The brilliant Podhoretz of course means "SUNNI [ARAB] MUSLIMS constitute 20% of the Iraqi population. Kurds are Sunni but are NOT ARABS.

Another common error is conflating the Iranians with Arabs; Iranians are Persian, and speak Parsi - which is NOT an Arabic language.

The diversity of Iraq - and the entire Middle East - is a basic reason why only a pluralistic democracy can govern well. Any monlithic government - such as Saddam's Sunni Arab/Baathist one - must be an evil tyranny to maintain power.

And another common error - promoted by Arabists and Islamophiles - is that Christianity and Judaism are external threats to this region.

Judaism and Christianity were WIDESPREAD before the Mohammedan onslaught. Baghdad was in fact a VERY JEWUSH city FOR CENTURIES. Most cities from Morooco to Syria to Bagdhad were very Christian and very Jewish for CENTURIES.

One must also remember that the Crusades were DEFENSIVE wars fought by Christianity to REGAIN territory that had been under its domain for a thousand years and was which had been taken away from it by use of force. Rome was just doing in return what Mecca had done before.

The Lefwing and anti-American and Arabist enemies of the West and the Free World want to obscure all these truths because they want a Middle East that is free of Western influence. As if the West began in Trieste and NOT Jerusalem.

That's why they propagandize that the West's presence in the region is somehow "colonial" or "neo-colonial" when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.

So, not only are we fighting to liberate our Arab and Turkomen and Kurdish brothers and sisters from tyranny, but also to let Christians and Jews - and Bahais and Zoroastrians and all the other INDIGINOUS faiths and peoples back into their ancient HOMES as free people.. free to follow their faith whatever it may be.

Excellent point. I hadn't thought of that example when arguing with associates.

There is a difference though. The white Afrikaners had essentially relinquished control of the country and were not a threat for civil war. The Sunni Arab population is very disaffected and is in many ways need to be clearly included in the new government.

I'm certain that the rest of the population could repress the sunni arabs or establish a separate state for the sunni population, but that type of balkanization would probably end with a very unstable regime that would not end peacefully or in a way that would help the case of freedom in the middle east.

This needs to succeed. The world can survive without a democratic Iraq. But the advancement of human rights and freedoms will probably be set back if this fails.

To bring the matter home, if every conservative sat out the last election, giving Kerry the win, I'm sure he and the libs would have demanded another vote out of a sense of 'fairness' and 'equity.' Right? In a pig's eye!

I'll bet the UN, being the pragmatic organization it is, embraces the new democracy in Iraq, however many people vote.

At least judging by the our pragmatic release of Unscam documentation, or lack thereof.

Of course the MSM will take the opposite tack.

Well said John. Put the anti-American MSM in their place. What phonies they all are.