jamiroguy1 Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 Why the US is running scared of elections in IraqWashington's plan to transfer power without a direct vote is a fraudJonathan SteeleMonday January 19, 2004The occupation of Iraq continues to get worse for George Bush and Tony Blair. The deaths of at least 20 people in a suicide bomb attack outside the coalition headquarters in Baghdad yesterday morning underlines the spiralling unrest in the country. The toll of US casualties since Saddam Hussein's capture is higher than in the same period before it. Angry protests over unemployment and petrol shortages have erupted in several cities in the south, in areas under British control. Above all, Washington's plans for handing power to an unelected group of Iraqis is being strongly challenged by Iraq's majority Shia community. The occupiers who invaded Iraq in the name (partly) of bringing democracy are being accused of flouting democracy themselves. Oh yes, and then there's the small matter of the weapons of mass destruction on which Saddam increasingly appears to be the man who had truth on his side. When he said he had destroyed them years ago, he, rather than Bush and Blair, was the man not lying. While the Hutton inquiry looms as the main Iraq worry for the prime minister, the primary problem for Bush is the chaos in Iraq. His plans for minimising Iraq as an election issue are in tatters. They relied on three things: the capture of Saddam; a reduction in the toll of US dead and maimed; and the start of a process of handing power to Iraqis.Full Articlehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1126178,00.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 Do you know anything abotu the history of this gov't The people As whole Rule by majority and often emotionally. Ayahtollah sistani is asking that we let a largely uneducated and highly emotional Shite Gov't to have a Majority so they can pick leaders who hate the kurds and the Sunni's? Cmon man Tell me even you can see why it wouldn't be prudent to let mob rule run Iraq Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 19 Author Report Share Posted January 19 That's not democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 When this country was started it wasn't democracy either the thing democracy doesn't do is work towards the common good it's a mob rule system. Im all for Ideology but you have to balance it with Practicality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 1ST- Read 1441 before you believe this horse shit of no trigger to war.. ""a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations." Please read the resolution before you take your vegans friends from starbuck's word that the rsolution said otherwise OK Jack?http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/usandun/02110803.htm2nd- How can they hand over power with out a constitution drawn? A constitution that protects ALL ethnic groups in Iraq. The shiats want a election because they are the majority and will only revenge what attrocities that were done to them..Do you want a civil war? you probabbly do so you can blame the Bush admin.This is the kicker....Annan should resist the poisoned chalice. He should support the concept of direct elections. It need not mean a delay in sovereignty for Iraq. Five months are not too long to prepare a vote. Alternatively, the UN should offer to take over responsibility for the entire transition to Iraqi rule, as many member governments originally hopedOh, you mean the same U.N. that tucked tail and ran when they were bombed because they failed to listen to the coalition recommendation of increased security? Not the same UN that defrauded the Iraqi people of billions when they provided billions to Sadaam, Uday and Qusay to build soccer fields and palaces, right?This article is a joke.. show me one article Guardian wrote about the atrocities committed under Sadaam.. Until then Guardian has lost all of the VERY little respect I had for it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 19 Author Report Share Posted January 19 Originally posted by siceone When this country was started it wasn't democracy either the thing democracy doesn't do is work towards the common good it's a mob rule system. Im all for Ideology but you have to balance it with Practicality. Then maybe we (the us gov't) should stop pretending to be spreading democracy if that's not what it is."The sons of the Iraqi people want a political system based on direct elections and a constitution that ensures justice and equality for everyone,"-Hashem Awadi, a representative of Sistani.Why not give it to them. The shiites hold the key to Iraq's stability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 Then maybe we (the us gov't) should stop pretending to be spreading democracy if that's not what it is."The sons of the Iraqi people want a political system based on direct elections and a constitution that ensures justice and equality for everyone,"-Hashem Awadi, a representative of Sistani.Why not give it to them. The shiites hold the key to Iraq's stability. Your wrong.. The only way to ensure sytability in Iraq is by creating a constitution first then a govt that is EQUALLY represented by all etnic groups and by hurrying that transition especially elections, will only ensure a path to civil war.