Terrorism? Or fighting for survival

[Tanasi]

Countered:

So, you are suggesting that when the military moves against the democratically elected government and forces them out of their rightfully elected positions, and then hands it back to a more acceptable government - that it's either not implying a 'military dictatorship' (for as long or short as you like) or that it's not being 'benevolent'?

I think you're speaking of Honduras. Was the president deposed by the military? Yes, but on the order of the Honduran Surpreme Court because the president was trying to violate their constitution. I happen to think their SC, their military and the interim president did the right thing and followed their constitution. The milatary didn't keep control of the government but turned it over to civilian control. IIRC the old president has been return to office but under the watchful eyes of their legislature, SC and military.
If you're speaking of Iraq, Sadam was hardly democratically elected.
If neither of these then what country are you speaking of?

Then I submit the recently-abdicated King of Bhutan for your consideration as a "benevolent dictator" (at least, a benevolent non-elected ruler). He ruled a traditional Buddhist country. His subjects were very happy with monarchic rule up until recently. When it was peacefully determined that the people of Bhutan would be happier trying a democracy, the King stepped down.

Did the King of Bhutan have ultimate and surpreme control? Could he have called out the military and stop it? If not then was he truly a dictator or monarch in reality or just in name?
I don't claim to know it all, I'm just saying that I don't know of any benevolent dictators or Kings/Queens. Frankly it would restore some of my faith in the human race if there was one.

[Slytovhand]

If neither of these then what country are you speaking of?

No no, Fiji... island country in the Pacific. Lots of disputes between ethnic Fijians and immigrated Indian Fijians. Laws were being passed to help one group at the expense of the other. The generals in the military staged a coup, and made demands to the government (effectively neutralising their power). Later, after their demands were met, they handed it back to the hands of the governing bodies.... Happy times were had by all!

Don't know of any benevolonet dictators or Kings/Queens??? Sheesh! You really need to do some homework!

From Wiki (C&P):

Absolute monarchies:

Specifically, monarchies in which the monarch's exercise of power is unconstrained by any substantive constitutional law.

* Brunei
* Oman
* Qatar
* Saudi Arabia
* Swaziland

Constitutional monarchies with active monarchs:

The prime minister is the nation's active executive but the monarch still has considerable political powers that can be used at their own discretion.

* Bahrain
* Bhutan
* Jordan
* Kuwait
* Liechtenstein
* Monaco
* Morocco
* Tonga
* United Arab Emirates[13]


Constitutional monarchies:

These are systems in which the head of state is a constitutional monarch; the existence of their office and their ability to exercise their authority is established and constrained by constitutional law.
Constitutional monarchies with ceremonial monarchs

Systems in which a prime minister is the active head of the executive branch of government. In some cases the prime minister is also leader of the legislature, in other cases the executive branch is clearly separated from legislature although the entire cabinet or individual ministers must step down in the case of vote of no confidence. The head of state is a constitutional monarch who only exercises his or her powers with the consent of the government, the people or their representatives.

* Andorra[11]
* Antigua and Barbuda[12]
* Australia[12]
* Bahamas[12]
* Barbados[12]
* Belgium
* Belize[12]
* Cambodia
* Canada[12]
* Denmark
* Grenada[12]
* Jamaica[12]
* Japan
* Lesotho
* Luxembourg
* Malaysia
* Netherlands
* New Zealand[12]
* Norway
* Papua New Guinea[12]
* Saint Kitts and Nevis[12]
* Saint Lucia[12]
* Saint Vincent and the Grenadines[12]
* Solomon Islands[12]
* Spain
* Sweden
* Thailand
* Tuvalu[12]
* United Kingdom[12]

As for Military Dictatorships... how about

Military junta states:

The nation's military control the organs of government and all high-ranking political executives are also members of the military hierarchy.

* Fiji (until 2010)
* Libya
* Myanmar
* Mauritania
* Guinea

Not sure how many of those fall under the category of 'benevolent', but that's the current listing...

[Boozy]

Did the King of Bhutan have ultimate and surpreme control?

He did at the time of his abdication. He was also very popular with his people at the time.

They now have a constititional monarchy with his son as head of state. The plan is to slowly move Bhutan into a UK-style constitutional monarchy with the King as a mostly ceremonial figurehead.

[Tanasi]

No no, Fiji... island country in the Pacific. Lots of disputes between ethnic Fijians and immigrated Indian Fijians. Laws were being passed to help one group at the expense of the other. The generals in the military staged a coup, and made demands to the government (effectively neutralising their power). Later, after their demands were met, they handed it back to the hands of the governing bodies.... Happy times were had by all!

Don't know of any benevolonet dictators or Kings/Queens??? Sheesh! You really need to do some homework!

From Wiki (C&P):

As for Military Dictatorships... how about

Not sure how many of those fall under the category of 'benevolent', but that's the current listing...

He did at the time of his abdication. He was also very popular with his people at the time.

They now have a constititional monarchy with his son as head of state. The plan is to slowly move Bhutan into a UK-style constitutional monarchy with the King as a mostly ceremonial figurehead.

Well there you go we've all learned something and that makes it a good day.