The cost of Bush gloating over Iraqi elections ?

After seeing the first “freedom is on the march” thread regarding voter turnout in Iraq… I’m think what will Iraqis feel after daring bombs and menaces voting and then to go home and see Bush gloating over a “succesful” Iraqi election. It will certainly sour their taste for the election.

I can imagine the reaction of the Iraqis when US neo-cons claim this as a victory for Bush. Just like in the Olympics where Bush had to spoil it for Iraqis by claiming 2 more were in the game due to him... and the angry Iraqi soccer coach quickly reminding people that his country is under a military occupation and not "free".

I’d really like to see Bush shut up this time around… and avoid giving insurgents reasons to condemn the election. Especially if any future government acts a bit like a US puppet (unavoidable IMO).

Even conservatives must agree that Bush keeping his trap shut will help save lives and Iraq. Or not ?

Oh come on Rashak Mani, Bush has a mandate. That extends from Americans’ approval of the invasion, to his plans to create a class system, to bragging about what a visionary he is in bringing freedom to the rest of the world. Anyone know when the elections for Iran are being planned?

Yep… Iraqi elections will also give him a mandate naturally…

I think the administration is being fairly cautious in managing expectations about the Iraqi elections after they were burned a year ago for touting the start of the Allawi gov’t as something that was going to greatly improve the situation there.

Course I’m sure there will still be some gloating, especially if it goes well, but I think the admin has learned that being overly optomistic about the war as it continously gets worse is making them look incompetent

I would much prefer Ted Kennedy keeping his mouth shut.

But, we do have free speech in this country.

Look, the Iraqis are having their first free elections in more than 50 years. Women are lining up to vote. People are walking miles to polling places. Two years ago no one could have predicted this would have happened.

You may call it gloating. I would call it taking pride in pushing forward an unpopular war to liberate 25 million people.

And if the elections were going badly, which is seems they are not, wouldn’t you be the first to land on President Bush with both feet, for his failure to ensure free and safe elections?

Much as I despise most of the significant things he’s done and supported, I can’t imagine that Bush gloating will have much of an effect on anything. Those who have decided to fight will continue fighting, and those who have decided to give this a shot will keep trying to give it a shot. Among those undecided about the whole thing, I’m sure they’ve been exposed to much stronger stimuli for accepting or rejecting the new Iraq than words coming out of Bush’s talking head. Besides, I’m sure that most of them have learned to tune out gloating about random and often ungloat-worthy things from Saddam’s reign.

Gosh, that somehow depresses me.

I think you should wait to see what the Iraqi people think before running YOUR YAP.

For all you know they’ll salute and thank him for liberating their country.
Why do you insist on jumping to conclusions, when HE hasn’t even opened HIS YAP???

I can tell you with 100% certainty what will be said:

Some people will thank America.

Some people will condemn America.

Some people will thank Bush.

Some people will condemn Bush.

At least one person will condemn “Rashak Mani”.
You certainly appear to enjoy opening YOUR YAP.

Like you said yourself… what you think or I say matter little… its when Bush opens his yap that things migth go wrong… bring it on… etc…

OK, truce?

I already told you I’m no Bush fan.

But the conclusion jumping really gets on my nerves.

Can’t we wait a week and see what happens?

… and/or at least TRY to hope for the best and accentuate the positive?
I mean, today is SUPPOSED to be a good day, but all I’m getting is “Dubya Still Da Devil”.

And I never even mentioned him. I was applauding the Iraqis, who are at this moment, celebrating. Like it or not.

Personally I think the elections are going about as well as could have been expected, but I still feel honour bound to pick you up for this. Free and safe? At least 30 people have been killed, polling stations have been blown up and some candidates felt unable to give thier names for fear of the consequences. Lets keep some sense of perspective here!

Funny you should say “wait a week”… your the one with the “freedom on the march”… still truce is fine by me… my apologies for jumping at your other thread.

Your naive… and I’m a pessimist then ? It would seem so. Still I’m more worried of things being spoiled for Iraqis and for a silly reason of Bush’s pride.

I meant wait a week before condemning Dubya to gloating, thereby alienating the Iraqis.

I don’t doubt Bush will give a nice speech this afternoon… but I’m not sure “gloating” will be the correct term.

Maybe give it five years… :wink:

I sure hope Bush keeps it low tone… and with good reason. Not only in order to avoid looking silly if things go badly.

Still when you do see/hear his speech… do have in mind how it comes across to arabs and Iraqis.

And thanks for the apologies about the other thread… My apologies back to you.

I think we agree more than either of us realize.

I truly was just trying to accentuate the positive about free elections and better than expected voter turnout.

I’m very optimistic about the whole thing.

oh… as for the wait a week… I’d say wait a few months. Democracy isn’t the magic formula for stable states and happy people. We’ve discussed elsewhere that democracy is far from helping Latin America for example. Imagine Iraqi “democracy” then.

Its not about “freedom” or “doing the right thing” or “democracy”… its about how power will be split and shared in Iraq… and if weapons will be used or not.


Agreed. If you’ll re-read above, I said “Five years”. I meant a week before judging Dubya on his “gloating”.

Thanks… and I’ll try to see some good in it… :dubious:

Ivylass, women had the right to vote under Saddam Hussein’s regime. I bring this up because in your post it seems that you believe that they did not.

They also drove cars, owned property, went to school and college, and were able to divorce their husbands. In the big cities, they generally did not wear the hijab.

You may be confusing Saddam Hussein’s Iraq with the regime of our good buddies, Saudi Arabia.