Regrettably, Brave New World's music is not nearly so entertaining as that of Sir Arthur Sullivan, while its plot is even more absurd than most of Sir William Schwenck Gilbert's in the famous G&S collaborations that delighted Victorian Britain.

Two recent elections point to a grimmer reality. The first was in Iraq, for provincial councils, and the second was Israel's general election that was held on Feb. 10.

In Iraq, as in most of the world, the question is neither whether elections were held nor who won. The question on which social order depends is who accepts the results of an election. If elections are to substitute for war, not only the winners but also the losers must accept their outcome. Losers must give up power, patronage, one of the very few local sources of money -- often lots of it -- and possibly physical security as well, hoping for better luck next time, if there is a next time.

I suspect the odds of that happening in Iraq are small. The Washington Post recently quoted one U.S. officer, who had served as an adviser to Iraqi army units, saying of Iraqi commanders, "When you got to know them and they'd be honest with you, every single one of them thought that the whole notion of democracy and representative government in Iraq was absolutely ludicrous."

That quote was in a piece by Tom Ricks, the Post's longtime defense correspondent, in the Sunday, Feb. 15, "Outlook" section. Ricks goes on to say, "I don't think the Iraq war is over yet, and I worry that there is more to come than any of us suspect. ...

"Many of those closest to the situation in Iraq expect a full-blown civil war to break out there in the coming years. 'I don't think the Iraqi civil war has been fought yet,' one colonel told me."

In such an environment, elections do not substitute for war but rather prepare the way for it. They exacerbate differences, heighten local conflicts, and lengthen the lists of "injustices" each party uses to justify fighting.

This unfortunate reality points again to what America needs to do in Iraq: Get out now, fast, while it can. If the United States is lucky, history will grant it a "decent interval" between the departure of U.S. military forces and the next round of Fourth Generation War in Iraq. However, if America's leaders dawdle until the fighting ramps up again, they may find it difficult, politically if not militarily, to leave at all.

(Part 2: How Israel's shift to the right has increased the Iranian threat to U.S. forces still deployed in Iraq)

(William S. Lind, expressing his own personal opinion, is director of the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the Free Congress Foundation.)

Related Links
Iraq: The first technology war of the 21st century

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News