Is invading and conquering countries the right way to establish democracies there?

Answer 1

It depends.

Germany and Japan are shining examples of how military occupation resulted in modern, developed democracies. Iraq proves exactly the opposite. Democracies require a fundamental set of values to be in place, for civil society to be active, for ethnic relationships to be strictly egalitarian, and for infrastructure to be relatively developed. On that pragmatic basis alone, many countries should not be conquered to be "democratized" because a democracy cannot yet effectively work. Voting does not make a country democratic, just ask Iranians.

As for the idea of national sovereignty, invading and imposing one country's will on another is a gross violation of this. As a result, this part receives the bulk of the condemnation. Suffice it to say, most people would prefer their country not be invaded by a foreign power even if their current government is less than stellar. It's an issue of pride, virtue, and self-determination.

Answer 2

It depends on your opinion....

Personally, i think not unless the people of the country are rebelling and are being massacred (Syria, Libya) then there is a palce for debate and possibly intervention

Addendum:

From a free democratic perspective, we are all responsible for the rights and lives of each other. Democratic government is of the people, by the people, for the people. While those such as the US do not always get it right, the people of the US are some of the most giving, charitable people of the world. It may be perceived as arrogance, or shortsightedness, but the people of the US want the whole world to experience freedom. When the world witnesses violations of human rights in a place where it can be corrected by American presence, the US will do what it can to ensure free democracy for others.