I've never been clear on what constitutes a right wing versus a left wing dictator - political leanings lose meaning to me in the absence of politics.
Let's call him Mr Friendly Dress-up then.
I would imagine dictators would be far more successful in rooting out terrorism than fledgling US sponsored 'democracies'
I think its becoming fairly apparent that even a democracy in Iraq will require a fairly brutal and intrusive secret police - dare I say "Turkey" - to make it function long haul. It won't be your momma's democracy for a while.
I can't help but think of Rummy's quote that Iraq wouldn't elect a guy like Osama once they were 'educated'. Seems to me that the current US method is a brilliant way to manufacture terrorists for the foreseeable future by installing secular democracies that will be unable to hold any real power if they go along with what the US wants. In other words, I don't think a true democracy in Iraq would be palatable to US interests if the election was really democratic b/c I don't think the majority of Iraqi's are pro-US.
Think so?
A poll earlier in the year in Saudi Arabia found most admiring Osama Bin Laden but only 8% saying he would be fit to run the country. In Iraq earlier in the year, a majority again had a favourable opinion of Mucky Al Sadr but only 5% said he should be running the country.
Iraqi's might be a little more pragmatic than you're giving them credit for. You're selling them short, essentially saying the lunatic fringe comprises the majority.
Unlike yourself, I think the average person in an average faraway place probably puts his family, home and their safety at the forefront of his electoral concerns just like anyone else in Des Moines. Who would best deliver that? Al-Sadr and his crew? I doubt if he'd get a lot of votes frankly outside of his local nutbar crowd.
You can also see in Iran that open and free elections, if they had been allowed earlier this year, would have resulted in the continued erosion of the religious power base there, hence the banning of candidates pre-disposed to that platform.
In any event, we're going to get an early preview in Afghanistan where the campaign has kicked off in a big way:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3632286.stm
If I understand correctly, in spite of violence and intimidation, voter registration is around the 90% area.
The USA has said it would leave Iraq if any government asked them to. Oddly enough, I believe they would since they're probably dying to get out and that would be an oddly legitimate way of doing so with heads held high.
However, we all know that any democractically elected government - even in fair elections - won't do that for the reason you cited, the crazies would take over since they're the biggest bullies left. No government would survive until the institutions are strong enough around it.
The only thing you can do is toss the democracy ball out there and see what happens. Roll the dice on it. I doubt the result would be as unsatisfactory as you're describing.
And if it is?
Then you know for sure whom your enemy are. It makes it a lot easier to pick targets.
That's why I'm a little puzzled as to why the anti-war crowd is writing off Iraq and Afghanistan as failed enterprises. A year and a half into it doesn't really tell us what its going to be like five ten, fifteen and 20 years from now. Its still early in the game if you ask me.
Give the people a say via the vote. See what happens. Evaluate where you stand afterwards.
Cowperson