[Captain Kirk]

First, you are wrong about your claim that Germany and Japan had "no history of democracy.". Hitler after all was democratically elected! The Weimer Republic was a fairly strong democracy (despite the Versailles treaty) but unfortunately was not strong enough to survive the depression.

Japan also had a recent democratic tradition including an elected parliament in the 1920s and free press. Neither country, of course, had the same degree of religious and ethnic division as Iraq. The UN had little with the interventions in Kosovo and Haiti though (at least in Kosovo) it was given authority by both Clinton and Bush. The UN has no role at all (that I know of) in Somalia.

BTW, I am equally against UN rule as I am against a MacArthur-regency. I support a third altenrative: allowing the Iraqis to set up an interim coalition govenrment asap and then turning over authority to it.

As to "loving" the UN, I support U.S. withdrawal from that organization.

[Timmy]

First, you are wrong about your claim that Germany and Japan had "no history of democracy.". Hitler after all was democratically elected!

Hitler was NOT elected. His party was successful in the elections which led to Hindenburg appointing him Chancellor.

As for the very limited democracy you mentioned on the Weimar Republic (<20 years) and the Japan thingy (which I don't know enough about to debate, though your comment that Hitler was elected is enough to make me suspect you may not be correct), so what? Remember that Iraq and Lebanon both had short periods of democratic governments in, what, the fifties? Regardless, my point stands. Iraqis are not too "inferior" for democracy to work, and anyone having such a belief is, quite simply, a racist.

[Valin]

I support a third altenrative: allowing the Iraqis to set up an interim coalition govenrment asap and then turning over authority to it.

So in other words you agree with the President.