Geez, could you get even more condescending? I’m sure the majority of adults in Iraq have average human intelligence, and can grasp the idea of “one man, one vote” after five minutes. That is, if they haven’t learned about it from watching CNN all these years.
I was wrong; you can get even more condescending.
Because that’s what they want, genius.
Translation: “I cannot refute your facts and your examples, so I will handwave it away and hope nobody notices.” :rolleyes:
As sailor mentioned before, the US government already said that an Islamic state was out of the question. This is as “democratic” as saying Christians are not allowed to run for Preident of the United States.
The servers at the Chicago Reader don’t have enough bandwidth or disk space to help get rid of your ignorance, xtisme.
What, you think the recent split over the Iraq war is enough to outweigh all the other economic and political benefits the United States gets from the rest of the world? And you accuse me of seeing things in black-and-white?
America and the free-thinking west want to install a democratic government in Iraq for the Iraqi people, to save them from themselves. Bless. But how can the American government instigate such a government when, according to people like Mike Moore and Mike Hersh, the existing government in America was not voted for?
*Al Gore won Florida in 2000. To gain an unfair advantage, Florida Republicans targeted 100,000s of innocent people - mainly Blacks - and robbed them of their voting rights. This was cynical, racist, immoral, and illegal. We can speculate about their motivations, but the results are clear: gross violations of the Voting Rights Act. That is why I am not “getting over it.” No one should. - Mike Hersh *
Sometimes elections get messed up, sometimes fraud happens. Doesn’t change the fact that we’ve got quite a bit more experience with fair elections than Iraq or just about any other nation for that matter, Britain excepted of course.
I think a lot of people are missing the main point of this thread which is that no matter how good what the USA is doing or trying to do if the perception is negative it is bound to fail. And the results of a study commissioned by the US government show the perception is very negative.
Water may be good for the horse and you can lead the horse to the water but you cannot make the horse drink. Banning all tobacco products in the USA would be very beneficial for the health of Americans but it is an impossible thing to do right now because the mentality and culture is against it. Trying to impose a foreign system in Iraq is going to fail if the local culture is against it. You cannot impose something, no matter how good, if the local culture is against it. And the point is that the local and wider local cultures are very much against America and anything American and that the USA is not doing enough to win them over.
What makes you think the local culture is against democracy? Heck, they’ve already elected local councils and the north has had democracy for ten years now.
I think all this “this or that people is not ready for democracy” is nonsense. Statements like that are made by people who do not want to “impose” democracy but a desired political system.
Well, that is exactly the position of the US occupation authorities: that the Iraqis are not quite ready to know they should vote for George Bush rather than Islamic cleric. I see you are in disagreemint with the position of the US government and in agreement with me when I say the elections in Iraq should be free.
Not only are you rude, rjung, but you are a hypocrite. Talk of hand waving:
From rjung
Translation: “You caught me trying to take a cheap shot at the US that was irrelevant to the thread or the point, so I’ll just insult you”. There have been ZERO, fool. Which was my point. You brought up an irrelevant point about US deposing democracies during the cold war, and made inferences that this was why the US wants to work with dictators instead of democracies today, with veiled hints that we still do this kind of thing. It was irrelevant, as I stated earlier, BECAUSE IT DOESN’T HAPPEN ANY MORE! I don’t mind using historical precidents to illustrate current events. I do it myself all the time. But when I asked you to back up your assertion, you simply insulted me. Good debating technique that…way to go rjung!
God only knows WTF you are saying here…I certainly have no idea:
From rjung
Huh? WTF are you talking about here? How does this relate to anything I said? Ever? How does this relate to reality for that matter? To someone not currently using heavy drugs, this is a total non-sequitor. I’ve read through it twice and I still have no idea what you are even saying and how it relates at all to the thread, not to mention where I ever made such a statement myself.
Could you translate WTF you are talking about and how it relates to the question I asked you (i.e. to provide a list of democratically elected governments deposed by the US directly from 1980 to the present)? Or does this relate to something you THOUGHT I was thinking about or would say??
