I don't have a long, detailed first post for this one (drunk at 4:17am ldo), but I was wondering what peoples' thoughts are when it comes to super powers intefering in other countries' affairs. Are we morally obliged to intervene in countries like Syria and Libya where dictators are killing (or have killed) thousands of civilians? What guidelines should be considered to intervene militarily? Should we mind our business and let people in such countries fight for themselves or should we provide some kind of support?

The Christian Just War Theory lays out in sufficient detail what constitutes casus belli.

Are there hot chicks involved?

Is there some type of natural resource involved? Oil , preferably, then yes. You just label them the axis of evil , or a dictator, or accuse them of building bombs that you have a thousand of , or say for sure there was yellowcake uranium , and the people will back an invasion.

the people of course, i mean congress and the US president , LDO .

Do you want to know when should we or when do we?

I think we should attack other countries if they attack us.

Do they have oil?

Based on my experience playing turn-based strategy games, the answer is "The sooner the better."

a game of world domination being played by two guys who can barely run their own lives imo

when we believe there is a clear and present danger to the united states. be it terror, economical, or even an epidemic.

im sure i could come up with more.

So you support economical wars? Would you support just invading countries and looting them for goods?

well the question was interfere militarily. not invade. no i dont support going in and looting for goods. but for example if iran tried to close the straight like they threaten to then yes we need to bomb them and open it back up.

if a country tries to do something to tank our economy. then yes do what we have to to thwart it.

So you would agree that our actions and sanction would be reason for Iran to attack us?

Forgot to ask if they were brown. Are they brown?

be more specific please.

We are implementing sanctions that will try to cripple Iran's economy. You said if someone tried to tank our economy, it would justify attacking them. Therefore, I am assuming that you agree that Iran has a right to attack us.

sure bring it on i would love for them to. get their army navy and air force and lets go.

So do you think the USA is trying to instigate a war with Iran?

R2P is more or less correct in spirit

Never, obv. I mean, who are we to say, really, that gassing millions of Jews is so bad?

That's actually an interesting tangent for this thread. There was information of the German atrocities leaked prior to Pearl Harbour. Then even after, the European Theater of operations was not about the atrocities, but a general war footing. Until the physical evidence was found it was closer to innocent until proven guilty. Decades later it culminated with Bush et al and their "evidence". The circle became complete with presumed guilt.

but I took a wrong turn for serious from a sarcastic post

Oil or if their dictator looks at you funny

I had never heard of that, thanks. I can't recall the last time we got involved in a conflict based on those guidelines. The only possible exception might be Somalia IMO.

lol'd, I want to play a game of Civ4 now.

Ignoring the sarcasm, and in light of cres' post, what guidelines for intervention would you consider before taking action? Let's assume there's absolutely zero resources to take from the country you're intervening in and the people in power are no threat to you at all (and by you, I mean your country)

Would any of you say that aiding the Contras in Nicaragua was a good idea, ignoring the fact that it was the Carter administration that let the communists take down Somoza's dictatorship (which we supported for decades before Carter)? Were we right to intervene in Libya? Are we morally obliged to intervene in Syria?

Libertarianism (cause I know there's a lot of RP supporters here), as I understand it, takes a non-interventionist approach to these issues, but is it okay to let governments massacre their civilians at will? When is it time to take action? How many lives have to be lost?

What would happen if (hypothetically ldo) people in the States started a revolution, would any country intervene and which side would they support if the US military started massacring armed "rebels"? What if the Brits started their own revolution if they got sick of having a monarchy, what would our country do, or rather, what should it do?

By the way, I'm not sure how important distinguishing between intervening and interfering is. I'm going to assume interfering is not welcomed by the other country.

If the war would somehow lead to forgiveness of my student loan debt, my ears would be open.

I recommend playing a few hundred games of Risk to find your answer.