time and time again i hear people voice support for the iraqi war based on the introduction of democracy. but is demoracy the awnser. western demorcacy evolved over centuries, and was preceded by royal dictatorship. the political system evolved as the middle class grew. and its for this reason i think democracy has worked in the west. imposing deocracy on a country that has a small middle class and is in poverty may result in many cases 'virtuall dictatorship', a good example being zimbabwe where the elected mugabe destroyes opposition evicts voters of the oppositon and reighns unchallengable. even in the west when germany was on its kness after the first world war. the elected adolf hitler assumed totall control and eliminated opposision. infact i can't think of one county outside the west (correct me if im wrong) that has succesfully adopted democracy appart from japan & india (india being industrialised by british rule). then there is the other side of the coin, non democratic regiems that have woked, well, as i said before, the west was born out of dictatorship, cuba has the best national health service in the world, china's doing quite well, saudia arabia, south america's sorting its self out slowly, morroco, all of which are doing much better than many democratic states. Im all for demorcracy when a country is ready for it, and this takes us back to iraq, but can be catastrophic when impossed too soon. i know what you people are like, so if you want evidence be specific and i will provide.