Free Elections in Iraq

[Sapper6]

of all the non-sense and crap i've seen posted here in the study, you would think that an event such as a long overdue free Iraqi election deserved notice and discussion. suprisingly enough, i'll guess i'll be the one to start this discussion.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050130/D87UET800.html

it's amazing, 36 people killed across the ENTIRE country on election day. i'd call that a success. of course, that's 36 people that lost their lives. this is especially a rather small number seeing that all the world was expecting nothing less than mass chaos there on election day.

so what do ya think? shall we take a break from bashing our own, poking fun at Cheney's wardrobe, and arguing about the right to be a homo to discuss something more important on a much larger scale....? :idunno:

 

[Cryozombie]

If those numbers are accurate, they had a better turn out than we did.

 

[Andrew Green]

"[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]About 300,000 Iraqi and American troops were on the streets"

Yay for freedom!

[/sarcasm]
[/font]

 

[michaeledward]

of all the non-sense and crap i've seen posted here in the study, you would think that an event such as a long overdue free Iraqi election deserved notice and discussion.

Believe me, I've noticed.

You are presuming the elections were free. As a student of Iraqi history, I'm sure you will recall there were elections in Iraq just a few years ago, which begs the question about 'long overdue', but we can let that pass?

How many of the 7,000 candidates names were actually known to the voting public?

Of course, party ticket 169 ...yes that is for whom a ballot could be cast ... ticket 169 ... was being advertised with photographs of Grand Ayatolla Ali Al-Sistani (not that Al-Sistani was part of the party ticket, but that's irrelevant too). Nothing better in a 'long overdue free election' than to vote in a Grand Ayatolla ... that has worked so well for Iran, don't you know.

So, anyhow, it's great that the Iraqi's get to go to the polls. But that, in itself, does not make for a democratic nation. Elections are one small part of what it is to be a democracy.

What we need now is some time, to see how 'it' all turns out. We may end up with "one election, one time", which really gets us no-where.

 

[Sapper6]

"[font=Verdana,Sans-serif]About 300,000 Iraqi and American troops were on the streets"

Yay for freedom!

[/sarcasm]
[/font]

hey andrew, it's called assurance of safety. would you prefer no troops on the street, no presence of force so that when ***** did hit the fan you could sit back and criticize that as well....?

@ michael

you're right, it will be a larger test seeing if it actually works. but the election is a small step. there is alot to build off there. certainly you're not going to compare the elections under saddam's regime to these elections are you...? at least there isn't going to be republican guards standing over your shoulder at the polls telling you which way you should vote.

and the voter turnout, was very high, and as TP pointed out, higher turnout than our own elections.

i hope dearly that the newly elected gov't gets their **** together. the more they can do on their own, the less that we are needed there, and the quicker we come home :asian:

 

[ghostdog2]

An unqualified success.

 

[Kane]

Yea, these free elections should be a success. The liberals said we couldn't do it (no offense to any liberals). They said this would turn out to be another Vietnam. Well if we gave up and withdrawn our troops it would have been another Vietnam but as everyone sees, it has not turned into one. Now they are having free elections. In time after the in-surgeons are captured Iraq will be free.

 

[Melissa426]

of all the non-sense and crap i've seen posted here in the study, you would think that an event such as a long overdue free Iraqi election deserved notice and discussion. suprisingly enough, i'll guess i'll be the one to start this discussion.

so what do ya think? shall we take a break from bashing our own, poking fun at Cheney's wardrobe, and arguing about the right to be a homo to discuss something more important on a much larger scale....? :idunno:

While I don't necessarily disagree with your post, I hope you have no intention of taking up a career in diplomacy. I predict you will be utterly unsuccessful.:uhyeah:

I am still reserving judgment on the election until further reports. I do hope that it bodes well for the future of Iraq and the safe return of our military.

Peace,
Melissa

 

[Sapper6]

While I don't necessarily disagree with your post, I hope you have no intention of taking up a career in diplomacy. I predict you will be utterly unsuccessful.:uhyeah:

I am still reserving judgment on the election until further reports. I do hope that it bodes well for the future of Iraq and the safe return of our military.

Peace,
Melissa

me a diplomat...? never

the thought process behind my post, melissa, was that we often get caught up in arguing about really stupid things. we get so bored in what's going on here, we get so caught up in the "what about ME" lifestyle. i want us to take a look at other things, things obviously more significant in our world, that's all :asian:

 

[michaeledward]

Yea, these free elections should be a success. The liberals said we couldn't do it (no offense to any liberals). They said this would turn out to be another Vietnam. Well if we gave up and withdrawn our troops it would have been another Vietnam but as everyone sees, it has not turned into one. Now they are having free elections. In time after the in-surgeons are captured Iraq will be free.

Which liberals said it couldn't be done?

