Thinking about Iraqi democracy

by jcjcjc, Thu Dec 15, 2005 at 11:12:36 AM EST

I'm just curious if I'm the only person here who's a bit ambivalent about the lack of interest in the leftie blog world for looking at the voting in Iraq.

Sure, it's jamming square peg into a round hole.  Democracy is never neat, and adding a three-way ethnic civil war into the mix doesn't make it easier.  Coat that with a thick layer of historic anger in a country that can be secular modernist and Islamic fundamentalist at the same time, and you do sometimes have to wonder if Iraqi democracy can or will ever yeild anything of value.

On the other hand, it is also intriguing to see voting taking place in Damascus http://news.ft.com/cms/s/3da9c7c6-6cc9-11da-90c2-0000779e2340.html , probably the last place you'd ever think anyone would ever get to vote on anything.

Sure, it has no direct bearing on the Syrian government, but one has to assume that if nothing else human curiosity would compel some Syrians to wonder what it is their Iraqi brethren are doing, and why it seems so much sloppier than when they get to "vote" in their nation.

And, for all it's faults, the same influence stretches into Iran and Saudi Arabia, where expatriate Iraqis are voting today, also.

I'm not a big believer that democratizing Iraq was a  goal worthy of the life of even one Paris Island grunt.  But, since we're ass-deep in Iraq anyhow, it must be said that democracy clicks with the Arabs somehow.

Sure, it's going to be an ass-backward democracy.  Possibly even a theocratic democracy.  But, it seems to make total sense to the Iraqis to pursue that angle.

And of course, you gotta get a kick out of the government over there encourageing insurgents to vote (http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17568130%255E663,00.html).  Generally, in most countries, rebellion is the fastest way to lose voting rights.  Particularly active and continuing rebellion.

And, in the end, the Iraqi government is the only thing that can get our boys home before January 2009.  If it means letting a fundamentalist rump state muddle through a protracted civil war, maybe that's for the best.  At the end of the day, it's their country, their problems.

But, what amazes me most is that a lot of Dems don't really take an interest at all in the Iraq vote.

I know it's tough for the anti-war crowd (of which I'm a charter memeber) to point out successes in Iraq.  But, at this stage, anything that gets our troops home sooner is good.  And the Iraq vote has the potential to do that faster than anything on the table now.

And, obviously, pro-war Dems just don't post a hell of a lot in the leftie blogosphere.

But, at the end of the day, there is the vague potential that an ideal scenario could play out: a secular (or at least a respectful Islamic) government could emerge, send our troops home, and put itself to the task of righting an Arab nation (which, even if failed, would still be an admirable effort compared to the laughable history of "reform" in the Arab world).

Iraq can't be all bad.  Unless of course you're an armed American who'd rather be home for Christmas.

Maybe the Iraq vote can get them home before Christmas 2006.

Just want you guys to think about it.

Poll
I feel the Iraq vote is
One more good step
Good idea, but doomed
Just not much at all
Being rigged by the US
Being rigged by Iran, Syria, the US, and everyone else!
Not rigged, but very evil nonetheless

Votes: 12
Results : Vote Link : Polls


Tags: (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 9 Comments :: Post a Comment


Voter turnout in Iraq last night (3.00 / 1)

is proof that American Voters are a bunch of Lazy Whiny SOBS.

In the United States- Their are no suicide bombers (People are not on the street killing each other on Election Day. Yet we see Voters who were given the right to vote or participate in the Democratic Process complain about Diebold machines,voter fraud,long lines. Voter turnout in the US is about 50%.
In Iraq- Voters lived under a totalitarian regime under Saddam for the more than 30 years. Suicide Bombing in Iraq on December 15 elections were anticipated and yet voter turnout in Iraq was very high- They had to extend the voting time in Iraq.

by CMBurns on Thu Dec 15, 2005 at 12:58:44 PM EST

Re: Voter turnout in Iraq last night (none / 0)

Yeah, people are lazy, whiny SOBs for complaining about voter fraud.  Who cares if your vote didn't count, and the guy who should have lost the election is now running the country into the ground!  At least you got to pretend to vote, you whiny SOB!
"It's not enough to say you'll be ready from Day One - you have to be right from Day One."
by schroeder on Thu Dec 15, 2005 at 01:53:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

For the record (none / 0)

I voted for Kerry in 2004
I voted for Gore in 2000

secondly Gore and Kerry lost because they were lousy candidates who ran lousy campaigns.

