There may be something to be said for the strategy of the salami game. But don't salami-slice strategies tend to suddenly change over into campaigns of sweeping change, generally decided by campaigns of a military nature?

And frankly, removing totalitarianisms and redressing the trouble they invariably cause, is, as I have said before, our business whether some of us want it or not. Recall that totalitarians resist better examples a outrance. Thus, we should expect, and train, to remove them whether they voluntarily surrender their privilege of oppression or not. Killing off totalitarians to make democracy just can't be wrong, Griff. Accept this morality, for killing totalitarians prevents totalitarian evil. Bad must die, good must prevail, and good better have the bullets and bayonets for the job, or good is totally fucked. This is not a condition I'd permit, but it is one you explicitly do, and I think that's colossally stupid of you.

Well there we have it. The enrichment of Halliburton and the mortgaging of the US government to enrich the elite few ... that is libertarian. Didn't Stalin also do same for the benefit of the people? Weren't his supporters also Urbane?

OHHHHHHH! BUUURN!

You just don't get it, do you?
Yes, it can be wrong. For one colossal reason, that's not how you "make democracy", you idiot. You can't push on a rope. "Killing totalitarians" just makes room for the next totalitarian. Better you should learn to pull on a rope and let the people (demos) decide (-cracy). I leave as an exercise for the student to name "choosing a style of government for others", (hint: it's not democracy).
A good end cannot sanctify evil means; nor must we ever do evil, that good
may come of it. -William Penn, Quaker, founder of Pennsylvania (1644-1718)

Stupid hypocrite.

Obviously, as a Libertarian, I do not agree with intervening with other governments.
Also, as someone who believes that the ends does not justify the means... if we act like them, we are them.

Aren't we as humans responsible for each other? Is it right for us to knowingly sit by and let innocent people be tortured and killed? At what point do we have some sort of moral responsibility to help?

V, I like you for things you do when you're not giving me a hard time. That said, just what is the "it" you think I should get? Generally it sounds like leaving bad governance alone that it may the more conveniently make extra trouble for the rest of us.

Crummy foreign policy -- helps antidemocrats win wars with us, and that is purely stupid, as well as wasting lives. Also stupid, no?

It's unduly difficult to make democracy if the totalitarians are organized, motivated, and armed. Why can't you get it that I understand this to be a two-step process? It's remove the threat, then construct the democracy. It helps everything if the threat removal has been sufficient. So, we should at least disorganize and demotivate the anti-democrats, as disarming alone isn't a thorough enough solution.

When, V, are you ever going to get that it isn't, and by definition cannot be, evil to remove oppressive, totalitarian governance? Augustine of Hippo figured it out before the friggin' DARK AGES!! What is your major malfunction, son?? Just how do you explain not understanding this??? Can you explain it?

I don't think you can manage it to someone of better moral understanding than you're showing. All unknowing, you shall reveal only your terrible error.

I've seen un-democracies. It's left an impression: even the ones that aren't materially too bad have to go -- by the cross or the sword.

Sure, call me a fanatic if you'd like -- it'd be with some justice. It's just better to be my kind of fanatic than your kind, see?

That sentence can be dismissed as conspiracy theory, to which tw is prey and I... well, call me immune.

Pooh pooh.

Since the only un-democracy you've admitted experience with is the US Navy, can I assume you intend to dismantle that institution as well?

But they have guns!

Self government is better than good government. Every time.

Hmm, really? What if the elf governing ones judgement is biased? Is it therefore still good?

Please don't bring the elves into it - it's complicated enough as it is.

yesman, it doesn't matter how bad a government is, if its the choice of the nation concerned. If we the 'enlightened' ones attempt to impose our systems, no matter how good, well meaning or fair, that system will be seen as imposed and will be resented. Self government is better than good government.

Dana, If by Self government you mean a simple democracy, then I wholeheartedly agree. If not please expound.