Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
moon

The Iraqi Elections

Recommended Posts

Normal campaigning has been 'virtually impossible'. Citizens have scant knowledge of the candidates or their views.

The locations of the polling stations have not been made public.

Motorised transport to polling stations will not be permitted so voters will have to make their way on foot whilst risking terrorist attack.

Overseas voter registration is extremely low.

There will be few, or no international observers at all.

 

Would you recognise the results of this turkey shoot ?

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4200783.stm

 

 

Robots to be deployed.

Edited by moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.If you make polling places public they will in fact be attacked

2. No cars=no car bombs

3. Iraqis in the US have in fact registered in rather large numbers, at least in california.

4.You cant campaign normally because you will be shot

 

 

All but one have something in common, security. Until Iraqis themselves desire peace and democracy they will have to live with these kinds of things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps there is a broken dove with gossamer wings here moon.

 

Perhaps the election of a soon-to-be-assasinated leader will shift the emphasis from tribal politics to something vaguely more federal.

 

I'm rarely onside with with American foreign policy and I'm certainly not onside with the fictitious war in Iraq, but given the present state of affairs, I think America is correct in pressing for an election sooner rather than later.

 

I

Edited by Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but you assume that every democracy on the planet didnt just "go through the motions" the first few times. The US exists as one of the oldest democracies in the world and our system is ripe with problems, has been since its inception.

 

This first election will allow Iraqis to find out if they want a say in their government, democracy isnt for everyone and it may not be for Iraq. But I am willing to let the people decide.

 

no you may be right but I re-read the article about registered voters and it was essentially a local story in LA. Supposedly certain areas are having decent turn out while others are struggling. I wonder how much of this is due to a lack of government support. I would be interested to see voting options in countries around the world.

 

One of the problems in the us is this

 

The Southern California location -- the only one in the western United States -- is the decommissioned El Toro Marine Base in Irvine, California. Election officials estimate up to 35,000 Iraqis will register and vote there. "I think we're going to lose some voters, but we're lucky to have an office here at all," Alhussaini said.

around the world I bet it is a lot like this

 

In Britain, many of the estimated 150,000 eligible Iraqis were confused about the political process and unsure whom to vote for.

 

 

 

"People keep calling us and asking us, 'Who should we vote for?'" said Jabbar Hasan of the Iraqi Community Association in London. "We say it is up to you. You decide. It is a new experience, even for the political parties."

Edited by one2gamble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you will accept the results of an election with no observers ? Just trying to balance democratic principles with common sense here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there were no international observers in the US....I dont see much of a difference. I am more concerned with the creation of an initial government outside those appointed by the US. I honestly think it will give some Iraqis more satisfaction and hopefully something to fight for. The political process is a very tricky situation, no matter what large groups of Iraqis will claim this election to be a fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The division between the Sunni majority and the Shi'ite minority will not disappear -- Not overnight and not never.

 

What may happen is the beginning of a pragmatic and mature devolution of power based upon a rough sculpture of democracy.

 

I

Edited by Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there were no international observers in the US

I see. :lol:

 

It's not hard to predict the outcome after an election which only Shias take part in and Shias 'win'. We'll be stuck there indefinitely killing Sunnis on behalf of Shias in the name of democracy.

The Kurds are likely to trade 'support for democracy' for an independent State.

Edited by moon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ie north vs south

Yep, you've nailed it 12.

 

The phantom tree of colonialism is bearing its fruit. Iraq is an unnatural composite.

 

If you think this is bad, watch out for the Kurds and the Turks.

 

I

Edited by Iain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:P

 

I did a Search on Democracy, found this!

 

de·moc·ra·cy ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d-mkr-s)

n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies

Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.

A political or social unit that has such a government.

The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.

Majority rule.

The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[French démocratie, from Late Latin dmocratia, from Greek dmokrati : dmos, people; see d- in Indo-European Roots + -krati, -cracy.]

 

[Download or Buy Now]

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

 

 

Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy

Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE

Function: noun

Inflected Form: plural -cies

1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections

2 : a political unit that has a democratic government —dem·o·crat·ic /"de-m&-'kra-tik/ adjective —dem·o·crat·i·cal·ly adverb

 

 

Source: Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

 

 

democracy

 

n 1: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives 2: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them [syn: republic, commonwealth] [ant: autocracy] 3: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group [syn: majority rule]

 

 

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

 

Coupled with what I believe, "Democracy is By the People, For the People" Guess where that came from?

