Whether the goal is security or democracy...

...it seems pretty clear to me that somebody other than the current crop of nutball neo-cons is going to be needed to get the job done. The Agonist excerpts Richard Clarke's NYT op-ed, wherein he raises the issue of 'enforced democracy', writing (with my emphasis) that...

"We cannot win [the idealogical war] without significant help from our Muslim friends. ... US versions of MTV or CNN in Arabic will not put a dent in the popularity of the anti-American jihad. Nor will calls from Washington for democratization in the Arab world help if such calls originate from a leader who is trying to impose democracy on an Arab country at the point of an American bayonet...

It's clear to me that no matter what organizational bones Bush is currently tossing to the UN, in the end the 'democracy' he intends to install (see how weird that sounds?) in Iraq will consist of "Here are your choices. Vote or I'll kill you." And the curious thing is, I think he actually believes that that will produce a democratic Iraq that other middle eastern states will want to emulate.

We know he's nuts. The only question is...