Me too. But at this point, it’s just too little, too late. The ideal time for elections was back in 2003 - we should have started with municipal elections in the smaller cities and towns in May of that year, then the same for the medium-sized and large cities in June and July. Then move on towards national elections once local rule seemed to be taking hold.
However, it appears that back then Bremer & Co. were too busy privatizing state industries, removing limits on foreign investment, legislating a flat tax, and in general trying to turn Iraq into Libertaria, to allow actual Iraqis any power to muck up their agenda.
Now the price of that arrogance is being paid - partly by us, but mostly by them.
These are elections where nobody even knows who’s running, because declaring oneself as a candidate is seen as making a date with an assassin’s bullet - not exactly what you’d call free and open elections. And the main result is already chiseled in stone: the Sunnis want to be back in power, and we’ve allowed them enough time for them to believe that if they can’t retake the country by force, they can certainly use force to prevent the Shiites from exercising power. Every month since we deposed Saddam, the Sunni insurgency has gotten stronger, better armed, and better organized. We needed to hold this election at a much earlier point along this curve, because now the Sunnis don’t believe they have any need to abide by it.
Citing the Sydney Morning Herald, which I’m not gonna register for, Juan Cole says the following:
Your quote from RTFirefly doesn’t refer to *one * election. So, no clearly not an election lasting 9 months. You don’t have just one election and call it democracy you know, you have to keep on having them…
hhmmm this must be the thread where neo-cons will gloat over Iraqi elections and describe it as “freedom on the march” ?
I’d rather see this as Iraqis managing things and preferably without having to hear americans assume its a victory for Dubya. Because everytime Bush makes a speech about how things are doing well or elections won’t be stopped… it discourages even more Iraqis to beleive they are de facto voting for their future… and not to give the US political points.
Don’t count your chickens before they hatch. There are such parties and the majority of Iraqis want the US to leave but not “now.” They want a timetable.
The great thing about democracy is that the people actually get to choose their own fate! They can vote for the return of the Caliphate and won’t even have the checkmark pre-printed!
So first the vote isn’t free because the anti-American contingency (or at least the “Leave Now” contingency) isn’t represented but now the likelihood of a pro-American government is vanishingly small? The OP is celebrating Iraqi independence, not the success of the vote relative to US interests.
One cannot avoid the feeling that your intention here is to shit all over the whatever good may there may be in a sea of bad.
It should be a great day for Iraqis… but I think the political machinations will in the long run spoil it for them. Especially if the election excludes many of them… if it creates new battle lines in a civil war.
The voting itself though nice and “patriotic” whatever… is just a vote. It doesn’t change the fact that the US is financing the country and occupies it militarily. It doesn’t change the fact the the post invasion was extremely sloppy and the invasion a fiasco of WMD.
If some consider a white wash I'm happy for them... but a good thing doesn't save the overall bad. Especially if americans take it as vindication of Bushie Jrs myoptic foreing military policies.
As you wish. I don’t feel any need at all to pretend a non-partisan viewpoint, if any administration has earned my contempt, it is this one. They did it the old fashioned way, they lied to me. Repeatedly.
Which, of course, brings us to caveat one: we are relying on the veracity of persons with a proven agenda, and a proven record for promoting that agenda with little or no regard for facts. Several of you have shown yourselves willing, nay, eager to forgive such transgressions against truth, to the point of denying thier existence. You are welcome to your kool-aid, but, no, thank you. I don’t much care for the brown kool-aid.
And so we come to another tremendous acheivement. One wonders, is this as tremendous an achievement as the handover of autonomy and soveriegnty, so loudly trumpeted some months past? Are we to expect the same marvelous turn-around as we witnessed then?
And a question, posed in admitted ignorance: when we measure the turnout in terms of registered voters, are we not measuring the turnout amongst persons who had already decided to participate?
But, of course, I thank Eleusis for the invitation to rally in appreciation for the vision and wisdom of The Leader. In a strictly non-partisan manner, of course.
Who said an election couldn’t be held in Iraq today? Please point them out. I’ve certainly never claimed that.
What I doubt is the efficacy of this election. We’ve had too many alleged turning points already, after which things were supposed to get better:
When we deposed Saddam.
When Uday and Qusay were killed.
When Saddam was captured.
When ‘sovereignty’ was transferred.
When al-Sadr and his militia were forced out of Najaf.
When we ‘cleansed’ Fallujah of insurgents.
Why should
Today’s election
be any less of a fairy tale? We’re talking the triumph of hope over experience here.
But if you want to get all excited, go right ahead. All I can say is, for the last 21 months, the pessimists have been consistently right, and the optimists consistently wrong. And even a lot of us pessimists about the war were expecting a quick and successful drive to Baghdad.
I am no fan of Bush and his Iraq policy, but the CIA didn’t install Saddam Hussein in 1963, inasmuch as nobody installed Saddam Hussein in 1963. Hussein wasn’t even in charge of the country until the mid-70s.