 

How can anyone say what is happening in Iraq is Democratic??

 

More like Oppertunistic? to resolve one heck of a Mess?

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think this is bad, watch out for the Kurds and the Turks.

Ah, now that's an interesting one. The Turks are desperate for entry to the European Union. You can't be in the EU if you go about offing Kurds, old chap, what ? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:P

 

So we can expect some REAL Politicital too and frooing?

 

What will it accomplish, except to show how STUPID it all was?

 

What a waste of Billions of Dollars, and Lives!

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Edited by Drovers Dog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, you've nailed it 12.

 

The phantom tree of colonialism is bearing its fruit. Iraq is an unnatural composite.

 

If you think this is bad, watch out for the Kurds and the Turks.

 

I

the turk thing could get interesting but if the Iraqis are willing to set up a representative democracy it should work. There are areas in the country that the minority has a majority population.

 

Send them here and they can learn the art of gerrymandering. Should work well enough to garner some minority power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been going through through international law and articles of the UN and have yet to see how the term colonialism can apply to the Coalition in Iraq. Of course it was a very different story when the UK went there and installed a puppet government. But of course that is just history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the turk thing could get interesting but if the Iraqis are willing to set up a representative democracy it should work. There are areas in the country that the minority has a majority population.

 

Send them here and they can learn the art of gerrymandering. Should work well enough to garner some minority power.

:P

 

What a wonderful idea!

 

Shame it could never be applied to an Invaded Nation?

 

We did it to them, we Invaded them, to make them free?

 

Now? how do we show them that Democracry we keep talking about?

 

It just ain't working?

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Now? how do we show them that Democracry we keep talking about?

 

It just ain't working?

 

:mrgreen::mrgreen::rolleyes::lol:

Since, judging from your punctuation, you are asking me questions I will answer.

 

1) Watch and see.

 

2) Yes, it is working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do the maths, ladies and gentlemen. 25M Iraqis in Iraq. 4M Iraqis in "exile". Guess what happens if most of the exiles vote? With secret locations, foot traffic only, no idea who the candidates are, terrorists taking potshots on the way, the biggest block of voters are those who DON'T even live in Iraq. You might say, the ones who escaped or didn't have the guts to tough it out, whatever look as though they will be the ruling voters in safety. The only ones in safety , in fact.

These so called elections are a mockery of democracy being forced on an unwilling Iraqi population by the burning Bush and his henchman (poodle) Blair. After all, we've bombed the [gimme a break here] out of them for years, killed thier women and children, looted, tortured and behaved just like the Gestapo in spades and now the Bush and Blair thikn there will be anything remotely like a fair election.

Best way is to let them have their own private civil war, just like the USA and sort it out among themselves.

After all, it's their country!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gestapo?

 

Um...yeah....right.

 

 

I guess you don't know that the US civil war was backed on both sides by foreign money and troops? Private civil war? That is a contradiction in terms.

 

 

 

Circumventing the word filter is frowned on. :mrsgreen:

 

 

Welcome to the Pit. :blank:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But of course that is just history.

Just one of many nasty chapters in British history that sadly, the incumbent imperialist power of today has refused to or been unable to learn from :mrsgreen:

(..but then again, maybe they learnt too well :unsure: )

 

Moon, The actions of the coalition countries over the last few years, most of which have been underpinned with shallow lies and deceipt, have only strengthened my convictions that they serve ONLY themselves. Iraq is not prepared to hold this election yet. You cited plenty of good reasons. This 'election' is a travesty. No right minded soul would have expected the first democratic ballot in Iraq to be trouble free, but this one has been steam-rollered along with seemingly scant regard for those it is being touted to be serving. Sadly, the Iraqis gaining democracy is not the elections purpose in my opinion, it is merely an opportunity for the coalition to add a techincally legitimate edge to their squalid group of marrionettes.

 

Replace the coalition with the UN or something akin to it and perhaps we can start to take the idea of Democracy in Iraq seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The UN had their chance and blew it.

 

They did not have the spine for it and were being manipulated by Saddam Hussein, at the expense of their members....chiefly the United States.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only 'expense' was the money you were losing by not being in-country and controlling the regions oil flow. Save the tired anti-UN rhetoric for the mid-westerners who think the world ends 100 miles from the edge of their street. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...