[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Nov 25 2004, 04:44 AM
In your original post, it looked like you were inferring "heavily armed U.S. and pro-U.S. mercenaries" were going to gun down "large numbers of people who are against the American supported candidates."

Did I miss what you were saying in that? It didn't look like it.

You totally missed what I was saying. I'm not sure how, because I never meant to imply that voters would be shot at. However, you can bet that some Iraqis do fear that.

In fact, that's not an issue given plenty of anti-occupation parties - including Mucky al-Sadr, are forming alliances and clamouring now to get to the ballot boxes. They'll get their vote out and they appear to believe in the process and that it will be fair.

Actually, it is still an issue because the al-Sadr crowd doesn't represent the people who are under curfew and therefore have no freedom to be as politically active as Sadr and others. That is an infringement on democracy any way you look at it. Al-Sadr can do whatever, and it doesn't change what is happening elsewhere.

There are anti-American parties among both #####es and Sunni. You're forgetting that. There's also no logical reason to rig this ballot, particularly since it is only electing representatives to guide the country to the follow-up in December 2005.

I'm not talking about "rigging" the election. I'm talking about fear infringing on democracy.

No . . . . the real issue here is what you identified in your second post: Will the climate be safe enough to stage these elections or is a delay warranted?

That was one of my intended points in my first post too, but I think the problem goes deeper. It's in the attitudes of the people. They haven't stopped fighting or wanting to kill each other yet. Sunnis, Shi'ites, and Kurds all still hate each other even if they are smiling for cameras for the election. The fact a military force needs to be deployed to stop them from killing each other proves that democracy is only a pipe dream for this generation of Iraqis.

It's a catch 22. You can't have democracy when an un-neutral military is conducting the "security", but in Iraq, there can't be an election without armed security. It's a real problem. I have no objection simply calling it an "election" on January 30th, but it won't be democracy until everyone can participate equally without fear. That means when no military "security" is necessary, and all citizens enjoy the same freedoms (ie. no curfews, and freedom of assembly). This will probably never happen in our life time, but I digress..