The trouble is, the logic of Ron's position is invasion and occupation, in the expectation that a free election might go the wrong way. There's an analogy with the position summed up by Eisenhaower in relation to the reason elections could not be held in Vietnam "80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh".

And that bit of realpolitick didn't work out too well.

And invasion and occupation, even if successful, would have to be done on the same illegal basis as in Iraq. Not an encouraging precedent either.