CNN: Can Democracy Thrive in Africa?

[JMA]

Yes, they do.

Then how come they act as if they don't?

[Rex Brynen]

Then how come they act as if they don't?

I think you mean "why don't they act the way I think think they should act," which is a very different thing.

[JMA]

I think you mean "why don't they act the way I think think they should act," which is a very different thing.

No not at all.

Maybe you can provide some examples of where these whiz kids have got anything right in terms of Sub-Saharan Africa?

[Dayuhan]

No not at all.

Maybe you can provide some examples of where these whiz kids have got anything right in terms of Sub-Saharan Africa?

What exactly do you mean by "right", and what exactly do you want the US to do?

[JMA]

What exactly do you mean by "right", and what exactly do you want the US to do?

LOL... I appreciate this is getting difficult for you. What about half a dozen examples of successes in foreign policy interventions in Africa by the US or the West?

[Dayuhan]

LOL... I appreciate this is getting difficult for you. What about half a dozen examples of successes in foreign policy interventions in Africa by the US or the West?

You're not answering the question. What exactly do you mean by "right" and what exactly do you want us to do?

If "success" is accomplishing one's goal, than to have a successful foreign intervention you must first have a clear goal that is achievable with the resources and within the time frame that you are willing to commit to it. In the absence of such a goal, success cannot be achieved and intervention is best avoided. Our interventions in Africa (and many other places) have generally lacked such goals, and thus would have been better avoided.

Are you trying to make a point? If so, please reveal it.

[JMA]

You're not answering the question. What exactly do you mean by "right" and what exactly do you want us to do?

If "success" is accomplishing one's goal, than to have a successful foreign intervention you must first have a clear goal that is achievable with the resources and within the time frame that you are willing to commit to it. In the absence of such a goal, success cannot be achieved and intervention is best avoided. Our interventions in Africa (and many other places) have generally lacked such goals, and thus would have been better avoided.

Are you trying to make a point? If so, please reveal it.

Methinks playing with semantics is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

But I will play along.

I prefer successful as in "having succeeded or being marked by a favorable outcome". So I suggest successful in the long term for Africa rather than to meet a parochial (US, Russian, China etc) goal.

If success in your opinion is based on have a clear goal then why is it that you and others who have a lot to say on matters such as nuclear weapons development articulate no such clear goal?

Here we talk about "can democracy thrive in Africa".

So what is your clear goal on this one? To let Africa evolve at it own pace without US and maybe other intervention regardless of human rights abuses and the odd genocide?

My view would be to keep raising the bar using the "carrot and the stick" method and holding Africa through the AU and the states individually to these rising standards.

There is IMHO a duty to interfere to secure and protect the universal rights of citizens in any country. (The brave western countries are more likely to intervene in Somalia or the Congo than say in Tibet for instance)

OK one more time then, can you name a half dozen or so interventions which have led to improved and increasing democracy in Africa (presuming that is your clear goal of course)?