Another funny yet thought-provoking question by Scott "Dilbert" Adams on his blog:

Here’s a question for all philosotainers. Are we better off if Pakistan is ruled by a relatively rational and reasonable dictator pretending to be an elected president, who is an enemy of Islamic fundamentalists, as is now the case with President Musharraf, or by a real democracy that could end up run by Islamic extremists with an arsenal of nuclear weapons?

Now, I know very, very little about the actual situation in Pakistan...what I find so challenging about this thought is more the general idea that maybe, just maybe, Western democracy is NOT the solution for the world's problems (as Bush clearly thinks and has said before in multiple speeches). Because what happens when the people of a sovereign nation come together, and freely vote together...for an Islamic extremist government which supports terrorists?