24 Hours: Iraq Votes.

Razor sharp sarcasm there Brandon :wink:

Please define for us step in the right direction.

The Iraqis have gained what exactly? The ability to vote in a election where the results have been predetermined to install a government friendly to the interests of bush inc?

kickycan wrote:

Violence, death, only half of the people showing up...yeah, what a great success.

I suppose it's lost on you that people who have never had an election and have suffered under one of the worst tyrants in modern history have at least achieved a beginning democracy. You really don't feel the tiniest empathy for these people do you, except to the extent that the war allows you to accuse Bush of killing them?

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

and your irrefutable proof that their purpose is the former?

He implied that guns were being used against the Iraqi voters to control the election outcome, and then advanced the notion that any picture of a gun in their presence consituted proof.

And btw, the dead Iraqis, Americans, and others killed in this senseless crime against humanity called the Iraqi war are human beings not collateral damage. Or they were anyway.

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Razor sharp sarcasm there Brandon :wink:

Please define for us step in the right direction.

The Iraqis have gained what exactly? The ability to vote in a election where the results have been predetermined to install a government friendly to the interests of bush inc?

"Bush Inc" won in this country, and the American people are fairly bright; why shouldn't it win in other countries?

I mean, you had your chance. If John Kerry and John Dean are the best you can come up with as alternatives, why would you expect sympathy from normal people going about their lives?

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

And btw, the dead Iraqis, Americans, and others killed in this senseless crime against humanity called the Iraqi war are human beings not collateral damage. Or they were anyway.

They are both human beings killed tragically in war and collateral damage. Both descriptions are accurate. My point, though, was that by your logic, all wars are immoral since the dead are just as dead as if they were killed by tyrants.

Lash wrote:

When we hear the stat here it is a percentage of registered voters. Who would tally the number of children and otherwise ineligibles that didn't vote?

People trying to fix things to go their way and make them look like the pillars of democracy the vicars of christ and the saviors of the world while counting the money behind closed doors? Just a guess.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

and your irrefutable proof that their purpose is the former?

He implied that guns were being used against the Iraqi voters to control the election outcome, and then advanced the notion that any picture of a gun in their presence consituted proof.

And now you are advancing the notion that they are there to protect voters. Aside from your different positions, you use the same methodology that you belittle in PDid.

I'm sure glad I can watch this from my computer keyboard and no fat warm happy amateur pundits like us are debating who I am, what I believe, and what the quality of my life should be for me.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

And btw, the dead Iraqis, Americans, and others killed in this senseless crime against humanity called the Iraqi war are human beings not collateral damage. Or they were anyway.

They are both human beings killed tragically in war and collateral damage. Both descriptions are accurate. My point, though, was that by your logic, all wars are immoral since the dead are just as dead as if they were killed by tyrants.

I stand by that definition. Name a moral war for me.

now if you will tell me why they were moral...

I suppose I am the only one on the planet who finds the Iraqi election to be interesting but puzzling at the same time. I can only guess what this election foretells about he future of Iraq and I certainly don't guess that because there was an election there will be a democracy (or even that there should be a democracy) I am also just guessing (blame my inherent stupidty) that in the best interest of the Iraqi people a benevolent dictatship would prove the most valuable in securing civil rights for the people. I find it most interesting that most everyone (from A2k posters to White House pundits are able to rejoice and/or denouce the voter turnout as if they had some inspired vision of what it all may mean in the years to come.

I suppose I am the only one on the planet who finds the Iraqi election to be interesting but puzzling at the same time. I can only guess what this election foretells about he future of Iraq and I certainly don't guess that because there was an election there will be a democracy (or even that there should be a democracy) I am also just guessing (blame my inherent stupidty) that in the best interest of the Iraqi people a benevolent dictatship would prove the most valuable in securing civil rights for the people. I find it most interesting that most everyone (from A2k posters to White House pundits are able to rejoice and/or denouce the voter turnout as if they had some inspired vision of what it all may mean in the years to come.

Arabs Mesmerized by Iraqi Elections
Sunday January 30, 2005



By DONNA ABU-NASR

Associated Press Writer

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) - A young man smoking cigarettes and drinking coffee in a Saudi cafe worries that Iraq's elections could lead to civil war. On the banks of the Nile, a student strolling with his girlfriend dismisses the polls as a sham meant to place a pro-American government in Iraq. Yemenis, chewing their mildly stimulating khat leaves, express hope the United States will pressure other tyrannical regimes to change.

