Iraq war might ever succeed, that would probably be the best outcome we could hope for (although there is a question as to whether the Sunni fundamentalists will accept a moderate Islamist democracy, and whether the Kurds will accept any real official role for religion). Back at the ranch, there might be a middle way too for American foreign policy between neoconservatism and liberal internationalism, which involves the promotion of Arab democracy by means other than military interventionism. Some folks think Kerry is entirely cool to any kind of democracy promotion, but others (including the New Republic, in their endorsement of him) think he would go further than Bush's ill fated democracy initiative or whatever it was called. I have no idea.

My whole worry about this project is that once we have committed ourselves to it (and right now it seems we could still backtrack or jump ship) we end up with multi-decade curbs on economic freedoms, civil liberties, and freedom of expression. This is why the Taft Republicans warned about Wilsonian interventionism and democracy promotion during the cold war. Its no coincidence that the rise of cultural liberalism in the late 60s, the return of full civil liberties (particularly after the Church committee findings), and freedom of speech coincided with the death of Wilsonian idealism and democracy promotion as a cold war foreign policy in the jungles of Vietnam.