For those folks who have been listening to George W. Bush on a regular basis, one of his ongoing justifications for a war with Iraq is his belief that a post-war Iraq will serve as an inspiration and example of democratic government for other Middle Eastern nations.
Well, as the Los Angeles Times pointed out Friday, that fantasy has no basis in reality:
Since this report completely contradicts Bush’s oft-repeated “inspirational democracy” fantasy, does this mean he doesn’t have a clue as to what his own State Department is telling him? Or does this mean he’s flat-out lying to the American public to try to sell a bad bill o’ goods? Neither option is very flattering, I’m afraid.
(And in a related vein, how come this news doesn’t seem to be getting any attention outside of the Times? Could it be that the “liberal media” is really a bunch of spineless cowards who are helping Bush sell his war, and bury contradictory information along the way?)
Democracy is the dictatorship of the majority and the servitude of the minority. For many in the US, democracy is to follow the government in the name of patriotism, and treason is to question the government. Democracy in Asia is but a word if it does not come with a full rice bowl. Democracy is a weapon to destabilize any nation that does not subscribe to the dictates of the US. Democracy is a cliche of the Western Press to humilate and demonize any nation. Democracy is a control of the mass by corruption and ballot rigging as in India, considered the largest democarcy in the world, yet having less per capita than a non-democratic nation like China.
Democracy is many things to many people. Only an American gas-bag and a charlatan will cry democracy when the US practises no democracy in her relations with other nations. There is a democracy for Americans, and no democracy for Iraqis, who need to be subservient to American invaders in the coming months. If Americans will decide the democracy for the Iraqis, where is the democratic right of Iraqis to determine for themselves.
Democracy does not work everywhere. Democracy cannot work when the people have no respect for the rule of law and are not educated to make informed decisions. Just think of the civil strife in Africa and the corruption in LAtin America. Compare India with China. A benevolent dictatorship is best.
I saw this 10 second news blurb yesterday. I was sitting on the fence about the war in iraq and in some ways think its a good idea(very limited good). but Bush ignoring the state dept and the CIA. makes me feel I should hop off this fence and stand up in front of the NO WAR sides camp.
Democracy in Iraq is a LONG shot, at best. I expext, though, that the post-Saddam gov’t will be an improvement, although it probably has a good chance of reverting to something similar w/o a long, strong US presence.
Jiang: Please do compare India with China. What’s your point? And if your benevolent dictatorship is so great why is the waiting list a mile long for people to emigrate from China to the US?
What, no posts from the resident Bushistas telling us how George and Dick know lots more than the State Department does, or how supressing the costs and risks of war is a great thing?
I see a scenario where we oust Saddam and Iraq holds free elections. And they elect Saddam’s current second-in-command who immediately starts in with the anti-US propaganda…
Well, that kind of makes the point: the US is not going to permit elections of any but approved candidates. And thats assuming that there is anything like an Iraq to speak of. The only thing holding Iraq together is Saddam, the only way we would be able to match his effort is by the same methods.
Lord only knows what we will be able to do if the Turks start whomping on the Kurds.
I know there arent really any piranha that can live in quicksand, but that would be the best analogy.
If not, what exactly do you mean by, “Compare India with China”? When I compare Indian democracy with Chinese communism, I fail to see any respect in which China compares favorably. Only two arguable exceptions come to mind:
China is not afflicted with political expressions of religious extremism. (Unless you regard Marxist-Leninist-Maoism as a religion.)
China has something close to a handle on its population problem.
In both cases, the cure is worse than the disease. China suppresses all religious dissent as viciously and brutally as it represses political dissent. China enforces its “one child” policy in a horrifyingly draconian fashion. Do you defend such policies as models to be followed by India, or Iraq, or any other country on Earth?
Won’t happen, Spooje. When we oust Sadaam, we oust his next in command, the one under him, the one under him…etc… Plus, you and Elucidator don’t seem to give the Iraqi people much credit. Iraq was held together before Sadaam, and I’m sure one way or another, it will hold together after Sadaam. His army will be so glad to see ours just so they can get a square meal in their bellies’.
In the ten plus years since the first Gulf War a fledgling democracy has thrived in northern Iraq (i.e. proto-Kurdistan). It exists strictly because we have provided them with military protection from Saddam (i.e. the northern no-fly zone) and economic aid. They have an elected prime minister, several political parties, a modern, western secondary education system, and a burgoning market economy.
Wait a sec. Just becase there is a difference of opinion and a “classified report” floating around that some in the CIA and state disagree that automatically makes the idea a fantasy if not an outright lie? You anti-Bush blow-hards are really reaching now. There is supposed to be oposing views in the government on issues like this. If everyone decides to toe the party line no matter what, that is ignoring all of the pro’s and con’s on the issue.
Now I am not saying they are wrong or right, but this bit of superficial evidence in no way proves anything but what the article says about the facts. There are dissenting opinions in the white house. And the theory of muzzling etc., is just that. Not proof of anything.
Not so, Fireperson. I give the Iraqi people a reasonable amount of credit. The distinction I see is that “democracy” means the people can vote however they like. They could vote Saddam back into power, however unlikely that may be. They could vote for the formation of an Islamic republic, however foolish that may be. But that’s democracy: if you can’t do something dumb, then you dont really have democracy.
There is no chance - zero, zip, nada - that the Americans will allow the Iraqis to vote until we are assured they won’t do something foolish. They may be offered a slate of candidates who have assured us that they agree with us on every major issue, and they may make thier choice.
There ya go again! The Iraqi people are oppressed, not stupid, they are not going to put themselves BACK in a hole. Plus, in America voting a teenager into the Whitehouse would be foolish, but we can’t do that—does that make us puppets?