How many body bags will it take before you consider it another Vietnam?

 

[Feisty Mouse]

me a diplomat...? never

the thought process behind my post, melissa, was that we often get caught up in arguing about really stupid things. we get so bored in what's going on here, we get so caught up in the "what about ME" lifestyle. i want us to take a look at other things, things obviously more significant in our world, that's all :asian:

It depends on what you think is stupid - like civil rights at home.

I am waiting to see how things turn out *after* the elections before standing on my head about it.

 

[ghostdog2]

Which liberals said it couldn't be done?
All of them Or maybe it just seemed that way.


How many body bags will it take before you consider it another Vietnam?
A lot more. As wars go, this has been low impact. And I bet you just hate that.

 

[michaeledward]

A lot more. As wars go, this has been low impact. And I bet you just hate that.

I find your attitude disgusting.

 

[Sapper6]

@ FM

oh yes, almost forgot...i guess i need to get my priorities in line oh my god, someone call the ACLU, my rights have been violated

@ michael

how many years were we in vietnam...? how many soldiers died in vietnam...? compare those numbers with those of OIF and get back with me. our campaign in Iraq is far from Vietnam. you and others wish to equate the two because you have nothing else.

we've lost 1400 soldiers/airmen/marines since march 2003. granted, even one is too many but in comparision, this is FAR from what we've lost in wars past. it's actually a record breaking count. take a look at the casualty rate of conflicts the US has been involved in the past 100 years. tell me again how bad we are doing.

sorry for the rant, you got me off topic michael. either discuss the topic at hand or dont dicuss at all. you too mouse. this topic is about the one of many GOOD things to come out of Operation Iraqi Freedom. if you can't stay on topic, if you don't have something good to add to the discussion, then stay out of it.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

Which liberals said it couldn't be done?
All of them Or maybe it just seemed that way.


How many body bags will it take before you consider it another Vietnam?
A lot more. As wars go, this has been low impact. And I bet you just hate that.

This is one of the most nasty things I think I've read on MT. Who in the world wants more people to die?

You are just undermining whatever points you would like to make by saying things like that.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

@ FM

oh yes, almost forgot...i guess i need to get my priorities in line oh my god, someone call the ACLU, my rights have been violated

@ michael

how many years were we in vietnam...? how many soldiers died in vietnam...? compare those numbers with those of OIF and get back with me. our campaign in Iraq is far from Vietnam. you and others wish to equate the two because you have nothing else.

we've lost 1400 soldiers/airmen/marines since march 2003. granted, even one is too many but in comparision, this is FAR from what we've lost in wars past. it's actually a record breaking count. take a look at the casualty rate of conflicts the US has been involved in the past 100 years. tell me again how bad we are doing.

sorry for the rant, you got me off topic michael. either discuss the topic at hand or dont dicuss at all. you too mouse. this topic is about the one of many GOOD things to come out of Operation Iraqi Freedom. if you can't stay on topic, if you don't have something good to add to the discussion, then stay out of it.

Me disagreeing with what you have to say does not mean I'm not addressing the topic - perhaps it just means you're not happy with a differing opinion.

Did I say your rights had been violated anywhere? No, not at all. I was saying that being concerned about domestic affairs does not preclude concerns about international affairs.

And my disagreement with why we went into Iraq by no means should suggest that I, or anyone else, *wants more people to die*. That is appalling.

 

[Sapper6]

how is what Ghostdog said so wrong...? you people claim our endeavors in Iraq are Vietnam reincarnated. thats BS. he just quoted the facts for you.

 

[Feisty Mouse]

how is what Ghostdog said so wrong...? you people claim our endeavors in Iraq are Vietnam reincarnated. thats BS. he just quoted the facts for you.

"you people"?

 

[Cryozombie]

MOD NOTE:

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Thank You.

-Technopunk
-MT MODERATOR

 

[Sapper6]

Me disagreeing with what you have to say does not mean I'm not addressing the topic - perhaps it just means you're not happy with a differing opinion.

Did I say your rights had been violated anywhere? No, not at all. I was saying that being concerned about domestic affairs does not preclude concerns about international affairs.

And my disagreement with why we went into Iraq by no means should suggest that I, or anyone else, *wants more people to die*. That is appalling.

i have no problems with differing opinions. i'd just prefer them to stay on topic. this thread is about an Iraqi election, not about your/others civil rights being violated. you changed the subject with your first post here.

my rights havent been violated, i was speaking for you there. like i said, it's obvious many here have the selfish attitude, "what about ME"...? you just echoed that fact for me. look around people, there's more happening in the world. you don't want to recognize an historical global event...? that's fine with me. turn a deaf ear. something good comes of OIF and you can't stand it, you won't even recognize it as being a step in the right direction. that is truly digusting.