> At 5:00 PM -0400 9/27/02, Nathan Newman wrote:
> >If the explicit goal of US intervention was to run Iraq from abroad
> >dictatorially, that might be an argument, but since the explicit goal is
to
> >restore power to the Iraqi people through democratic institutions, the
nice
> >symmetry fails. You can argue that this will not happen or is not really
> >the goal, but you are back to arguing subtext, not stated intention.
>
>Since when is the US military a "democratic
> institution" in Iraq?
If (not when, since this is hypothetical) the US military is then replaced by democratic elections, something Hussein's military will not be, then the military would be a democratic institution.
Which (with musical chorus) is why the US military national guard was a democratic institution down South.
-- Nathan Newman