Sometimes things work out wonderfully in the world. Twenty-five years ago, mathematician Anatoly Shcharansky was a prisoner in the Soviet Gulag. Now his ideas of spreading peace by spreading democracy have the ear of the Texas businessman who is the President of the U.S.
That amazing turn of events puts GWB's campaign for democracy into a broader context: perhaps it should be understood as the next phase of the struggle that occupied much of the last century. At present, the world is noticing the Islamic countries, but the status of human rights in the remaining Communist (or semi-Communist) countries reminds us that the Cold War's work is not yet finished. The idea of peace through democracy applies to China too.
But is it our role to force it on everyone else? A well founded criticism of W's speech is that it presents an unwinnable and never ending reason to fight wars. Not to mention that many of the statements made, even as hyperbole, are just flat untrue (really, are we not free b/c China is communist - or better yet, b/c Vietnam is not?). Had Bill C made this speech, the rhetoric would to bother me so much b/c I'd figure he's just full of himself. But since it comes from W, I fear he may really believe it.
Can you go back to the text of the speech and see if those concerns hold up? I don't think they do.
I didn't hear the State of the Union, but it seems from the Inaugural Address that he was simply stating what would be the over-arching motif for US foreign policy.
Maybe I'm wrong. If I am, I share your concerns.