Joint India Indonesian Army Exercise Garud Shakti Concludes.

[Dayuhan]

In the modern context, the States' (Nation) authoritarian and might can hardly be challenged with resistance, armed or otherwise. It will be ruthlessly put down. Sri Lanka crushing the LTTE is a live and modern example of the State's might. And to a lesser extent, the problem in Chechnya.

Why did the Hungarian uprising of 1956 not succeeded?

These matters will never be in the public domain and it will he naive to believe it will be. However, if there is foreign influence and that too from an unchallenged global power, 'peoples' uprising' can effect a change. East Europe is an example. The Catholic Pope played his role as the benign 'cover'.

Again this looks like a topic for another thread, but...

I think the impact of foreign influence on domestic rebellion is being vastly overrated here. Rebellions against strong governments that have full command of their armed forces will typically fail. Foreign support will only change that if it takes the form of direct military intervention.

Rebellions succeed when governments lose their mojo. This happens: regimes age, tyrants lose their potency, the populace becomes restive, the military and police apparatus begins to waver in their loyalty. Not all states are mighty, and when the regime or the tyrant grows weak, the mighty become vulnerable. Mubarak didn't fall because foreigners conspired against him, he fell because his own armed forces wouldn't back him when push came to shove.

The presence or absence of foreign support is far from the only variable determining success or failure of a revolution, unless of course the foreign support takes the form of direct military intervention

As far as the Arab Spring catching the US by surprise, maybe this can help that it was no surprise (that is why I say that if one has to keep an unbiased attitude one should Google the views and not only subscribe to those who support one's own favourite hobby horse):

http://www.demdigest.net/blog/2012/0...ushing-defeat/

There's nothing here that even remotely suggests that the Arab Spring was a product of US intervention... this piece deals with so-called "democracy NGOs" in the post-Arab Spring environment.

Anyone who is aware of the NGOs and their funding are aware that they also are encouraged to 'assist the viewpoint' of those funding. Nothing is altruistic and it is not a falsehood that there is nothing called a Free Lunch.

Of course, but how effective are these NGOs, really? Certainly they have no capacity to create revolution, nor have they any capacity to make a revolution succeed if the government being rebelled against is not ripe for it. All the NGOs on earth wouldn't bring down a Gadaffi... it took direct military intervention.

Even the Aid given to poor countries are not without strings. See the state of Pakistan. They blow hot, but then they eat crow!

A lot of countries, including Pakistan, accept the conditions for aid, take the aid, and then ignore the conditions or make nothing beyond a superficial and very nominal attempt to meet the conditions. The US is no great puppet master; they get played as often as they play others.