Last week---Friday 4, if I am correct---FOX News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly interviewed entertainment-investor Wayne Rogers about, among other directly related matters, Roger’s vocal and activist opposition to America’s efforts in Iraq.

Although the two disagreed antithetically on almost everything about the subject, they agreed on the baseless contention that imposing effective democracy (secret-vote, free elections, followed by participatory-democracy form of governance) in Iraq is worthless, and a great waste of precious blood and lots of money.

To debunk such allegation, all one needs is to ask the following one-line elementary, but very powerful, question:

Which effective-democracy has ever inflicted physical aggression on America?

The categorical and absolute answer is NONE.

Why?

Simply because effective democracies do not inflict physical aggression on others, and if they ever recur to attacking other countries---sometimes preemptively---it is only either in legitimate self-defense, or in legitimate defense of nations, particularly the week.

Effective democracy in Iraq---and in the rest of the Muslim world, for that matter---is a cold, national security need. It is not the idyllic, romantic idiocy that the duplicitous Democrats along with the Left contend, accompanied in that respect by a large mass of myopic individuals of all walks of life who, displaying lack of basic critical judgment, have managed to swallow the cud that the Left has fed them.

In the 1930s almost everyone concurred that the notion of an advent ever of effective democracy in Imperialistic Japan, Nazi Germany, and Fascist Italy---a few years later, the three bestial aggressors of WWII---was just nonsense, an utopia. Factual history proved them dead wrong, and the cost of imposing such a blessing---effective democracy, that is---on those three apparently irredeemable countries was, unfortunately and unavoidably, torrents of blood and mounds of treasury. The three former monsters are now peace loving and prosperous nations.

And those who parrot that "...Iraq is a tribal society..." ignore the meaning of the old Arab say that "Books are printed in Egypt, but read in Baghdad."

They also wittingly or unwittingly ignore that Mesopotamia, at the very heart of which Iraq is located, has been a most coveted crossroads in the Middle East for millennia. It has been so from the times of the ancient Egyptians, the Medes and Persians, the Greeks (Alexander made Babylon the capital of his empire a short time before his death, and where he was entered), the Romans, through the time of the Mohammedans, the Mongols, the Ottomans, British and French colonialists, and to now, Islamofascism.

Islamofascism is mouth-watering for strategically located and petrodollar rich Iraq, which---by the way, and according to the U.S. Department of Energy--- ranks only seventh among America’s crude oil suppliers, after, in that order, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, and Algeria.

Effective democracy in Iraq---and in Afghanistan, for that matter---would be like a stake driven through the heart of Islamofascism. That's why Islamofascism and its symbiotic but emulsive allies, the Democrats and the rest of the Left, oppose and malign the notion of democracy in Iraq and the rest of the Muslim world.

By the way, for those skeptics that think that democracy or freedom in the Muslim world is not feasible and just a pipe dream, consider the following*:

1-Indonesia (democratic republic; population: 234,693,997; Free)

2-Bangladesh (democratic republic; population: 150,448,339; Partly Free)

3-Turkey (democratic republic; population: 71,158,647; Partly Free)

4-Afghanistan (democratic republic; population: 31,889,923; Partly Free)

5-Iraq (democratic republic; population: 27,499,638; Partly Free)

6-Malaysia (constitutional monarchy; population: 24,821,286; Partly Free)

7-Morocco (constitutional monarchy; population: 33,757,175; Partly Free)

Total 574.4 million; that is, there are more than half a billion Muslims living in Muslim societies ranging from partly-free to entirely-free. Adding to it about 64 million Muslims who live in Western Europe, Canada and the United States, the total passes 600 million the number of Muslims who have tasted freedom. For reference, consider that, just about a decade ago, Mexico was still rated as Partly Free.

For sure, none of those seven states would condone, let alone support Islamofascist terrorism, as Iran (Shia fundamentalism) and Syria (Baathism) do, or allow the hatching of Islamofascist ideo-theologies that would do the same, such as Saudi Arabia (Wahhabism) and Egypt (Islamic Brotherhood) do.

And brush aside all that tired trite so phonographically repeated by some, such as, for instance, that America’s “prestige” is at stake in Iraq; to hell with “prestige;” it’s our own survival as a viable nation what we are betting there.

The global war on Islamofascism, of which Iraq is now the main front, is a war that we must win, for it is a war where, for the first time in our history, we face, and must defeat completely, a mortis concupisco (he who indulges with death), martyrdom-suicidal enemy that treasures committing mass-murder. Worse, it is an enemy specifically obsessed with mass-murdering as many Americans as possible, including defenseless children, women and men on American soil, and elsewhere, for the sole “sin” of being American, and obsessed as well with the complete destruction of America.

The democratization of Iraq and Afghanistan---and the rest of the Muslim world, for that matter, and not necessarily by military-force-driven compulsion alone---is a national security need, for it would defang Islamofascism at its roots.

Effective democracy in Iraq is an unavoidable need.