FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSDIRECTORY
You are invited to Log in or Register a Frihost Account!

Iraq's next elections: A promising event.

 


ocalhoun
source: http://ebird.osd.mil/ebfiles/e20090107648553.html
I apologize for the source being on a military-only network. If you are in the US military, you can see the source yourself, but otherwise you can't get access.



Quote:
The nation’s provincial elections on Jan. 31 are the first in which the government has deemed it safe enough for the names, instead of simply the political affiliations, of officeseekers to appear on the ballot.


Quote:
It is also the first time that large numbers of candidates like Mr. Kareem have decided for themselves that Iraq is sufficiently safe to campaign publicly and put their oversize pictures on posters and banners around the city. It sometimes seems that every square inch of blast wall in Baghdad is covered with them.

^Shows that real progress is being made in making Iraq safer and more free.
Quote:
The provincial election also takes place against the backdrop of a wave of departing foreign troops, most significantly from Britain and the United States. The United States has agreed to pull its combat troops, now numbering about 145,000, from cities by June 30, and to withdraw entirely from Iraq by the end of 2011.


What's this? A sensible plan for withdrawal? With Bush still in office? Really, it is.
And pulling out of the cities first, while remaining close by in case Iraqi police are overwhelmed is an excellent plan.

Quote:
While Mr. Maliki is not running, his Dawa Party has organized a group of political organizations into a coalition called State of Law, which is playing down Dawa’s Shiite roots and emphasizing improved security, nationalism and economic development.

Very, very nice for a change.


Quote:
“I won’t participate in the election, because those whom we elected last time failed us,” said Iman Karkaz, a 50-year-old academic from the war-torn city of Falluja. “Most of the parties used religion and Islam as a cover and then created sectarianism and riot in our society.”

^And they're already experiencing some of the problems of an established democracy! Bad news, but it may be a good sign.


Quote:
“I won’t elect any of the religious lists,” he said. “The lists that think art is forbidden, that sports are forbidden and that freedom of expression is forbidden won’t be elected by me because it ties me up with the chains I’ve always been with, and I want to be free now from those chains.”


We may have gone in on false pretenses, but that goes a long way towards justifying the war in my opinion.



(On a side note, Somehow I don't think that mostly good news like this will get much coverage in the major news networks, especially since in contradicts some liberal views of Iraq.)
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
(On a side note, Somehow I don't think that mostly good news like this will get much coverage in the major news networks, especially since in contradicts some liberal views of Iraq.)


Agreed! But I did pick up on some of this in the more formal magazines. Iraqis are of course from a total different culture, and what you see, is not always what you get. You may think you are on your way to peaceful elections, etc. and then something to the contrary happens out of the blue. Anyway, we need good news like this, and am keeping my fingers crossed. Will be sort of miraculous and also good beginnings for Obama Smile
ocalhoun
^It's already too late for the elections to be completely peaceful. It is normal for candidates to have their own militias, and two candidates have already been assassinated. It is good progress though.
joomla
to me it looks like having elections in a prison.
as long as they have the country split up in red and green zones with walls around them and people don't have the freedom to move, how can they have the freedom to vote?
How can it be possible to have fair elections if they have turned the whole country into a huge prison.
Candidates that don't suite the right profile are dying before they even have 1 vote.

Elections are good. If the outcome isn't already set.
ocalhoun
joomla wrote:
to me it looks like having elections in a prison.
as long as they have the country split up in red and green zones with walls around them and people don't have the freedom to move, how can they have the freedom to vote?
How can it be possible to have fair elections if they have turned the whole country into a huge prison.
Candidates that don't suite the right profile are dying before they even have 1 vote.

Elections are good. If the outcome isn't already set.


The place is not a prison!
The red and green zones and the walls are there to provide security, which is the one thing the country needs the most.

As for candidates not getting the chance at getting elected because of assassinations, it actually isn't very bad right now. Only two candidates have been assassinated, out of the thousands running for office. Given how violent the country has been lately, this is a spectacular success!

Violence is down two thirds now, and despite all the people saying that victory in Iraq was impossible, it is gradually happening.
TomGrey
Thanks for posting this thread.

You're right that the anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-capitalism press is very very quiet about this event.

I didn't know about the two assassinations. Very sad. But it's not at all clear from this point that "it's gonna get worse before it gets better". It looks like the worst was 2006, after the temple was bombed, and it's mostly going to get better from here on.

Thank God. for Bush. and America. and those who supported Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Far more freedom than any other Arab Muslim country now has, tho Lebanese enjoyed quite a bit not so long ago.

A successful, secular but religion-respecting Iraq might provide some hope for the Palestinian-Israeli problems, as well.
handfleisch
joomla wrote:
to me it looks like having elections in a prison.
as long as they have the country split up in red and green zones with walls around them and people don't have the freedom to move, how can they have the freedom to vote?
How can it be possible to have fair elections if they have turned the whole country into a huge prison.
Candidates that don't suite the right profile are dying before they even have 1 vote.

Elections are good. If the outcome isn't already set.

You're right, of course, and yours is the general world view of the unprovoked attack and occupation of Iraq and now the "democracy". But telling that to the minority of true believers is like arguing Communism with Stalinists. With these conditions
Quote:

Iraq's Shocking Human Toll: About 1 Million Killed, 4.5 Million Displaced, 1-2 Million Widows, 5 Million Orphans

we're supposed to celebrate?

http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/123818/iraq%27s_shocking_human_toll%3A_about_1_million_killed%2C_4.5_million_displaced%2C_1-2_million_widows%2C_5_million_orphans/
deanhills
handfleisch wrote:
Iraq's Shocking Human Toll: About 1 Million Killed, 4.5 Million Displaced, 1-2 Million Widows, 5 Million Orphans
we're supposed to celebrate?


