[blockquote]I think you are wrong. There several reasons are wrong. First and foremost is how are you going to do this- at practical level. Who is going to teach this stuff. [/blockquote]

I didn't say it would be easy. Look at Heinlein's prescription for a moral and educated society in "Starship troopers", where the moral education of society is led by grizzled war veterans. There are ways of doing this, and it doesn't have to happen overnight, you just need to move towards it through time. Failing to do something because it is difficult is not an adequate excuse. If something needs doing, and doing right, then it has to be done.

You imply that we should "teach people about American culture". Sure, but before they are receptive to being taught, they must first become friends, and before that, AMERICANS must learn enough about them to become their friends, not their invaders and opressors. Thjere is a simple logic here. If Americans insist that the world becomes lioke them and learns their culture as a prerequisite to acceptance, then the overwhelming outcome will be rejection.

If the US is serious about having a world-wide "Empire", then it must learn from successful and unsuccsesful empires of the past. In most successful cases, a high degree of diplomacy was required with agents in outlying territories who understood local cuture and politics and acted to hold things together. A quick review of the British Raj would help here. In the Roman empire there was a strong tradition of bringing the sons and family of tribal leaders to Rome - partly as hostages, and partly to train them at first hand in Roman politics and society, so thet on their return they would be "better" subjects. How many of the rulers of the world were educated in the best British public schools?

Yale and Harvard and the ivy league have the same role in the modern American Empire, imho.

You focus very narrowly on Iraq. I think this is a mistake. The problem is much wider than just Iraq - it's the whole Arabic and Islamic world, and tribal societies in general and how they interact with the modern world.

I think you're right to identify leadership as the key (and see above about education). Whatever gets done, will happen through dialogue with the actual leaders of the people. Some of these may be "terrorists" or otherwise set against us, but we still need to talk meaningfully to them and understand them.

The number of leaders may be very large in a tribal society. Many countries and companies have come unstuck through dealing only with high-level leaders and ignoring the trickle-down to lower levels. Everyone has to be involved in a deal, otherwise the result is high-level corruption and low level dissent.

One of the problems with the strategy of killing-off "bad" leaders is that it leaves a power vacuum into which thugs, drug barons, and opportunists will step - few honourable people will take up leadership roles if their predecessors have been assasinated. This is one of the counter-productive aspects of Israel's dealings with the Palestinians - they have systematically killed off any legitimate leaders, leaving only brigands to run the show.

Imprisoning "bad" leaders has some virtue, but be prepared for them to remain a focus of popular aspirations even from within prison. They will NOT be neutralised and may become stronger - Xinano Gusmao in jail in Jakarta or Nelson Mandela in Robben Island are prime examples. Fortunately, these individuals were "good" leaders, imprisoned by a "bad" regime. What will be the judgement of history be on Abu Ghraib, and Guantanamo Bay?