Quote:
Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Sep 24 2004, 03:55 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Sep 24 2004, 03:55 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Cowperson@Sep 23 2004, 11:52 PM
Are you saying the results are going to be rigged? 
It looks like even Mucky al-Sadr, if he lives that long, will be a candidate in Iraq. If that guy can be on the stump with his message then anything is up for grabs. I mentioned before a Gallup poll found a slim majority of Iraqi's actually admired al-Sadr but only five per cent would vote for him.
Believe it or not, Karzai actually DOES appear to have widespread popularity in Afghanistan.
The entire world will be watching these two elections with a keen eye. Its unlikely there would be any widespread, systemic fraud to empower a desired result. Chaotic fraud is another thing. Or voters scared away that there isn't enough to give it legitimacy.
You're the guy saying we should admire Muslim culture. I've asked you before why I would offer that respect . . . . but I added that the average Iraqi probably has the same concerns of family, home, security as the average voter in Des Moines.
In fact, if you applied some logical thought to it, nothing would be better for the USA than a more radical government emerging that asks them to leave.
Cowperson
|
How about pre-determined? You honestly think that a country that has made an illegal military invasion into another is going to run a straight up "democratic" election in that country? Give me a break. Now you're just trying to stir the pot. Bush is running his guy around Washington right now trying to drum up election support on what a great job he is doing in Iraq. You think for a minute that America is going to continue to support Bush and his BS Iraq campaign without a guarantee? Please, the President of Iraq is on display in Washington, no matter what the election has to say. These elections are not about "establishing" democracy. They are about putting a puppet government in place that will allow the Americans to build the systems that will "hopefully" lead to their form of democracy down the road. This "election" does not establish democracy. Once America vacates the country and a self directed election can take place, only then will democracy be established. Until then, its a puppet government no different that Noriega's was in Panama.
And don't talk to me about respecting Muslims and how this election has anything to do with that when America is occupying their country. Good lord, Muslims are getting no respect anywhere in the west. Ask Cat Stevens.
You know, you can argue that America would look good if a more radical government were elected, but I think they would look stupid. This is why you won't see anything in this election happen that you don't already see right now. The present guy will be President and the "house of representatives" will be elected. The cabinet will be appointed by Bush and Co. and the US agenda will move forward. Anything less than that will make America look stupid, weak and vulnerable from a leadership perspective. Bush will not allow that to happen. His administration lied to get into Iraq, so why no fudge an election? Fits their MO. Look for it to happen. [/b][/quote]
You honestly think that a country that has made an illegal military invasion into another is going to run a straight up "democratic" election in that country?
Yep.
They would look a lot stupider if they didn't and that's a fact Jack.
The key to internationalizing this conflict and getting the USA off the hot seat is a legitimately elected government. Fudging the results deliberately would be a little moronic since it would only sewer them further.
I would think that's obvious.
You know, you can argue that America would look good if a more radical government were elected, but I think they would look stupid.
Hold your breath because its a possibility.
Unlike your Muslim culture loving self, however, I wouldn't bet the farm it would happen. I trust the common man in Iraq as a pragmatic person a lot more than yourself, which seems a little odd given your declared big heart and me being a culturally unrefined sourpuss and all that.
But that's the risk you take.
In fact, if you'd actually thought about it before you started typing, you would have realized this has ALWAYS been the risk from even before the invasion.
There was ALWAYS an election looming as an aftermath of this conflict. What's the surprise?
So here we are. Put it out there for a vote and see what happens.
Whatsa matta? You afraid? It either works or it doesn't.
The present guy will be President and the "house of representatives" will be elected. The cabinet will be appointed by Bush and Co. and the US agenda will move forward. Anything less than that will make America look stupid, weak and vulnerable from a leadership perspective. Bush will not allow that to happen. His administration lied to get into Iraq, so why no fudge an election? Fits their MO. Look for it to happen.
Actually, the only thing certain is that if Allawi IS actually elected President . . . . you're going to call it a conspiracy whether its deserved or not.
Good lord, Muslims are getting no respect anywhere in the west. Ask Cat Stevens.
What would Yusif Islam, his real name, have to do with an election in Iraq? Another conspiracy?
Isn't Farley Mowat banned from the USA as well? Is he a Muslim? Are they banning guys who used to shoot gophers? Or was it because he said he used to shoot at US Air Force jets?
Cowperson