Originally Posted by mulp

Review the history of Vietnam.
Review the history of Korea.
Review the history of Cuba.
Review the history of the Philippines.

And the best one is Palestine. A wonderful example of the US and the UN imposing "democracy" on a people while systematically denying the Palestinian people, who had been born and lived in Palestine through multiple occupations just as their parents and grandparents had, any say in the "democracy imposed on them, a "democracy" that rejects their legitimacy as citizens of that "democracy."

The difference between the "terrorists" attacking the British in Palestine and the "terrorists" attacking the British in Iraq is that the "terrorists" attacking the British in Palestine were "foreign fighters" that came from Europe, while in Iraq, the "terrorists" are Iraqis. The US supported the "foreign fighters" and "terrorists" in the name of democracy in 1948, and now six decades later, the US is being faced with the reality that the US failed to install its "foreign fighters" as a "legitimate" government in Iraq.

Ask yourself this: Who is more of a legitimate Iraqi leader of Iraqis: Muqtada al-Sadr or Ahmed Chalabi?

If you think the Bush administration's view that Chalabi should have any leadership in Iraq, then you must think Arnold Schwarzenegger should be president of Austria because Arnold lived longer in Austria than Chalabi has lived in Iraq.

Clearly the Bush administration point of view is that Sadr can't be part of the Iraqi government because he is too Iraqi and too determined to have Iraqis determine the government of Iraq in opposition to the US view of who should govern Iraq. Saddam has had more support from the US government by far as the leader of Iraq than the US has given Iraqis like Sadr.