Upxl - what government should they have, then, if democracy isn't any good? So far it seems they haven't found it - despots of one flavor or another lead to brutal and corrupt regimes.

As to the racism thing, you are saying, "because they are different they shouldn't have democracy." Replace the word "democracy" with "human rights" and you have a very racist phrase.

And democracy is an awful form of government, but what's better? There have been relatively few benevolent dictators (if you ignore certain poster's regards for Castro and Chavez ).

Quote Originally Posted by Upxl
First of all because WE believe that it’s a good system doesn’t automatically mean everybody does.
And in this case WE are right.

Quote Originally Posted by Kagemusha
But the Islamistic revolution was the will of the people of Iran.If the US had intervened wasnt it have been against the values that US upholds?What is a country other then its people?If there would be will to replace the Power of Clerics in Iran by majority,dont you believe they could do it?
I haven't been advocating overthrowing Iran, mind you. I have mostly been arguing about Iraq. There was a country were the "majority" seemed content with Saddam in power. No rebellions (though some massacres brought on by the Gulf War). But we removed their government, and gave them the opportunity to form their own democratically.

They came out in droves against threats of death to vote.

If democracy "wasn't for them" why did they do it?

Quote Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Isnt the job of creating Democracy the burden of the Iraqis not US.If one wants to be free unfortunately he or she should be willing to die for that right.The government is for Iraqis.Do you think they would have overthrown Saddam Hussein themselves? After years of sanctions there still wasnt a powerfull opposition in Iraq.
Saddam had a nasty habit of killing dissenters. Funny thing about dictators...