Oh, please. The US military set up a thoroughly corrupt regime in Afghanistan, which collapsed nearly instantly when the sugar daddy left and may be assumed to

Oh, please. The US military set up a thoroughly corrupt regime in Afghanistan, which collapsed nearly instantly when the sugar daddy left and may be assumed to stop paying. That doesn't show the success or failure or democracy, it's entirely orthogonal. The article tries to tie it to democracy. To test that, set up an alternative: A thoroughly corrupt but not at all democratic regime, which loses the military and financial support of its sugar daddy. Would that end better? I see no reason to believe so.