather than deal with the issue, the UN and the rest of the world has taken a similar policy of appeasement and isolationism that led us into WW2.
I’d be willing to hunch that part of it may be based on the concept of “better to deal with the devil you know than the devil you don’t know”.
Another idea I’d like to throw out there is perhaps the world needs a villian. It gives the other countries something to agree on, namely that “that guy is bad”.
so you want the world to overthrow governmental systems you don’t like? Why should the world community force dictators out of power?
I would have to say that if the dick-tator is only harassing his own people, then realistically, it remains an internal concern. In which case it is up to the citizens to do whatever they feel they must.
If the dick-tator starts harassing his neighbours, then it becomes a regional concern. In this case, it is obvious that regional powers should be willing to assist the newly harassed sovereign countries in that region.
If the dick-tator tries to pull a Napolean or Hitler, then help may be required from further away.
However, assistance should only be offered to a recognized government that has made the request.
Assistance should never be forced upon any sovereign country, from another country who is not directly affected by the criminal or war-like actions of the dick-tator.
Nor is it the right or privelege of any other country to decide the legitimacy of any current administration. Unless, an overwhelming majority of the population has requested this assistance.
That is just my opinion, though.