Iraq Objectives

This subject is complicated and nuanced. (Jesus, did I just say that?)

"Democracy" is not having one election in which the population elects tyrannical, for-life, religious dictators. I don't know what you call that, but it's not what Americans mean when we say "democracy".

We don't have a "democracy" of course. But we mostly use that word as shorthand for our actual system. Trouble is, people are so uneducated these days, they mistake the shorthand for the thing it points to...you know, like the old Zen concept of "mistaking the finger for the moon".

So when Americans shrug and say, "Well, if the people VOTE for Hamas....what can you do? It was a democratic election!" I want to scream at them for how stupid they are.

Democracy is not a single plebiscite, it is Form of Government; And democracy... considering that in the modern world the USA is its inventor, definer and godfather...means a free society, with guaranteed civil rights for all—that cannot be voted away by a majority— and a process by which the governed choose the government...you know...of the people, by the people and for the people.

Now. That's a pretty mature and difficult way to run a country. It is also a most inefficient way, as our Founders knew and appreciated. They wanted government to be as inefficient as possible...given how much they believed in the intrinsic EVIL of government.

That being the case, and a certain political maturity being required to handle the responsibility and the disappointments and conflicts of a democratic republic...without resorting the violence, civil war, coups, and other uncivilized lawlessness...we might want to consider whether Iraq and her people are actually quite ready for the experiment.

There is no doubt that a stable Iraq is necessary to the Security of the United States, Europe and the Middle East itself.

But, stability does not necessarily require a Democratic Republic. Dictators have been known to produce quite stable nations. Not "free" ones perhaps, but stable.

The bottom line: a "free" Iraq is not necessary and may not be possible. But I do know that a stable one is both necessary and possible.

Here's my suggestion: Let's pick a Dictator who's nicer than Saddam, who likes us, and can win a show election (surely we election-stealing Neo-Cons can rig one more lousy election!) And let him rule with as much of an iron fist as necessary to keep the factions from destabilizing the country; promote capitalism; give us bases as necessary; and move the country toward secularism as slowly as necessary to keep the pot from boiling over. And let's make sure that our pet Dictator does not create a Mordor in which the Minions of a Dark Lord kill, rape, torture, kidnap and otherwise terrorize all citizens on his psychopathic whims. We are America. We can do this. We have experience. We've done it before.

The Liberals will get the vapors...what else is new. They are screaming that they want our Boys out of Iraq. Let's accommodate them. Set up a Dictator that will do our bidding, and they can bleat about that for a minute. But it won't last long. Because, basically, nobody will care. They will get no traction out of that issue. Americans will relax when our troopers come home, and the Left will be mewling voices in the wilderness, which is their proper state.

We can afford to give Our Dictator lots of money, weapons, training, along with threats of replacement, to keep him docile and obedient, and still spend a LOT less than we're spending now...and no more U.S. troops need be in harm's way.

There is no doubt than an American/Western style democratic republic would be a solid and great idea in Iraq. The chances of establishing one at this point in time seem to be rather slim. But we must have a stable, U.S.-friendly Iraq if we are to control the Mad Muslim Mullahs in the greater Middle East.

I'm would happily support a U.S. supported Dictator in Iraq. But I insist he not have delusions of personal Godhood. The difference between Mubarak and Saddam are instructive in this regard.

I say, let us not make the perfect (democracy) the enemy of the good (stability) by attempting and failing to create the impossible, and succeed only in making Iraq the center of a firestorm of instability, fanaticism, poverty, death, destruction and endless violence.

The Gunslinger