You cannot say one moment that it will take the Arabs a generation or two to develop democracy, and then say Bush was stupid to ask for democratic elections because the Palestinians voted for Hamas. - Yes, we are in closer agreement that you realized. - As a teenager, before the country of Israel, I did an English paper on the problems in the British colony of Palestine. I thought the Zionists were foolish to go there, but where else could they go? Remember Roosevelt would not let in German Jewish refugees (Ship of Fools). Now I know different. The Turkish Empire, ruling thru Sharia Law handled an authoritarian state well. They allowed all regions to be semi-autonomous. As long as all ethnic groups got along, the region stayed productive and paid taxes to the Turks, each region could 'do its own thing'. Actually then a good spot for the Zionists. They bought their land and things remained quite (relatively, that is). - WWI changed all that. Churchill split up the area without regard for ethnicity. The area called Palestine was split into a narrow strip East of the Jordan and Trans-Jordan to the West. The colony of Jordan became a monarchy, (as if by magic) and "Palestine" just a colony. Palestine has never been a sovereign country. - I should have been clearer in my 'two generations' estimate. How long did Europe take to assimilate the "Enlightenment"? I don't think Russia is there yet. All Arab countries are authoritarian now. It takes generations in a population to develop a craving for a democratic government. Two generations may be too short. Bush was trying for instant gratification of his policies, but then he is not a deep thinker.