[KSagal]

A revolution is exactly what is needed to change a form of government. Not all revolutions require military or force, but the reality is that most eventually get there...

I do agree that military alone is never enough. The military is a bulldozer. It is needed to clean out the debris of the old dictatorial regimes, and even to remove the smaller bulldozers on that site. Then the building can begin.

Often times the bulldozer can be used to help with some of the heavy lifting in the early building stages, but it is not the best tool, even if it does help.

At some point, always, it takes locals to take control of their own lives and their country. The fix will never happen without this.

World history if full of people with pitchforks and shovels taking control from those with guns. Go back far enough, and it was pitchforks and shovels against swords and horses. It does not matter. Until and unless this grass roots effort happens, there will not be success.

I see the big difference between the US using it's military and the examples of French in Indochina (Viet Nam and the area) and the USSR in Afganistan, is that the U.S. wants to spread Democracy, and build trading partners, not expansionism. This is our motivation. In the other examples, expansionism was the goal.

I do believe that a free people will always be a more productive and happy people. I am not alone.

And I agree that the concept of throwing money at a problem is no more the solution than throwing an armor division or two at it.

Northern Africa is full of examples of hugh amounts of money and foreign aide that was sent in to head off a revolution, or to bolster local governments. It has failed just as much as any military examples given. And there are some very rich despots as a result.

The solution is always local people wanting to make a better life for themselves. Short of that, there is nothing that can be done for any long term success. If a local group has an idea, and is willing to do the deed, but needs some help, that is where and when we should get involved. Otherwise the best you can hope to accomplish is to trade one mess for another.

I am reminded of the simple fact that you cannot get anything clean, without making something else dirty. I don't care if you are washing your car, or the floor, or overthrowing some dictator.

You can, however, make things dirty, without actually making something else clean. This is just making a mess, or moving from this kind of mess to another kind of mess.

I believe that the best of intentions were involved in Iraq and Afganistan, but because of insufficient local buy-in, the road has been much more difficult than anticipated. There is local activity, just not enough to make it work.