Oh calm down Christopher.  We are on the same side.  (Which is not to 
say we are in agreement...especially with that 3rd term stuff...I don't 
want three terms of George, and neither of us wants Bill to return for 
a third.)  I was not speaking specifically of Iraqi democrats, but the 
world's democrats in general.

Iraq is special.  We rather overtly engaged in domestic politics there. 
  I don't think you are being completely honest in your apparent 
surprise that Iraqi's seem to include the use of violence in their 
political campaigns.  Its a local traditional expression of the 
democratic process.  If they choose to use it against us, well, they 
must think we are campaigning for a role in their government.  Now how 
could they have gotten such a silly idea?

-jc


On Jan 10, 2005, at 2:27 PM, Met History wrote:

> In a message dated 1/10/2005 3:12:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> [log in to unmask] writes:
> But, I'm not sure there's a lot of folks fighting against democracy. 
>  There sure are a lot of folks fighting us.
> .... for the folks who are "fighting us", not "democracy".  Take an 
> IED/RPG vacation for a couple of weeks - just polish your mortar 
> shells or something, or prevent your daughters from going to school.  
> Then, have an election without anyone getting beheaded or being 
> required to form naked human pyramid.  Elect anyone by a simple 
> majority, anyone: vegetarian, Vermonter, anyone. I think at this point 
> we don't really care*. Then, even Bush/Rumsfeld will leave!   And Bush 
> will get a third term - cool!!!   
>  
> OK?         Christopher
>   
> *(Caveat:  I guess that, after all this, we might conceivably stay if 
> Saddam is elected.  But then, maybe electing Saddam will lead to 
> peace!)