As to THIS piece of shit:
From xtisme
From rjung
Why don’t you do what I said, tough guy, instead of making a gratutious insult?? Instead of hijacking THIS thread with this crap, MAKE A FUCKING NEW THREAD ABOUT IT LIKE I ASKED YOU TO??? l’ll be more than happy to ‘discuss’ it with you there if you feel you have all the facts. As I stated that twice in earlier posts (and that this wasn’t the place to discuss this), you saying this is just a cheap shot to score points. Is that the best you can do, insults and cheap shots??
Other than that, I see no reason to continue to discuss anything with someone as rude and stupid as you are. You didn’t actually address any of my points, which I layed out pretty throughly, just called me ‘condescending’ with out backing up your position at all. You took cheap shots you KNEW were cheap, and you basically insulted me simply because you disagreed with me. I didn’t make any insults at YOU, just because I disagree with your position that Democracy is some kind of intuitive and inate ability we are all born with. Looking back at all the failed democracies throughout history, I’d say that your assertion isn’t exactly accurate, “genius”.
From Sailor
Sorry to the OP…I guess we did tend to drift off topic. I would have to agree that the perception of the US IS fairly negative atm, but I’m not sure that this translates necessarily that we are ‘bound to fail’. I’d say the jury is still out on whether we fail or not, or on the degrees to which we fail or succeed.
From Sailor
Well, I’ve stated my position on this in this thread, and its pretty obvious I’m in the minority on this here. I maintain that the Iraqi people need to learn to crawl before they can walk, to walk before they can run, and that taking things slowly doesn’t hurt anyone…including the Iraqi people. I’ve been accused of being ‘condescending’, but looking back at all the failed democracies in history, I don’t see this as justified.
Democracies fail for all kinds of reasons, to be sure, but one of the big ones is when the democratic process is rushed into an area where there was no tradition of self rule before. Until a people are fully aware of all the rights, duties and responsibilities of the process, its very easy for some unscrupulous individual to manipulate the system to the detriment of all. Its happened many times in history, in fact. Thats why I say, IMO, there is no reason to rush this process, with the situation as it currently is, and every reason to take our time and do it right.
Making the assumption (which I think is reasonable, IF a democratic government takes root there at all) that in future elections the Iraqi people will be completely free to elect whoever they want, I fail to see why its so very important to jump right into this and do it NOW with totally wide open elections. As I’ve stated earlier, even a poor choice is better than what the Iraqi people have ever had before…which was no choice at all. From what I was reading earlier today, they are pushing to have a draft constitution by December and elections next year (sometime in 2004).
I think that, until we know more about exactly WHO is running in those elections, we are all getting riled up over nothing. AFAIK, there has been no list of any candidates yet. Maybe the people who will run for election WILL be popular with the Iraqi people. Who knows? I think I’ll drop from this thread (much to the relief of a certain rude cretin I’m sure) and wait and see who is running next year. Maybe you can re-address this question at that time, or resurrect this thread then Sailor.
Bullstuff. You couldn’t refute my earlier point (that the United States has a long history of overthrowing democratically-elected leaders if we dislike their politics), so you carried my argument to the extreme (“name all the governments we overthrew last year”). That, mon ami, is what is called a straw-man argument, where you misinterpret my point and try to “prove” something as a result. Unfortunately for you, I refuse to play your game, and I’m sure the other folks reading this thread will see through your tactics.
Unless you’ve got citations on whatever current covert operations the CIA is engaged in, I don’t think you can support your claim. Heck, some believe the CIA tried to overthrow Hugo Chavez in Venezuela last year, which indicates some sort of skulldugggery is still going on.
You claimed that – if my premise was correct – the US would overthrow the leaders of Germany and France for opposing the Iraq war. I pointed out that the US still has more to gain in political and economic benefits from those countries, even with the disagreement, which invalidated your (straw man) claim. And now you’re sputtering, and I’m left wondering if you’re being intentionally obtuse or merely clueless.
Because there’s nothing for me to debate. These events occurred for those reasons. Having me start a thread about them is as ludicrous as asking whether or not men have walked on the Moon.
