the point, of course, is that a multicultural Jeffersonian democracy on the banks of the Euphrates is not going to happen regardless of how much american blood, treasure and goodwill is dumped on the problem.
And as I said... A 'multicultural Jeffersonian democracy' would be about my third or fourth choice, behind a Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, and Wilsonian democracy. I will agree, unless there is an Arab version of Thomas Jefferson, they will probably not end up with 'Jeffersonian democracy' in Iraq. This doesn't mean the democratic model can't be used by Arab-Muslims to form a cohesive functioning democratic government. And a cohesive functioning democratic government in Iraq, is substantially better than what they had.
I realize you are a naysayer, and it flies in the face of reason to believe you will ever be anything else, you are too invested in defeat to do that. Iraqi's could magically wake up this morning with red, white, and blue skin... singing Yankee Doodle, and shooting American flags out their ass, and you would still have the same wrongheaded views on Iraq. They simply never can do enough to satisfy you, because you are so invested in their failure.
Take off your tin foil hats and put down your koolaid for a moment, and THINK... Would Iraq eventually be better off under a democratically controlled governing body, or an evil tyrant dictator? Hmmmm... democracy---evil tyrant dictator--- it's such a damn hard choice! I wonder what 12 million Iraqi's with purple fingers think? I wonder what pinheads views would be, if we were talking about America being ruled by Bush or having presidential elections in 2008? Would you make the same idiotic argument that America is better off with a dictator, and we can't handle elections or democracy? I think not... so why make this argument for people you don't even know?