When was the last time two genuinely democratic countries went to war?

[Platypus]

I can't think of any examples in the 20th century, unless you count the Spanish-American war. What was the status of Democracy in Spain at the time?

[A18]

I don't know, but it doesn't usually happen. I only support imperialism against dictators.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well, some could argue Serbia was a democracy during the Balkan conflicts of the 90s, but it wasn't actually, the elections were farher corrupt, Milosevic had things rigged his way, and even when fair elections did occur and he lost, he refused to step down until there was massive pressure put on him. I suppose it could be WWII, since Finland was technically at war with the US and Britain since they were at war with the Soviets who were allied, but no battles between the Finns and Americans or Brits happened.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Closest example would probably be Greece and Turkey, but even that's pushing it.

[patrick1]

India and Pakistan which was once a democracy periodically.  Some border wars in South America might qualify- Ecuador/Peru.  although I don't know much about their poiltical history.

[A18]

I heard Saddam used to win landslides. Does Iraq count? :-)

[J. J.]

I can't think of any examples in the 20th century, unless you count the Spanish-American war. What was the status of Democracy in Spain at the time?

Closest example would probably be Greece and Turkey, but even that's pushing it.

Spain was still strongly monarchial in 1898.

If we're "pushing it," it might be Egypt and Israel in 1973; Syria certainly wasn't however.  There is at least some democratic elements in how Egypt is governed.

This is going to depend on how you define "genuinely democratic."

[Platypus]

Probably the liberal democratic (not as in a liberal democrat person, thats the name of the model) model of democracy. IE, minority protected, free and commonplace elections, free (at least -ish) media, etc.

[minionofmidas]

If you really push it (in the other direction), never since no genuine democracy ever existed.

[Platypus]

The modern version of democracy, not the ancient Greek model. A genuine liberal democracy in trerms of the world's actual scope, then, if I have to clarify further.

Basically what I'm saying is that when bush's speechwriters wrote that more democracy brings more peace, they were right to a degree-it brings more people for democracies, in theory, and that if the whole world is democratic the world will be more peaceful, imho.

[dazzleman]

Never.  Wars are invariably caused by dictatorships.  Democratic societies never choose to wage offensive war, because most people don't like war.

I would probably never support a war against a true Democracy, and there would probably never be a need for one.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Never.  Wars are invariably caused by dictatorships.  Democratic societies never choose to wage offensive war, because most people don't like war.

I would probably never support a war against a true Democracy, and there would probably never be a need for one.

Then I guess you weren't a fine of the US executing a coup in the democratic nation of Chile, or funding rebels against the democratic nation of Nicaragua, or the plans to invade Italy if the Communists ever won the election.

[dazzleman]

Never.  Wars are invariably caused by dictatorships.  Democratic societies never choose to wage offensive war, because most people don't like war.

I would probably never support a war against a true Democracy, and there would probably never be a need for one.

Then I guess you weren't a fine of the US executing a coup in the democratic nation of Chile, or funding rebels against the democratic nation of Nicaragua, or the plans to invade Italy if the Communists ever won the election.

The Chile thing is questionable, on the razor's edge.  I don't necessarily believe that the US fully instigated the coup there, and maybe it would have been better to be totally uninvolved.

As far as Nicaragua goes, I don't accept your contention that the Sandinistas were democratically elected.  They were a dictatorship that seized power from another dictatorship, and then tried to export their revolution to other countries around them.  They were no more a democracy than Castro's Cuba.  And when they actually held free elections, the Sandinistas lost.

Do you really believe that we would have invaded Italy if they had elected communists to power?  I don't.  As I recall, it was in the 1970s that Italy flirted with communism.  That would have gone over really big in the immediate post-Vietnam era.

[J. J.]

Then I guess you weren't a fine of the US executing a coup in the democratic nation of Chile, or funding rebels against the democratic nation of Nicaragua, or the plans to invade Italy if the Communists ever won the election.

I'm going to point out that the US and Chile were never close to war in the 20th Century.  If you want to say "tried to influence a government though covert means," we could look at some of Israel's activities in the 1980's and 90's relating to the US, e.g. Jonathan Pollard.  Likewise, there was never any direct conflict between the US and Nicaragua and, as has been pointed out, Ortega never won a free election.

