No immediate ending to Iraq war

The best way to describe our current siruation in Iraq is a Chinese idiom: riding on the back of a tiger and afraid to get off. The tiger here is not Iraq itself, but rather the whole mess in Iraq President Bush has led us in. We know that we have very limited options. It is true that riding on the bck of the tiger (US personnel staying in Iraq) is not comfortable and dangerous, but the alternative is worse. The alternative, getting off the tiger's back (pulling out of Iraq), as suggested by some Democrats, is more dangerous, because we could get "devoured".

I know we all want to blame Bush and his associates for all the mess they led (or misled, to be more accurate) us into, and for the mistakes after mistakes they have committed in Iraq. But we have to propose a viable solution to this problem. Pulling out is not a viable solution, we all know it. American public knows it, as indicated by a recent poll showing majority of Americans do not support pulling out despite the belief that Iraq war is a mistake.

If Democrats cannot put out its own solution to the problem, calling the troops to pull out of Iraq will further alienate voters. Democrats have lost in 2004. They are risking of losing it again in 2008.

The country needs a real visionary, knowledgeable and yet courageous leader, not a cowboy. Let's hope in 2008 we can put America back on track.

Iran's presidential election

Bush and Rice are out denouncing Iran's election. This is an insult to the millions of voters in Iran. These people have spoken, and they have casted their ballots. Where in the world does anyone else have the right to say that their votes are illegal, or illegitimate?

No election is perfect. In many places in the world, particularly in middle eastern countries, people don't even have the right to vote. Obviously I would love to see power of the Guardian Council lessen. But the reality is that in Iran, and many Islamic countries, religion and politics are mixed. This is the tradition, and their people want to remain that way. Maybe western democracy isn't the only choice. Maybe we should just shut up and let them choose any flavor of democracy as they see fit for their own cultural and religious background.

Promoting democracy around the world?

Yesterday Wall Street Journal front page featured a story about the upcoming Iran's Presidential election, (which actually took place yesterday). I guess that many Americans are surprised to know that there IS an election in Iran, no matter how imperfect it may be, whereas there is NONE in Egypt or Saudi. Yet Bush administration is calling Iran one of the axis of evil nations, and Egypt and Saudi allies. Are we truly promoting democracy around the world, or what? Do we really mean what we say?

Several weeks after the brutal killings in Uzbekistan, the US government seems to be very reticent about the whole incidence. Aren't we supposed to protect freedom around the world?

No wonder people around the world are cynical about the lofty ideals promoted by US foreign policy.