The Arab world is anything but indifferent to Sunday's polling in Iraq, which has dual implications for the restive region. It will almost certainly bring to power Iraq's long-suppressed Shiite Muslims, boosting the sect's influence in this Sunni Muslim-dominated area. It also will mean Washington has succeeded in bringing democracy to Iraq by force - at least for the moment - a precedent that could shake up the autocratic Arab world.

``Arab governments may not say it, but they don't want Iraq's democratic experiment to succeed,'' said Turki al-Hamad, a prominent Saudi columnist and former political science professor. ``Such a success would embarrass them and present them with the dilemma of either changing or being changed.''

Arabs were of mixed feelings about the poll. Many said U.S. involvement reinforced their distrust.

``This election is an American movie made to convince Iraqis to go to the polls so that the United States will stay in Iraq and control its oil,'' said Jordanian Mohammed Fakhri, 28, owner of a mobile phones shop. ``There will be ... a government with Iraqi stooges serving U.S. and Israeli interests.''

A veiled Egyptian flower vendor who gave her name only as Um Abdel Rahman dismissed the poll as ``a sedative for the people. Democracy is just a decoration.''

Wouldn't she like to participate in free elections? ``Women speak their minds all the time. I don't need to vote,'' she said.

However others hoped the poll would be a catalyst for a region-wide democratic push.

The elections are a ``good omen for getting rid of dictatorship,'' Yemeni political science student Fathi al-Uraiqi said, chewing khat with friends. ``But I hope America is not driven by its own interests but by a genuine desire to spread democracy in the rest of the region.''

Mohammed al-Omran, a 21-year-old Saudi coffee shop manager, said the Shiites should be fair if they want to prevent the situation in Iraq from dissolving into civil war or partition.

``Saddam Hussein was hated because he persecuted (the Shiites). They should not do the same,'' he said, as he sipped coffee and smoked cigarettes.

Interest was high among Saudi Arabia's Shiite minority, who have long complained of discrimination.

``People are glued to their TV screens'' in al-Qatif and Ihsaa, Shiite-dominated towns in the oil-rich Eastern Province, said Muhammad Mahfouz, a Shiite editor of a cultural magazine.

Clergymen used special services Saturday for Ghadeer Day, which marked the Prophet Muhammad's nomination of his son-in-law Ali as his successor, to pray for smooth and safe elections, he said.

Some of Iraq's Sunni Arab neighbors have expressed fears a Shiite-dominated government in Iraq could join with Iran to form a Shiite crescent, threatening traditional Sunni dominance of the region and inspiring potential political claims by other Shiites.

Al-Hamad, who lives in the Eastern Province, said Saudi Arabia will only fear a Shiite government in Iraq if it allies itself with Iran, which had called for exporting its 1979 Islamic Revolution beyond its borders.

A Shiite government in Iraq will not inspire unrest among the kingdom's Shiites, he said.

``They are not demanding self-rule or an alliance with Iran. They just want rights that citizens in any country expect,'' he said. ``A Shiite government in Iraq will give them the confidence to lobby more persistently for those rights.''

Arab intellectuals, politicians and writers differed over whether the elections would provide a good example for democratic reform in a region in which free and fair elections are rare and human rights groups operate with difficulty.

Arab League spokesman Hossam Zaki said the election was a step forward, but added that Iraq, with its unstable security situation, was a ``model to be avoided.''

Lebanese politician Walid Jumblatt said the polls can only be judged after the results come out. But so far they've proven ``a bizarre model,'' with candidates campaigning furtively for fear of insurgent attacks and Sunni Muslims boycotting the process.

Writing in Beirut's Al-Anwar newspaper, political analyst Rafik Khoury said Arab governments who have criticized shortcomings of Iraq's elections, demanding that they be ``honest and transparent ... themselves ban such elections for their own peoples.''

``If the future promised by the elections appears confusing, are the Iraqis supposed to bet on the future that the executioners promise them?'' he said, refering to insurgents.

The Egyptian student, Ahmed Abdel Rahman, openly spoke about not trusting U.S. intentions in Iraq, saying the new Iraqi ruler ``will be a follower of America.''

But when asked if democracy can grow in Egypt, where President Hosni Mubarak is widely expected to seek a fifth term in power, the 20-year-old looked over his shoulder and said:

``Let's talk about Iraq. Let's stay away from talking about Egypt.''