[TheCommentator]

Democratic societies never choose to wage offensive war.

You forgot the phrase "against each other."

[dazzleman]

Democratic societies never choose to wage offensive war.

You forgot the phrase "against each other."

No, I deliberately left it out.  Democratic societies do not initiate wars unless they are threatened by a non-Democratic country.

Britain and France declared war against Germany in 1939, but could you seriously argue that they were the aggressors?  Germany forced them into a war they didn't want.  Democratic countries almost never want war.  They only undertake it as a last resort.  That also hold true, incidentally, of our war in Iraq, though it is not as black and white as some past cases.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Iraq posed no threat to the US. And there's no way you can even argue Vietnam posed any threat to the US.

[JohnFKennedy]

I believe Britain declared war on Norway during either WW1 or WW2, I forget which - that was two liberal democracies at war, though no fighting ever took place.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

You're probably thinking of Finland, during WW2. That's because Finalnd was fighting the Soviet Union and allowed the Germans to set up air bases on their land to launch sorties against Soviet forces. British forces never actually fought Finland though, they simply attacked the German air bases. Now it's also worth pointing out Finland did join the Allies in the end, once they fended off the Soviets the Germans refused to leave their territory. So Finland declared war on Germany and fought to force them to leave.

[JohnFKennedy]

You're probably thinking of Finland, during WW2. That's because Finalnd was fighting the Soviet Union and allowed the Germans to set up air bases on their land to launch sorties against Soviet forces. British forces never actually fought Finland though, they simply attacked the German air bases. Now it's also worth pointing out Finland did join the Allies in the end, once they fended off the Soviets the Germans refused to leave their territory. So Finland declared war on Germany and fought to force them to leave.

Finland, that is the one, a bit out of it today, had only 4 hours sleep in last 24 hours - was in Paris.

[dazzleman]

Iraq posed no threat to the US. And there's no way you can even argue Vietnam posed any threat to the US.

Vietnam was a proxy war, and the belief was that the ideology represented by the North Vietnamese posed a threat if it spread.  This is not a black and white issue, but suffice to say there would have been no war had the North Vietnamese not sought to take over their neighbors, which they eventually did.  Obviously, we made our share of mistakes.

Iraq once again is a war against something larger - the Islamist terrorist philosophy and the deadening repressive middle eastern dictatorships that result in terrorism.

World War II was a black and white war because the democracies waited until the threat was right in their face to act.  They gained clarity, at the cost of near defeat and a much prolonged war, with far greater loss of life.  Since then, we have opted for less clarity, and tried to head off threats before they became too great, with the cost being that those who choose to bury their heads in the sand (as many did in the period before World War II also) constantly claim that the war was not necessary.  If the British and French had deposed Hitler bloodlessly when he reoccupied the Rhineland in 1936, in violation of the Versailles Treaty, today's liberals would still be claiming that Hitler posed no threat to the west, was a misunderstood victim, and that treating the Germans would have solved the whole problem.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Iraq posed no threat to the US. And there's no way you can even argue Vietnam posed any threat to the US.

Vietnam was a proxy war, and the belief was that the ideology represented by the North Vietnamese posed a threat if it spread.  This is not a black and white issue, but suffice to say there would have been no war had the North Vietnamese not sought to take over their neighbors, which they eventually did.  Obviously, we made our share of mistakes.

Iraq once again is a war against something larger - the Islamist terrorist philosophy and the deadening repressive middle eastern dictatorships that result in terrorism.

There was no threat from a comunist Vietnam, as we see ther ewas no spread throught SE Asia.

Iraq was not an Islamist dictatorship. Saddam hated Islamists and was very secular. Islamist Iran sure didn't like him.

[Middle-aged Europe]

For more on the topic see here:

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/demowar.htm

[PBrunsel]

I guess the War of 1812 counts, if no one has said that yet.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I guess the War of 1812 counts, if no one has said that yet.

Wasn't Britain still largely controlled more than the monarchy than any democratic leaders then?