Hoping Against Hope

For days, this article by Joshua Micah Marshall has haunted me. Marshall argues that the introduction of chaos into the Middle East is essentially this administration's plan, writing, "In short, the administration is trying to roll the table--to use U.S. military force, or the threat of it, to reform or topple virtually every regime in the region, from foes like Syria to friends like Egypt, on the theory that it is the undemocratic nature of these regimes that ultimately breeds terrorism." Marshall does not cite many sources for this argument, and I find myself hoping he's wrong, even as I suspect he may be right. When I pair Marshall's portrait with articles like this one from James Kuhnhenn of the Pioneer Press' Washington bureau (the Pioneer Press being a right-leaning paper that strongly endorsed Bush) I wonder who the Bush administration will listen to. We've previously established that the administration feels no special obligation to revisit or revise its preferred positions when they are questioned or challenged by:

1) Our closest allies;
2) The U.N.;
3) Millions of protesters;
4) Noted conservative columnists and pundits;
5) The Pope;
and now . . .
6) A significant chunk of the Rebublican congressional delegation.

So I wonder and worry . . . if Marshall is correct, is there any power on earth that could prompt the Bush administration to retreat from this plan?