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 19 Author Report Share Posted January 19 Originally posted by mr mahs Your wrong.. The only way to ensure sytability in Iraq is by creating a constitution first then a govt that is EQUALLY represented by all etnic groups and by hurrying that transition especially elections, will only ensure a path to civil war.... What makes you think ignoring the will of most of the iraqis will ensure stability?Equal representation? That's a great idea. Has it been tried yet? Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 What makes you think ignoring the will of most of the iraqis will ensure stability?Equal representation? That's a great idea. Has it been tried yet? Nope. Just because the Shias want it a certain way doesn't mean all Iraqi's want it... Equal representation... What do you think the Governing council is??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 19 Author Report Share Posted January 19 A farce. The governing council was rejected by the iraqis because the people were selected not elected and weren't representative of them. They were/are only interested in self-promotion rather than the good of the iraqi people.The Shia don't want total control over the country, they want equal representation of people of THEIR choosing, not ours. What better way to promote democracy and freedom by letting them decide who their interem gov't is and allow them to decide who will represent them. They've obviously earned their place in the government after attempting several US unsupported coups d'etat and living under Saddam. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattbateman Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 the only way for peace in iraq is if the iraqi people want it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 19 Author Report Share Posted January 19 Originally posted by pattbateman the only way for peace in iraq is if the iraqi people want it I think they do.. but they longer we meddle in their affairs and do not internationalize the reconstruction efforts then the US will be blamed for everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 I think they do.. but they longer we meddle in their affairs and do not internationalize the reconstruction efforts then the US will be blamed for everything. the Iraqi people are political infants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksimons Posted January 19 Report Share Posted January 19 balls.ever heard of the right to self-determination.the american people are political infants.so fucking what.we all are.the iraqis know what is best for their country. they have had years under saddam to plan for their future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 20 Author Report Share Posted January 20 British Officials Say Iraq Elections by June ViableBy Nicolas Pelham in Basra Published: January 19 2004 17:58 | Last Updated: January 19 2004 17:58British officials in Basra no longer oppose early elections in Iraq, saying security and procedural obstacles to polls could be surmounted before the transfer to civilian control on June 30."We have a working hypothesis that you could manage an electoral process within the timeframe and the security available," said Dominic D'Angelo, British spokesman for the UK-led southern zone of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Basra.The volte face comes after demonstrators packed Basra's streets on Thursday in response to a call from Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Iraq's senior Shia cleric, to back his demand for an elected assembly. British officials estimated there were between 100,000 and 300,000 protestors.Coalition officials fear Ayatollah Sistani could issue a fatwa, or religious edict, to his followers to suspend co-operation with the coalition authorities if polls do not go ahead.Full Articlehttp://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1073281137552 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breakbeatz2 Posted January 20 Report Share Posted January 20 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 I think they do.. but they longer we meddle in their affairs and do not internationalize the reconstruction efforts then the US will be blamed for everything. yeah, genius, we should just let idots with Kalashnikovs run around and drill liwuor store owners full of holes,listen to yourselfits pathetic, you want to criticize our country so much you look for anytihng to take a stab atyou disgust me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 Originally posted by marksimons balls.ever heard of the right to self-determination.the american people are political infants.so fucking what.we all are.the iraqis know what is best for their country. they have had years under saddam to plan for their future. actually the constitutional process took over 25 years man and if you read something you would know that our style of gov't was chosen by VERY few Learn something Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 Originally posted by breakbeatz2 yeah, genius, we should just let idots with Kalashnikovs run around and drill liwuor store owners full of holes,listen to yourselfits pathetic, you want to criticize our country so much you look for anytihng to take a stab atyou disgust me You really got me all wrong. I want what's best for our country. Not the Carlye Group.Honestly, if you think that the Shia's are our enemies then we're doomed to fail in the reconstruction of Iraq. Do you honestly want the reconstruction of iraq to fail? Wake up, dude. You really have know view of the big picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daprofessional Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 Not the Carlye Group. stop