Hypothetical Iraq election outcome
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
It all depends on the election, me think that there will be so much chaos around january 30th that either the US call of the election at the last minute, or they will not accept the results. As it looks now, there's no chance in hell that a valid election can happen in Irak in a month ... so there will be a permanent US nominated interim goverment with no real power, no real police, and civil servants and "insurgents" will continue to strike like they do right now; and the US soldiers will be stuck in the middle of it all.
Maximilien Lincourt Your Head A Splode - Strong Bad
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
We do what we always do: declare success and move on to the next misadventure.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
Iraqi shiites are the majority there so it makes perfect sense that the goverment partially reflects this. But they do have their own, Iraqi identity and seeing them as some sort of long hand of Iran is plain wrong. Of course you accept such result. There's nothing wrong with it. As long as you in some way guarantee that there will be another election (I think this goverment's major task is to create a constitution) and that the constitution is respected the rest will take care of itself. In case you haven't noticed - in Iran they had to forcefully remove reformers from elections - that's what democracy eventually does to the islamic state. They could not do this if they had constitution such as Iraq has. Tomaž
-
Iraqi shiites are the majority there so it makes perfect sense that the goverment partially reflects this. But they do have their own, Iraqi identity and seeing them as some sort of long hand of Iran is plain wrong. Of course you accept such result. There's nothing wrong with it. As long as you in some way guarantee that there will be another election (I think this goverment's major task is to create a constitution) and that the constitution is respected the rest will take care of itself. In case you haven't noticed - in Iran they had to forcefully remove reformers from elections - that's what democracy eventually does to the islamic state. They could not do this if they had constitution such as Iraq has. Tomaž
They could not do this if they had constitution such as Iraq has. Yeah, just like Hitler could not seize power in the 1930s because Germany had a constitution.
-
They could not do this if they had constitution such as Iraq has. Yeah, just like Hitler could not seize power in the 1930s because Germany had a constitution.
That might be a problem for Hitler if he had one strongly pro American nation and one nation determined never to be ruled by the Shiites in the same state. Shiites might just as well win the election but they can't themselves change the constitution neither they can pas laws that are against the constitution (having constitutional court). Hitler also had 2.5 million strong SA army and supporters throughout Germany. Tomaž
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
Greg Daye wrote: Do we accept the decision? Yes. "The Yahoos refused to be tamed." from 'The Right Nation'
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/12/21/wirq21.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/12/21/ixworld.html[^] "Privately, officials concede that Iraq is likely to take "an Iranian turn" after the election, a notion unimaginable before the invasion... Now many grudgingly accept that the elections are likely to usher in an Islamic state." Please bear with me on a hypothetical situation here... Now, what happens if an Iranian-like American-unfriendly government is elected by the people of Iraq? Do we accept the decision? Do we try to impose some government on the people, perhaps citing undue Iranian influence?
Will the Kurd and Sunni parts of the population accept such a government? I rather imagine they will prefer to fight a civil war on their own instead. Some comments about entropy anyone?
Fold With Us! That's what military intelligence does: fail. They should just drop the facade and call MI the "Department of 'Whoops!'" - Gary Brecher, aka The War Nerd
-
Chris Losinger wrote: it's probably easier to ensure the outcome you want than it is to work around one you don't want. Exactly. See an election is really just a poll. If you ask the right type of questions, exclude the right group(s) and weight the answers in a certain way you can be assured of recieving the pre-concieved answer. ;P ;P ;P ;P Sorry, I couldn't help myself. :-O "Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it." Philip K. Dick
-
Chris Losinger wrote: it's probably easier to ensure the outcome you want than it is to work around one you don't want. Exactly. See an election is really just a poll. If you ask the right type of questions, exclude the right group(s) and weight the answers in a certain way you can be assured of recieving the pre-concieved answer. ;P ;P ;P ;P Sorry, I couldn't help myself. :-O "Reality is what refuses to go away when I stop believing in it." Philip K. Dick
-