| Mnementh said: Peaceful regime changes by time (dictator dies) or peaceful public protest may need a longer time to reach a democracy, but result in far, far less death, destruction and general suffering on the way. So i do prefer it, although it seems cruel. But history shows again and again that actually the slower but less destructive way is usually less cruel. -snip- |
I'm well acquainted with most of the examples you shared. In particular I've watched and read a lot about the Spanish Civil War and the Franco regime in the aftermath. It did take decades before the country had its freedom but that was in part because the power was so concentrated in Franco's hands. When he died, his regime died with him. The other political parties quickly won decisively against his and freedom returned.
Venezuela is different. Chavez died years ago yet the dictatorship continues under another dictator and a bunch of thugs who continue to oppress Venezuelans to this day and will continue to do so if they can for decades. What about Cuba? The dictatorship there has yet to be toppled and Cubans have lived in poverty and misery for 60+ years. When will they achieve their freedom? Should they continue to wait 60 years more until someone in the military grows a conscience and brings back their democracy?
That's the same question Venezuelans would like to ask those against intervention. How many more years should they wait and peacefully protest while being beaten down, persecuted and put into political prisons? Not to mention that regardless thousands die every day by way of hunger and lack of medicines. Should Venezuela become another Cuba? I say no. So as much as I wish I could agree with you, I don't. The only way Venezuelans are getting their freedom back is if the corrupt military and the communist dictatorship is taken down. By force and with an international intervention.
