In spite of the negativity, nay-saying and general pessimism about the future of Iraq, in the face of dire predictions about the plausibility of bringing democracy to the Middle East, Iraq's first democratic election in decades will take place as planned. Opponents of President Bush are trying to either set unreasonable expectations for success or demand, as Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) does, that we abandon the Iraqi people to the tender mercies of the terrorists despite all our promises to them. What effect will the election have on the security situation in Iraq? What can we realistically expect to happen on election day and beyond?

Anyone who expects the election to be almost completely violence-free, as happened in Afghanistan, is trying to set the stage for a declaration of failure. Of course we can expect the terrorists to cause as much violence and mayhem as possible, in an attempt to disrupt voting. This alone should tell the naysayers just how important bringing democracy to the Middle East is, and how vital it is that we never turn back from this goal.

If our enemies don't want democratic governments to flourish, then we must consider that our best weapon against them is democracy itself. Their leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, has "declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy." Democracy gives people hope, and people with hope for the future don't usually strap on bomb belts or pack their cars with explosives. All sources indicate, however, that the Iraqis' thirst for long-delayed democracy will not be stopped by the thugs and murderers that want to control Iraq.

We can reasonably expect the violence to continue after the election as well, and for some time, though it will hopefully lose steam as the year goes on. When the people of East Timor voted for independence from Indonesia in 1999, terrorist violence actually increased dramatically after the election, as the anti-democracy forces took out their frustration at losing on the populace. Two years later, however, the 2001 election passed without a single incidence of violence.

We're lucky in America; our sore losers mostly just march around carrying signs and chanting pointless slogans, as they did when protesting the President's second inauguration. When they get tired, or when the cameras are off, they just throw the signs away for others to clean up and go out to dinner. More than likely, Iraq will see a surge of violence from the terrorists over the next several weeks, at least until the final election outcome is announced.

Some people are setting artificial goals by which to measure whether the outcome of the election is "successful" or "legitimate." They tell us that there must be a 50% overall turnout, or a certain percentage of Sunni turnout, or a lack of violence before, during or afterwards. Some claim that the United Nations or other Middle Eastern countries must pronounce the election legitimate (as if any of them would know a legitimate election if it wore a neon sign saying, "100% Legitimate, Really, I Swear!").

The only measure of a successful election is whether the Iraqi people feel that they had a chance to cast their vote and have it counted. Unlike Democrats in America, most of them don't seem to feel that the election is only legitimate if they win. After decades of oppression and tyranny, simply seeing a ballot that doesn't let them choose between "Saddam Hussein -or- death for my family" is enough to start with. And if some Sunnis refuse to participate, it only means their voices won't be heard.

According to Reuters, some Iraqi expatriates see the election as an historic event. It's a turning point in the history of their country, if not the world. Some quotes:

"I am ecstatic to have passed through this experience at last. This (election) might cause a difference, not necessarily right away but eventually," said Sara Masoud, a student who has lived in Syria for eight years.

In Australia, Iraqis danced in the streets, twirling scarves and singing, and proudly displaying blue ink on their fingers which told the world they had cast the first votes.

"When I look at the ink on my finger -- this is a mark of freedom," said Kassim Abood, outside a polling booth in a disused furniture warehouse in western Sydney.

"I didn't think I would live long enough to see this moment," said Abood, who decades ago fled the rule of Saddam Hussein to seek asylum in Australia.

"Iraqis are hugging each other, kissing each other, this is a wonderful day," he said. "I am born anew today."

"I am voting out of loyalty for my fellow countrymen, for our great Iraq, for those buried in mass graves and for our martyrs," a weeping Adel Mijbil Qawqaz said at a polling station in the United Arab Emirates.

"This is the first time we can vote with any freedom. I could almost cry," said Yousif Jamil, 52, a former army officer.

Just a few years ago, the thought of a democratic election taking place in Afghanistan or Iraq was laughable. One has taken place, and the other is taking place now. To the likes of Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, Bobby Byrd -- the Angry Liberal Democrats who speak for the party -- this looks like a disaster, a quagmire, a terrible event, a repeat of Vietnam. To the rest of us, it's the birth of a new democracy, and it's amazing.

And as any mother can no doubt tell you, births are almost never easy or painless, though they are nearly always worth it.