Probably not. If the country is sovereign, with a government in place, then that is call “war”. This is not to say that some organization such as the UN ought not to interfere. There are laws regarding human rights— international laws. Slavery, for example is illegal in all countries, but it still exists. With any problem, the invading country, (the US for example) is deciding what is right and what is wrong. and for sure there are standards of correctness of “rightness” and “wrongness”. Interestingly, this country doesn’t invade any country unless there is something in it for this government…… in the case of Iraq, oil. In the case of the rape of Sudan, our government just figures they’re just poor African Black folk, for sure not worth any trouble. Same for Rwanda in the 1990’s. The US foreign policy is determined by money…. follow the buckos, and you have the US foreign policy. There was no reason to interfere in Rwanda….. nothing financially important, so the murders occurred. But with oil at stake, and any excuse in the world to try to get it, Bush invaded Iraq, even tho all of his advisers told him that country had no “weapons of mass destruction” None, zero. It was an excuse. Even his own father told him not to invade that sovereign country.

There is as well, there, a no-win situation. The middle east has been a horrible mess for 8000 years!!!! — since the dawn of civilization in Mesopotamia. IT is no different now, is it? And how arrogant of George to think that he could change 8000 years of history. The middle east was invaded for decades during the Crusades…. nothing changed…. It didn’t change then, and it won’t now.

So to answer your question, ‘is it justified for a country to interfere in the affairs of another country? ‘ Probably not.

What do you think? Our country does it all the time – think IRAQ. Do you agree with the USA’s policing the world policy, or do you think we should mind our own business?