Do the above statistics include the US/UK soldiers that died? If not, there is a list at the URL below:
http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx

I also researched for statistics regarding Iraqi deaths, and they seem to be much less than indicated by you. The lesser numbers of course do not detract from how horrible it is, one of the worst acts of aggression on the part of the US Government, however, perhaps you need to double-check your stats sources:
Iraqi Civilian Deaths 2003-2005 http://www.iraqbodycount.org/analysis/reference/press-releases/12/
Iraqi Civilian Deaths Overview and Totals from 2003 to Date http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
Iraqi Military Deathshttp://icasualties.org/Iraq/IraqiDeaths.aspx
ocalhoun
handfleisch wrote:

we're supposed to celebrate?


Yes, because it is ending!
After all the talk about how the war in Iraq was impossible to win, victory is at hand, and now seems inevitable.

Invading Iraq was a mistake, but we persevered through the hardships that mistake caused in order to bring it to the best outcome possible. Though the transition was hard and in hindsight it wasn't needed, we'll leave Iraq better than we found it.
jmlworld
ocalhoun wrote:
source: http://ebird.osd.mil/ebfiles/e20090107648553.html
I apologize for the source being on a military-only network. If you are in the US military, you can see the source yourself, but otherwise you can't get access.

Quote:
The nation’s provincial elections on Jan. 31 are the first in which the government has deemed it safe enough for the names, instead of simply the political affiliations, of officeseekers to appear on the ballot.


We may have gone in on false pretenses, but that goes a long way towards justifying the war in my opinion.

(On a side note, Somehow I don't think that mostly good news like this will get much coverage in the major news networks, especially since in contradicts some liberal views of Iraq.)


I'm not really happy to be involved in this, but I have to add my fair point.

You are quoting biased military news published behind the reachable networks to cover all the tragedy George W. Bush committed in Iraq.

This news is faraway from that of the independent news agencies.

Iraq became the breed ground of all the well known terrorists who only know how to disturb every effort towards the peace process.
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
handfleisch wrote:

we're supposed to celebrate?


Yes, because it is ending!
After all the talk about how the war in Iraq was impossible to win, victory is at hand, and now seems inevitable.

Invading Iraq was a mistake, but we persevered through the hardships that mistake caused in order to bring it to the best outcome possible. Though the transition was hard and in hindsight it wasn't needed, we'll leave Iraq better than we found it.


Well said Ocalhoun. New beginnings are in sight. I doubt the transition will be complete for a long time to come, as families are mourning loved ones. Think it will take a long time to heal. But part of the healing would be to create new hope for an Iraq future, and I think that is happening right now.
ocalhoun
jmlworld wrote:
biased military news published behind the reachable networks to cover all the tragedy George W. Bush committed in Iraq.

This news is faraway from that of the independent news agencies.
.


Actually not, this is a military report, made word for word from a combination of articles taken from the same 'independent' news agencies you mention. It is meant to give commanders a good sense of what the media is saying about what they are doing.

Why so much trust in the media anyway?
Xanatos
jmlworld wrote:
You are quoting biased military news published behind the reachable networks to cover all the tragedy George W. Bush committed in Iraq.

This news is faraway from that of the independent news agencies.


You are quoting biased overly-liberal news published with the sole purpose of furthering its own agenda.

This news is far away from that of Independent and unbiased news agencies.
deanhills
Xanatos wrote:
This news is far away from that of Independent and unbiased news agencies.


You MUST be joking Xanatos. Which news agency from the States is unbiased in your opinion? They are all the same, trying to get the loudest and most sensational headlines as those headlines sell, getting the news out as soon as possible, even if it means no chance for proper verification of the facts. "Independent" and "unbiased"!!!!! I would like to see that.
Xanatos
deanhills wrote:
Xanatos wrote:
This news is far away from that of Independent and unbiased news agencies.


You MUST be joking Xanatos. Which news agency from the States is unbiased in your opinion? They are all the same, trying to get the loudest and most sensational headlines as those headlines sell, getting the news out as soon as possible, even if it means no chance for proper verification of the facts. "Independent" and "unbiased"!!!!! I would like to see that.


I Never said that unbiased news agencies existed. I was just mocking his statement.
jmlworld
Xanatos wrote:
jmlworld wrote:
You are quoting biased military news published behind the reachable networks to cover all the tragedy George W. Bush committed in Iraq.

This news is faraway from that of the independent news agencies.


You are quoting biased overly-liberal news published with the sole purpose of furthering its own agenda.


Well, I was quoting British and Arab news agencies. I think they are almost unbiased.

What I'm talking about is something like Telegraph, Independent, Al Jazeera, Ash-Sharqal Awsat, etc...

Xanatos wrote:
This news is far away from that of Independent and unbiased news agencies


Do you mean CNN and Fox?
Xanatos
jmlworld wrote:

Do you mean CNN and Fox?


Fox? Unbiased? You have got to be joking.
Related topics

Liberal bias: Iraq's Unreported Historical Event
The Middle East Conflict
Iran shelling Kurdish villiages in Iraq again
Backtracking? ...Of Course Not!
Stop the topics!

Bush really rocks
Not Voting is Reasonable for People Who Want Freedom
New Prime Minister in Canada
US Government Take Google To Court
What is your greatest FEAR ?

Sleep less to get more out of life?
Democratic Candidates.
Girls 'just felt right' murdering friend
Pakistan goes to polls
Italy convicts 23 Americans in Bush Rendition Case
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Discuss World News

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2007 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.