Here is an article by Pat Buchanan that discusses the democratists in a different light. Maybe it will further clarify about whom I was writing. My reason for relating Afghanistan with the democratists, is that we have no allies there, so why are we still there? We are building a democracy in a country that appears not to want one. We have defeated them, but now without enough military to control the country, we put our soldiers in jeopardy in a democracy building situation, amongst a hostile population, without enough backup. If we stay, we need hundreds of thousands of soldiers to occupy the country in order to truly have control of their nation.
In my opinion, after defeating the Taliban, we are now trying to reform Afghanistan into a democracy when they don't want to be a democracy. If we are going to do that sort of thing shouldn't it be a major military action? Can we imagine, during the occupation of Japan following WWII, Japanese men killing American officers, repeatedly, ten years after the initial victory over and occupation of Japan, and doing it in a secure Japanese governmental office? No, we can't, because they had plenty of troops on the ground in order to truly occupy the country. I have no problem with democracy building of an enemy country. I'd just prefer it be done the Japanese way, with thousands of troops on the ground until it is accomplished, and in a place like Japan where the citizens were already an advanced enough society to be more likely to accept a democracy.
www.wnd.com/2012/01/americas-meddling-abroad/2/