Now, if you want to debate whether those events occurred (or, heaven forbid, whether they actually promoted democracy in the countries involved), then go open a thread yourself.
Ah, I see you’er a student of the Bill O’Reilley School of “Debate”. Gotcha.
What do you call it when you say that they cannot possibly want to reject the American Model and aren’t given the choice about it ? Its very patronising to assume what is best for them is the same that conveniently the USA represents. (Even if it is the best for them… )
Adaher also remember that the US has a great record of fair election and democracy historically INSIDE THE USA... abroad its been quite the opposite actually. US fomented right wing dictators all over the place... and not that many democracies. Land of the Free only inside it seems...
As for xtisme… I do agree that making a “fair” and open election now will result in some wierd stuff. Like I said myself… there are few real leaders in Iraq… this is not the moment for an open election where extremism will prevail. Still nothing points to a better situation 4 years onwards either… or that the US is concerned about building a future REAL democracy.
The problem again is what will happen during this first US croony government... if they major fuck up its the US fault... if they do a great job... why let a democratic govt. mess things up ? There will always be the temptation for the US and other groups to derail the democratic "build up".
Americans were allowed to vote for G.W., so should the Iraqi people be allowed to make their own mistakes:D
vis a vis the thread - does the american government really care so much about their image? there are some ugly boxers out there… how can the government really be made to suffer in a situation like this? the people at the top can say what they want - it’s my way way or the highway - and it’s the little people who are left brushing up the shrapnel. at the end of the day, imo, the american leadership couldn’t give two hoots what the rest of the world thinks. they’ve enough muscle and wealth not to. the people however, the general heaving masses, they’re the one’s who should be concerned. more 9/11’s, more big black spots on the calendar… and the answer to this roundabout of bullying the bullied and the bullies bullying back? admittedly clueless.
erm… and the answer to this merry-go-round of bullying… no, i lost the plot there somewhere. hell, i only get to play on the computer for a half hour during lunch!
**What do you call it when you say that they cannot possibly want to reject the American Model and aren’t given the choice about it ? Its very patronising to assume what is best for them is the same that conveniently the USA represents. (Even if it is the best for them… )
**
It won’t be the American model. We’ve done this at least four times before and in none of the cases did they choose an American system, unless you consider democracy to be inherently an American concept. Which would be strange considering it existed before the United States. Japan and Germany chose parliamentary systems, for example, that had their own local flavor. Iraq will do the same. They are writing their own constitution.
**Adaher also remember that the US has a great record of fair election and democracy historically INSIDE THE USA… abroad its been quite the opposite actually. US fomented right wing dictators all over the place… and not that many democracies. Land of the Free only inside it seems…
**
And left wing when it’s suited us. But, when we actually put troops on the ground, we settle for nothing less than democracy. There will be no dictators here unless we give up before we finish the job.
You love to put a positive spin adaher… they are writing their constitution ?! I wonder who is “guiding” their hand… you make it sound like its all free and spotless… but hey… you chose what you want to see.
It might be parliamentary… but I doubt it… too messy for Middle East… you would have governments changing every week. A Republic is more similar to what they had before…
I have yet to see Rummy and gang show good will pure and simple...
No, they are writing their own constitution. There are some things they will have to put in there. Equal rights for women and minorities. But otherwise they’ll decide their own system.
Parliamentary is pretty messy. I’m thinking a federal system might work better. A federal government like ours was prior to FDR. The different groups have vastly different views about how to run things and the only good solution will be for them to have 90%of the power in local and regional hands.
have yet to see Rummy and gang show good will pure and simple
McCarthur didn’t show all that much good will, neither did Bush I in Panama. Yet democracy was the result. Seems like a lot of people are looking for symbolic feel good gestures rather than hard results.
Panama was a democracy before CIA Noriega made it into his own private resort ? McArthur seemed to geniunly want to help the japanese… and is pretty well respected until today.
When was Panama a democracy before Noriega? I’m ignorant of Panamania history prior to the 70s, but Panama was a military dictatorship before Noriega came to power.
McCarthur showed about as much compassion as Bremer is showing now.