dwelling on the past, what's done is done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted January 21 Report Share Posted January 21 Originally posted by jamiroguy1 You really got me all wrong. I want what's best for our country. Not the Carlye Group.Honestly, if you think that the Shia's are our enemies then we're doomed to fail in the reconstruction of Iraq. Do you honestly want the reconstruction of iraq to fail? Wake up, dude. You really have know view of the big picture. I at least think you want whats best but mob rule isn't best Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted January 21 Author Report Share Posted January 21 Originally posted by siceone I at least think you want whats best but mob rule isn't best They're not a mob. They've protested civily. This perception that they are uneducated, ak-47 toating barbarians isn't who the shia's are. In fact they are cooperating with the US occupation until thus far.Give Iraqis the election they wantDespite Bush's rhetoric, the U.S. is opposing true democratic votingRobert Scheer Creators Syndicate 01.20.04Proving again that Martin Luther King Jr. had the right idea, the peaceful demonstrations by thousands of Iraqi Shiites demanding direct elections have been a far more effective challenge to the arrogance of the U.S. occupation than the months of guerrilla violence undertaken by a Sunni-led insurgency. Led by clerics demanding real democracy, the protests have strongly raised this question: What right does the United States have to tell people that they cannot be allowed to rule themselves? With the stated reasons for the U.S. invasion -- the imminent threat of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction and his ties to Al Qaeda -- now a proven fraud, the Bush administration was left with one defense: It was bringing democracy to this corner of the Mideast. If we now fail to promptly return full sovereignty to the Iraqis, inconvenient as that outcome may be, the invasion will stand exposed as nothing more than old-fashioned imperial plunder of the region's oil riches -- and the continued occupation could devolve into civil war.Full article.http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=16307 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamiroguy1 Posted February 12 Author Report Share Posted February 12 :) UN now backs elections in IraqSistani's clout increases as world body supports his call for elections over US plan for transfer of sovereignty.By Matthew ClarkThe United Nations has opted to support calls from one of the main leaders of Iraq's Shiite Muslim community for early elections. The move to back Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani's insistance on one-person-one-vote over the US plans to hand back sovereignty took place amid heavy security in the wake of two recent suicide bombings that killed nearly 100 Iraqis. In a nod to Sistani's rising influence, UN diplomat Lakhdar Brahimi announced the decision after a two-hour visit to the reclusive cleric's home in the holy Shiite city of Najaf, 90 miles south of Baghdad. Mr. Brahimi said that Sistani "is insistent on holding the elections and we are with him on this 100 percent because elections are the best means to enable any people to set up a state that serves their interest." Brahimi leads a UN team that is in Iraq to assess the feasibility of holding the early direct elections that Sistani has been urging in opposition to the US plan of holding regional "caucuses" to elect an interim government by June 30. Under the plan, the interim government would not hold direct elections until 2005. The team will have its work cut out for them. As The Los Angeles Times reports: [The UN team] must sound out competing Iraqi interests and find a way to select a government that all sides find legitimate. They must do it without appearing to take sides, and they must not let the UN be forced into a role that is larger than it is willing and able to handle.It is this highly-charged environment that made Brahimi reluctant to go to Iraq after two years of nation-building in Afghanistan, reports the Times.Full articlehttp://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0212/dailyUpdate.html?s=mes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted February 12 Report Share Posted February 12 cool. However, I'm all for the all factions representated in govt policy - but, I agree those members be voted in and not selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmatas2277 Posted February 12 Report Share Posted February 12 Originally posted by raver_mania cool. However, I'm all for the all factions representated in govt policy - but, I agree those members be voted in and not selected. unfortunately thats how its gotta be NOW...but once things get started..things will work out...all of us need to learn a bit of patience...we all see the death toll rising over there...if we hurry things up, IT WILL NOT WORK..and the death of all those soldiers, whether the cause is right or wrong, would have been for nothing...a democracy isnt built in day....there must be RULES and a fair and viable PROCESS... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmatas2277 Posted February 12 Report Share Posted February 12 Originally posted by siceone When this country was started it wasn't democracy either the thing democracy doesn't do is work towards the common good it's a mob rule system. Im all for Ideology but you have to balance it with Practicality. werd... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.