The US has shown itself to be detrimental to third world democracies

U.S. Primacy/Hegemony maximizes the spread of democracyDominican Republic: The US supported a brutal dictatorship from 1930 until 1961. The US had the dictator killed when he began to garner harsh criticism from other nations. Following the assasination, a democracy was formed in the country. That democracy was overthrown by the military in 1962, who proceeded to try to set up their own democracy. The US intervened to uphold the 2nd democracy, which most Dominicans felt was illegitimate. The rebel forces were those who supported the previous, left leaning democracy, and they wanted the properly elected leader of the country to be reinstated. Either way a democracy would have existed. The US only caused damage with military action. [3] (Page 8, top of page)Philippines: The US may have acted to keep Marcos in line in 1968, but after that, when he became a true dictator, the US strongly supported him. From 1972 until the end of Marcos' rule, the US did not question his authoritarianism, and thus allowed the afformentioned severe corruption in the Philippine government to move the country towards a dicatatorship. Had the US not intervened in the Philippines to begin with, there is no reason why the country would not have become a democracy. In fact, the US may have delayed the country's advance towards democracy by refusing to grant it independance for almost half a century and allowing corruption to take hold in the government. [3] (Page 4, bottom of page)Panama: The US government supported Noriega after he had already corrupted the government in Panama. Overall, the US's support of Noriega caused much more damage to Panama than his eventual ousting was able to correct, and the government that came after was also criminally involved. [3] (Page 5, 2nd from bottom)Honduras: The government of Honduras, as with most of the other democracies mentioned by Con, was extremely corrupt to the point of being undemocratic in it's conduct. The military was given free reign in the country and those that bordered it. The conduct of the US supported government of Honduras was abhorrent and in violation of human rights, and by endorsing and maintaining such behaviour and suppressing all movements that opposed it, the US government was damaging the democracy. [3] (Page 3, 3rd from top)Bolivia: The US supported a brutal dictatorship in Bolivia from 1970-1982. The CIA was involved in the overthrow of Bolivia's previous democracy. Whatever pro democracy actions the US eventually took do not reduce the anti democratic nature of their previous actions. [3] (Page 1, Bottom of page)El Salvador: From 1979 until 1989 the government of El Salvador was a military dictatorship, whose false elections were rigged by the CIA. The US explicitly supported the military government and the death squads which were trained and armed by the CIA. [2] (#15) [3] (Page 3, 3rd from bottom) Haiti: The fact that the US attempted to intervene in the Haitian elections in 1988, and then participated in a coup to overthrow the leader who they tried to keep from winning the election, which resulted in a dictator taking power, shows that the US's actions were detrimental. The US having ousted the dictatorship and restored Aristide's government does no make up for the aformentioned actions taken to undermine Haiti's democracy. [2] (#17)Egypt: Con claims that my arguments are irrelevant because they refer to past US foreign policy. However, the term of Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak began in 1981. Con has used examples dating back to 1965. Furthermore, Egypt is not a third world country, so it is a moot point.Lybia: The US acted to appease it's allies, and such actions do not reflect standard US foreign policy. Thus such actions are not representative of the US's usual treatment of third world democracies. Authoritarian Expansionism: 1st: Con's explaination of current US foreign policy is inaccurate, because he discounts the influence of US hegemony. The essence of democracy is freedom and independence, and US hegemony requires that countries surrender aspects of their sovereignty by being forced to cooperate with the US. Because of this, US foreign policy continues to pose a threat to third world democracies regardless of whether Realism or Neoconservatism is used. The US's overthrown of Haiti's democracy in 2004 and attempted coup in Argentina in 2002 are clear evidence that the US remains detrimental to democracy.http://globalresearch.ca...;http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com... 2nd: Con states that the US prevented Soviet influence over 'those elected governments'. If Con is refering to the governments of Guatemala and El Salvador, then he would be incorrect. Neither government was democratically elected. Both were military dictatorships which remained so under specific US guidance. El Salvador's elections were rigged by the United States, and Guatemala was clearly a dictatorship. Con has continualy ignored the fact that almost every one of the US supported governments in Latin America has been a military dictatorship. He continually insists that the governments were elected without giving evidence to support such claims. Con states that over all, Communist regimes are responcible for the largest death tool. That is true in Europe and Asia. However, in Latin America Rightwing Military regimes such as those supported by the US are responcible for the most deaths by far. John Stockwell, a retired CIA operative, says of the US backed government of El Salvador and the elected government of Nicarauga that the US launched terrorist attacks against- "(The CIA) launched a campaign to discredit (Nicaragua's) elections. International observer teams said these were the fairest elections they have witnessed in Central America in many years. We said they were fraudulent, they were rigged, because it was a totalitarian system. Instead we said, the elections that were held in El Salvador were models of democracy to be copied elsewhere in the world. And then the truth came out about that one. And we learned that the CIA had spent 2.2 million dollars to make sure that their choice of candidates - Duarte - would win. They did everything, we're told, by one of their spokesmen, indirectly, but stuff the ballot boxes...." [1]Talking about the death toll of US intervention in the third world, Stockwell says-"800,000 in Indonesia alone according to CIA's estimate, 12,000 in Nicaragua, 10,000 in the Angolan operation that I was sitting on in Washington, managing the task force. They add up. We'll never know how many people have been killed in them. Obviously a lot. Obviously at least a million. 800,000 in Indonesia alone. Undoubtedly the minimum figure has to be 3 million. Then you add in a million people killed in Korea, 2 million people killed in the Vietnam war, and you're obviously getting into gross millions of people..." [1]The estimates given by Stockwell do not even include the 200,000 killed in Guatemala, 75,000 killed in El Salvador, or the hundreds of thousands killed in Bolivia, Honduras, Chile, Argentina, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and others. 3rd: Con claims that overall the US has not intervened in most democracies. This is true. However, this debate concerns third world democracies. All of Con's examples except for the Carribean Islands were second world countries, 3 of which the US has intervened in (Turkey, Indonesia, Sri Lanka) and Con failed to provide specific Carribean Islands. Con has yet to name a single third world democracy that the US has not intervened in, and he has named only one third world democracy (Grenada) in which US intervention did not at some point encourage dictatorship over democracy.http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com... [1]http://www.listverse.com... [2]http://www.military-veterans-for-justice.com...;[3]