Realism vs Idealism on Armed Conflicts

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Realism vs Idealism on Armed Conflicts

Posted by DampCold on Jan-22-2005 05:28:

Realism vs Idealism on Armed Conflicts

What are your views on the theories of realism and idealism as it relates to armed conflict and is intervention justified in cases of human injustices? If intervention is justified, what level of injustice must occur before action can/should be taken? One of the current issues that come to mind is the Sudan/Darfur crisis.

Posted by Shakka on Jan-22-2005 12:12:

...please be sure to compare and contrast your thoughts clearly, as this dissertation will constitute 35% of your final grade...

Please continue.

Posted by Subey on Jan-22-2005 15:04:

What should have been asked was why didn't the UN create a real, standing, mobile intervention force after Rwanda.

Then this issue of what to do about Sudan (Rwanda Reloaded) wouldn't exist, because there would a system in place to codify how the above force is used.

Posted by josh4 on Jan-23-2005 05:49:

This is all wrong. You should take a stance and post something like "Realism is better because blah blah blah and blah blah." Then someone will reply calling you a moron and give their reasons why you are wrong, and another person will reply to them calling them a moron and give more reasons and eventually you end up with a PDD fist fight and several pages ready to help you out.