If the invasion of Panama was wrong, why didn't the world protect Panama?

Maribat

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
5,048
There was no 'international outrage'. Why should anyone be outraged by freeing a country from the grips of a dictator who was indicted on charges of racketeering, drug smuggling, and money laundering?
A drug smuggling dictator? Maybe you don't know but it's the USA a drug smuggling country. Do you call the presidents of the USA "drug smuggling" presidents (they are not dictators, you voted for them). I'll bet my last ruble you are ignorant of that.
 
Feb 2016
5,049
Atlantic Ocean
Let's start properly, with the very beginning of things: why Didn't You stopped America, what did You do to defend Panama ?
Mr tuner you know what he means, why would you go with the "what did you do" he does not have a military force with him.
 
Feb 2016
5,049
Atlantic Ocean
A drug smuggling dictator? Maybe you don't know but it's the USA a drug smuggling country. Do you call the presidents of the USA "drug smuggling" presidents (they are not dictators, you voted for them). I'll bet my last ruble you are ignorant of that.
Its different when they do it :D

Friends who disagree with Maribat please read into the CIA drug smuggling operations please.
 

pikeshot1600

Ad Honorem
Jul 2009
9,958
All governments are in the drug business. That is why it thrives. I cannot speak for others, but for decades that business is how a lot of CIA ops are financed. You don't have to go to Congress to beg for money and there is no inconvenient oversight.

None of that has much to do with the strategic raison d'etat of the Panama operation. Is this a great world or what? :D
 

David Vagamundo

Ad Honorem
Jan 2010
4,439
Atlanta, Georgia USA
If you look at the UN Security Council vote to condemn the US invasion, only the US, Britain, France, and Canada voted against condemnation. Finland abstained. Of course the USSR, China, and Yugoslavia, being Communist nations, voted against the US. It was after all still the Cold War. But every other country also voted to condemn the US invasion. Some of these Third World countries were military dictatorships so of course they voted to support Noriega. But some of those countries were reasonably democratic and one might expect at least one or two to support the US, but it didn't happen.
But how much criticism is there today? The OP makes it sound like outrage about this event is still current. And I don't buy that the invasion was wrong.

BTW--the answer is The Monroe Doctrine. Panama is in the US sphere of interest even more than most Latin American countries, as it owes its existence to the US.
 

deaf tuner

Ad Honoris
Oct 2013
14,533
Europix
Mr tuner you know what he means, why would you go with the "what did you do" he does not have a military force with him.
No, in fact I do not know what he means.

It's not the first time I hear "why the world … ? (fill the blanks as it pleases You).

The world is formed by me, and You, and him. So the first question is "why I … ?" (or You, or him). Maybe the answer to "why I …" it's enough as an answer.

For example: "why didn't I do anything about the invasion of Panama?"

My (honest) answer is that it passed quite unnoticed, it wasn't in my circle of interests, I was in the middle of other things that seemed much more important from my POV.
 
Last edited:

Maribat

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
5,048
the answer is The Monroe Doctrine. Panama is in the US sphere of interest even more than most Latin American countries, as it owes its existence to the US.
And Guatemala was in the USA "sphere of interest", and Hawaii, and Iran, and Vietnam, and Afghanistan... I see they stick out of the Monroe cover. Not that I believe any doctrine could justify an open or covert agression.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,745
USA
And Guatemala was in the USA "sphere of interest", and Hawaii, and Iran, and Vietnam, and Afghanistan... I see they stick out of the Monroe cover. Not that I believe any doctrine could justify an open or covert agression.
The Monroe Doctrine prevented the European powers from doing to North, Caribbean, Central, South America what they did to Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. And by and large, while the US was not innocent of exploiting those lands, its conduct was nothing when compared to those other colonial/imperial holdings. It could have been so very worse...
 

pikeshot1600

Ad Honorem
Jul 2009
9,958
As an observation, the Monroe Doctrine has had nothing to do with the behavior of the United States in the Western Hemisphere. It was, and it remains, a statement of the interests of the United States in that hemisphere. International politics recognizes feel-good aspects only if, and as needed.

Political pressure, and military intervention have been applied when US interests were seen to be involved. That is the same as Russia's interests in Bulgaria in the 1870s; Poland and the Baltics in 1939-1944; Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia in the 1940s; Georgia in 1921 and 2008, and Crimea in 2014.

It is the political order of the universe. Anyone who has a problem with it, tough tits.