Ten Iraqi parties demand vote be postponed
Ten parties signed a joint statement arguing that elections should be postponed by six months to allow an improvement of the security conditions.
Actually the count is up to fifteen groups who want to postpone the January 30th elections. The groups include the most prominant parties in Iraq and include those led by Prime Minister Ayad Allawai, a Shiite, and Adnan Pachachi, a Sunni. Both politicians have been strong supporters of Americans being present in Iraq as well as American policies – - their joining the forces that want to postpone could very well put the elections off until the end of July if not even later.
If that is what they want then they is what they should do. forcing an election is no better than forcing every citizent to vote for Saddam.
the Kurds remain a powerful wild card. Shiites don’t like ‘em, Sunnis don’t like anybody, and an election that glosses over transcendent tribal hsitory won’t be liked by anyone.
other than that, we’re in super shape.
my children will be visiting beautiful, downtown Baghdad wearing the olive drab so popular with the Army being greeted as liberators.
if it weren’t for logic & reason, i could see myself supporting this admininstration and the decisions it’s made.
There is no way to have a fair election in Iraq right now or in January. It has to be postponed, which could fuel the insurgency and tensions between Sunnis and Shias. Politically and militarily there is no choice. This is a product of the postponing of military action by the president until after the election, while rejecting other possible courses of action in the meantime.
Sadam and our democrats want to delay the election until never. Sadam and our democrats, like the above examples, are far more comfortable with an anti-american despot in charge.
Hey Wally,
How’s it the Democrats? I thought you neocons won?
Bush said elections in January, now maybe not.
That’s like he knew for a fact Saddam had stockpiles of WMD — bzzzzz!
Saddam has ties to al-Qaeda — bzzzzzz!
We will be seen as liberators (by bombing them?) — bzzzzzz!
Major Combat Operations have ended — bzzzzz!
Not to mention his fiscal malfunction, higher medicare costs, and lower job growth.
You guys are in charge, now. It’s gonna be tough blaming anyone else.
dg, how many times must I explain to you what the context of “major combat operations” are? Are you lame?
If Bush said it off the cuff during a casual press conference at the White House, I’d buy it.
But he put on a flight suit like he was fucking John Wayne, and landed on an aircraft carrier to tell us major combat operations have ended while a banner with the words “Mission Accomplished” over head.
The definition you gave is not the one Bush wanted us to have.
That was a deliberate facade — bullshit.
He lied.
Lame doesn’t quite fit the description I have for dg…a dullard is a better fit.
Bush dressed up in a flight suit like John Wayne, landed on an aircraft carrier to tell us major combat had ended while a banner over his head claimed “mission accomplishedâ€.
Your definition is not what Bush was trying to convey”and you know it.
Dont tell me al gore went to iraq did he? it sound like hot airhear al in running around in baghdad doing what he tried to do in 2000 gore is still upset over loosing in 2000 and is acting like a jerk:razz::cool:
You know guys, facing reality in Iraq is important. International, and national legitimacy should not be thrown together on the fly. Legitimacy does not come from arguments about values and intentions. Legitimacy comes from law -international and national. George Bush has violated both several times. It is a crime to send people to other countries to be tortured. It is a crime to forcibly evict UN weapons inspectors from a country in which the UN has a mandate to act (no matter how you love to type anti-UN tirades, they are all irrelevant). It is a crime to not allow the Red Cross, Red Crescent, and humanitarian convoys into a seiged city. It is a crime to bomb hospitals (the first day of the Fallujah assault saw the bombing of a hospital that killed nearly 40 people, mostly nurses and orderlies).
There is no point in having elections in Iraq. Too many people have already died at registration booths – all of the centres are currently shut down in Mosul – and too many will die on January 30th. I wonder if, in the face of thousands of deaths in one day, which is entirely possible, you can finally admit that Iraq is more than “hard work”, but a mess borne of a lack of international legimacy.
And just a further point – is anyone else disturbed by the fact that for the most part, calls to delay or go ahead with the election are on either sides of the Sunni/Shia divide?
what’s new?