Can someone help me understand the theory behind sicilian dragon, and if it has any flaws.

Do you mean the sicilian defence,dragon variation,or accelarated dragon?

You might want to search chess.com (and especially articles) for "dragon" - you'll probably find lots of interesting information

The theory is pretty clear.  In most sicilians, black gets a queenside attack and his (in the dragon) fiancettoed bishop supports this powerfully.  Its main weakness was that it was thought to have been discredited (60s and 70s) by the Yugoslav attack, which was then, considered self-working.  The dragonwas then rejuvenated and is now fairly popular.  I have tried re-discrediting it by shaving a move off the Yugoslav (delaying castling, leaving white's king's bishop undeveloped etc) with mixed luck.

The Dragon is a powerful opening if played correctly, but there are weaknesses. This is one of the openings that messing up can be costly. The Yugoslav counter can destroy black, so black needs to be just as aggressive or faster.Typically, the queenside bishop for black is not used for quite a while, as the white spaces would be clogged up.

http://www.chess.com/groups/home/the-dragons-cave

So is there any strong Scicilian variation that avoids both the The Yugoslav and Maróczy Bind, and is hard to mess up. And sorry darkcloudy I meant the accelerated dragon variation.

Sorry, but the immediate (unexamined) answer is "no", as these are largely white's choices.  Yet neither the Yugoslav or Maroczy are guaranteed wins for white.  They are both strong in the hands of strong and aggressive players, but a mediocre aggressive dragon player against an overly-cautious Yugoslav, and I would back the aggressive dragon.  They are all 3 attacking formations and caution just wastes tempi.