We all know that some parts of Iraq are more secure than other parts. So, the poeple in the secure parts will vote but the people in the non-secure parts will not be able to vote. So, the elections are not valid at all. We all know that..So, i hope that the US will not talk about how the democracy worked in Iraq and how great it is in Iraq after the elections. The people in the north will vote but what about the rest? You call this democracy?!?!
Iraq January 30th 2005 Do you all See ? It really was all worth it in the end ! The Iraqis finally had elections! Wasnt that worth the looting of your public wealth of 200 billion and a few thousand of your soldiers ? A North Korean'esqe flavour these elections have I can hardly wait for the US newspaper headlines on Monday " People United In Joy ". De javu ? Wasnt the US embassy in Saigon stormed by a squad of VC in 1968 ? The spectre of malaise here . Just like I said eeriely like the 68 Tet offensive . Remeber my post "who is behind these attacks in Iraq" I was right all along they are the people of IRAQ, and they want their country BACK. And what I have known all along its the US and allies that is kilingl most Iraqis not the 'terrorists' .
In all fairness, this is simply to set up a constitutional convention, not actually elect leaders to run the country. However, I fear that the US will use this to its advantage and elect a puppet government. But then again, I wouldn't expect anything less.
top_mosker It would be WORSE for them to rig a consitutional convention than an actual election. What if they put into the constitution "leaders must be santioned by the US" and "all constitional changers must be ratifide by US president"???? i dont think they would be that crude but think if they did. any goverment at all would be a puppet then
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20...73_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-IRAQ-ELECTION-SCENE-DC.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4220551.stm Eight million in a country of 25 million? Not bad.
First and foremost, let's get our terms straight. There is no democratic process in Iraq. Iraq is occupied by 150,000 U.S. troops. The Baath and other parties are proscribed from participating in elections or holding public office. In a real democracy, voters are free to choose from any party. In a real democracy, a foreign occupation force does not exert any political influence whatsoever. And in a real democracy, people aren't afraid to venture out into the streets, risking rape or kidnapping in order to vote. You can't have democracy without basic security, period. So this is not democracy. Which gets us to the next term: "Iraqi judges," etc. By definition anyone who holds public office in an occupied country is a collaborator. This would include, for example, Palestinian Authority "leaders" under the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Now a collaborator may or not be a good person, and he may or may not be laboring under a benevolent occupier, but he is certainly a collaborator and thus a fair target for nationalist/patriotic resistance forces seeking to expel the occupiers. Collaborators are, in some ways, even more of an enemy to the Iraqi resistance than the Americans. They demoralize the resistance and set an example of subservience that other Iraqis may emulate. It's not surprising, therefore, that Iraqi guerillas would choose to execute them. http://www.rall.com/rants.html
This is the best you can expect in a country that is still stuck in the feudalist period. For hundreds and hundreds of years ever dispute has been settled with a gun, sword, or branding someone an infidel. Change is never smooth and rarely ever pretty.
I am glad that the Iraqi ppl feel they had a election, but what really made me scratch my head was that the assembly will be determined by a proportional representation system which in Iraq would put the Shi'a in a huge majority since the Sunni's voted in little numbers, and I suspect that the Sunni vote is fragmented due to all these parties. This doesn’t look all to good for avoiding a civil war, the Sunni’s will feel left out (even if they all voted they would still not be power) and I believe a cessionary movement may grow.
At a little after noon EST, Jane Arraf on CNN is reporting about 30 percent turnout in Baqubah, a mixed Sunni-Shiite city to the northeast of Baghdad. It seems clear that the turnout was largely Shiite. Although the violence and attacks have been extensive and took place all over the country, the security measures put in prevented massive loss of life. Suicide bombers clearly could not get close enough to crowds to take a big toll. On the other hand, if the turnout is as light in the Sunni Arab areas as it now appears, the parliament/ constitutional assembly is going to be extremely lopsided. It would be sort of like having an election in California where the white Protestants all stayed home and the legislature was mostly Latinos, African-Americans and Asians. http://www.juancole.com/
Democrats in America are slitting their wrists over the high turn out. They were hoping for another Tet. I would give anything to be on the plane taking Dan Rather and other members of the Old Media back to NYC. All of them will be drunk and telling stories about the good old days reporting from Viet Nam.
Yes, us liberals (in my case used for lack of a better term) are so upset over the prospect of our troops being able to leave Iraq. That would be enough to make me contemplate suicide. Get a grip. The situation we face in Iraq is expensive, dangerous, and shows no sign of going our way any time soon, if ever. It shows every sign of being like the Soviet's invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.
What about you? Don't americans still live in a disguised feudalist system?Aren't there still poor people that pay lots of taxes and work their asses off and receive nothing, while rich people do nothing and gain millions? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The word liberal isn't bad. The perjorative parody of it the right wingers have constructed is. But there are many issues where I part company with liberal orthodoxy. But it fits me better than any other label.
Yah! I guess that's why so many poor people try to get into the U.S. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
prelude to problems from the Sunni triangle.... another note, poor Europeans seldom run to US and vice versa
I didn't quite intend to refer to americans as the poor people. I was refering to the politics of exportation of poverty- that is, rich people in US, controlling poor people in developing/underdeveloped countries (mostly developing, actually). This is what I wrote about it last time: I hope that clarifies. Oh, ok. That explains a lot. It just seems that americans tend not to like that word.....
Clarification, TruthSeeker? The last time I checked, the third world contries were anxious for the manufacturing jobs that U.S. markets created. So you're blaming our consumption? Do we control the wage scales of the PRC? Thialand? Or elsewhere? Maybe their governments do. Hmmmmmm! And I thought that Saddam put himself in power via a coup. Okay, now I understand. To be successful is sinful. It's vile to have a standard of living higher than your neighbor because, of course, it must have been stolen because honest effort and work couldn't possibly account for it! People were meant to be poor. Now I get it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Iraq, A Celebration Of Democracy! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Democracy and freedom took a huge step forward with the Iraqi elections. Over 70% of eligible voters went to the polls even under threat of death to exercise their God given right of self governance. This is a huge defeat for terrorists and anti-democratic forces around the world and in this country. No one can deny now the Iraqis do not want freedom and democracy. It is a great day for the world. First Afghanistan now Iraq is breathing the delicious air of freedom. Let freedom ring and God bless the free people of the world everywhere. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
