IRAQ: who is attacking whom, and why?

INSTAPUNDIT linked to a posting at The Corner by Rich Lowry who cited a good article by the NYTIMES about the violence leading up to the Iraqi elections (and then Glenn updated to a post on the same subject at CAPTAIN'S QUARTERS).

Check'em out.

And also keep this FACT in mind: violence is principally being used by neobaathists and neojihadists against Iraqi citizens, the Iraqi Army, and Iraqi Police, and Iraqi election officials.

What does this FACT tell us about the state of affairs in Iraq, and their chances of establishing a democracy? I think it tells us their chances are very good. Here's why:

If the majority of Iraqis did not want elections - and wanted a return of a Saddam-like regime (neobaathism) or a theocracy like they had in Afghanistan (neojihadism), then the neobaathists and neojiahdists would not have to use violence and intimidation; they could win at the ballot box or they could mobilize non-violent mass-demonstrations (like those in Serbia or Georgia or Ukraine).

Their use of violence proves that the bad-guys KNOW that they cannot win any other way. They know that without intimidation they cannot gain power or authority anywhere - Iraq included. The bad guys seek to gain, by intimidation, what they cannot win through passionate appeals to people's hearts and minds.

I have faith in people - that includes the Iraqis. I had faith in the Afghanis, (and I have guarded hope in the Palestinian Arabs). I believe that they can all rule themselves democratically. I believe they can all succeed in establishing democratic self-rule in spite of the ruthless thuggery of those who support tyranny of one sort or another.

Bottom-line: If we are not intimidated by the ruthless minority (who think they're an all-knowing elite destined to construct utopia, but who are in fact no different than the KKK), then we cannot lose.

UPDATE: for a detailed analysis by another OPTIMIST click HERE and read Belgavia Dispatch.