Democrats need to nominate candidates that can appeal to more than 60% of the electorate especially in swing states like Florida,Pennsylvania,Ohio and Michigan.

I am ashamed to say that LeftWing Loonies like yourself always bitch and complain when you loose elections by a narrow margin.

by CMBurns on Thu Dec 15, 2005 at 02:22:12 PM EST

What a fuckwad! (none / 0)

I'm a Left Wing Loonie?

Shit, ask around.  I'm one of the Bob Casey Dems.

So, one can only assume you're just an ass.

by jcjcjc on Fri Dec 16, 2005 at 10:39:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What a fuckwad! (none / 0)

Triple JC-the left wing looney fuckwad(if that is your name )
Are you supporting Casey because you like Casey or Are you supporting Casey because you hate Rick Santorum and you want him unseated.

Reasonable Democrats- LeftWing and Centrist Democrats are supporting Casey because they want to defeat Santorum. and see the Democrats get a majority in the US Senate.

Let me ask you another question Triple JC,you left wing looney fuckwad. Who are supporting for the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination?

by CMBurns on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 09:18:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Spoken like a true fuckwad (none / 0)

Take a good look through my comments genius.

Spend some time finding out shit about people before you sit there and lecture me on being a pragmatic leftie.

I'm not.  Not by a mile.

There's a little tab in my user profile.  Click on it, and search for all the Casey-related comments from me.

Otherwise, please stop posting comments to anyone on here, because you have no right to belittle people without at least using the technology at your fingertips to figure out where they stand.

by jcjcjc on Mon Dec 19, 2005 at 07:40:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Second point (none / 0)

To address your points -- at the incredibly vague outside risk you aren't a troll -- here's my rundown.

My horse in 2008 is Mark Warner.

I would have voted for McCain in 2000, wouldn't do it in 2008 to save my life.

I was one of the people supporting Casey Jr when everyone around here had a hard-on for running a leftie netroots candidate to be fabricated later (no offense, but Chuck P wasn't going to get it done, gang).

I supported Harry Reid when everyone wanted his head for not being leftie enough.

I am anti-abortion.

I am anti-tax*.
* - but, pro-balanced budget even if that means raising taxes to do it.

I am very pro-gun and VERY pro-armed citizenry.  I  believe every American should be required to know how to use a firearm.

I am pro-defense.  I think shit like DARPA is just the coolest thing since Wheaties.*
* - but, pro-defense means doing things that really defend America, not stealing oil from the nearest Arab dictator we could esily blame for a war, and then grinding our army into powder to ensure that fuckwads at Halliburton get to pillage money from the US and Iraq.

Why the hell am I a Democrat?

  1. The GOP is corrupt beyond comprehension.  Look at the Indian Gaming Scandal with Abramoff, DeLay, et al.

  2. Labor.  Republicans really don't deserve the vote of a single working white man until they do more to actually earn it.

  3. Fair play.  At the end of the day, the GOP is an opponent of a level playing field where everyone has a chance to get ahead if they work hard.

  4. Healthcare.

  5. Education.  Because the GOP wishes to turn American schools into retard factories that turn out dumbed down voters and compliant workers.

  6. Social programs.  Because a great nation requires a great people supported by a great government to do great things.

  7. Infrastructure.  The GOP seems to think magic keeps interstate bridges from collapsing.

  8. Realism.  Because the GOP is so immature they think you can conduct two wars AND cut taxes at the same time.  Seriously guys, grow up.

by jcjcjc on Mon Dec 19, 2005 at 07:53:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

jcjcjc- a flip flopper (none / 0)


"I am anti-tax*.
* - but, pro-balanced budget even if that means raising taxes to do it."

You say you are anti-tax- but are willing to raise taxes to balance the budget. Are you willing to cut government spending on pork projects or are you a tax and spend liberal.
No one is pro-taxes

by CMBurns on Mon Dec 19, 2005 at 01:45:11 PM EST

You really are a douche (none / 0)

Good day, sir.
by jcjcjc on Tue Dec 20, 2005 at 01:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: