Resolved: On balance, the United States federal govenment is justified in intervening in the intern

Rebuttals“In Chile, the United States wanted a more American supportive government and they intervened in the 1970's, but it only turns out that after the assassination the nation's new leader is anti-American and commits great atrocities of which weren't happening before the US intervened and caused a coup to get rid of the old government in Chile.” The US involvement in the 1973 coup consisted of knowledgment of the military coup and $35,000 given to the group that botched Allendes capture. If you want to call this intervening then fine. The CIA however, did not anticipate Augusto Pinochets regime. This, of course, is eligible to happen and is hard to predict when you are trying to stop another violation of human rights regime. “The US intervened here to in order to eliminate an Islamist regime in order to install a western friendly government and it came out even worse. The current government restricts water rights which are key to these people and the reason that we don't hear about it in America is because the United States doesn't want to admit their own failure!” There is no evidence regarding the US involvement of an Islamist regime overthrow. Not even the source you provided. There isn’t even evidence that a radical Islamist regime existed in that government. We do know that following their independence after the dissolvement of USSR they became a sectarian nation but not one of a radical islamist. “Many people argue that we've gone into Iraq and done great for their government, but the truth is that we went in their for oil and in Pakistan and Afghanistan the United States discovered a REM (rare earth metal) deposit and decided to exploit it! Heck the CIA has even created Al-Qaeda and given them $3 billion dollar to fight against the USSR.” We entered Iraq for various reasons. There is absolutely no evidence or even empirical evidence that suggests we entered Iraq for oil and Afghanistan for REM. This is not only completely false information but unrelated to this debate. Fact is, we entered Iraq and overthrew a ruthless regime that involved the deaths of hundreds of thousands of kurdish Muslims slaughtered by Saddam Huessein. The Iraq war lasted 10 years involving 30 countries. We established a stable government and a leader that was in favor of human rights. Now the conspiracy theories of both Iraq and Afghanistan war can be discussed on another debate. This is about intervening to stop human rights abuses. “My opponent for some reason has brought up the United Nations. I'd like to remind him that this debate is about the US not the United Nations. The United Nations has also failed significantly to uphold the resolution as well. The United Nations has failed to intervene in other nations as they have failed to defuse both the Syrian and the Iranian Crisis.” The US is a member of the UN security council. If the UN is involved, then the US is involved. The UN is involved in the Syria conflict. http://www.un.org... “One of the United Nations Core policies is to respect other nation's sovereignty. A nation's sovereignty is extremely important. Noam Chomsky nailed the topic of isolation with this quote, "Israel is following policies which maximize its security threats... policies which choose expansion over security... policies which lead to their moral degradation, their isolation, their delegitimation, as they call it now, and very likely ultimate destruction. That's not impossible." This is what is quoted from the General Assembly document. “Respect for the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference the internal affairs of States in their electoral processes”. Now there are many ways to define sovereignty. Sovereignty is usualy defined as a rightful status or independence. Yes, we should respect other nations sovereignty but that doesn’t justify other nations to commit violations of human rights. As stated but the UN. Human rights violations are against international law and intervention is justified. “Civil War Means Progress” Civil wars will happen. But this is the problem of the occurring country not the US. Civil Wars are not violations of human rights unless there are violations whithin these wars like we see in Syria or Libya. The Syria civil war is still happening but the result of US intervention in Libya created more peace. A new government appeared to be taking steps towards reconciliation. Let me remind, the US is not the only country involved in these two civil wars. References http://en.wikipedia.org... http://dictionary.reference.com... http://abcnews.go.com... http://www.ohchr.org...