Iran next?

[Trumpetmaster]

Remember - Bush said this was a "Crusade". Poor choice of words.

[haggis]

Iraqi Voter Turnout

” Iraqi independent election commission has said the turnout exceeded expectations and could be between 60 and 75 percent of registered voters.”


I had a conversation with myself this morning, something the mean, (partially) redheaded Yankee nurse claims I do frequently, including mumbling in my oatmeal. I asked myself if faced with the real threat of being bombed or killed would I have voted?

Personally, I’d like to believe that I would have but I (also probably) would have tried to talk my wife and my sons out of voting out of a sense of fear and (overly?) protectiveness towards my family.

Yesterday's voter turnout in Iraq, somewhere between 60 and 75% depending on the source, caused me to wonder about voter turnout in other countries. Here's a sampling from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance

· France - 2002 Parliamentary Election, 60.32%.
· Russian Federation - 1999 Parliamentary Election, 60.49%.
· Argentina - 2001 Parliamentary Election, 75.21%.
· Australia - 2001 Parliamentary Election, 94.85%.
· Brazil - 1998 Parliamentary Election, 78.51%.
· Canada - 2000 Parliamentary Election, 61.18%.
· Czech Republic - 2002 Parliamentary Election, 57.95%.
· Germany - 2002 Parliamentary Election, 79.08%.
· United Kingdom - 2001 Parliamentary Election, 59.38%.
· Poland - 2001 Presidential Election, 61.12%.
· India - 1999 Parliamentary Election, 59.73%.
· Israel - 2003 Parliamentary Election, 67.81%.
· Japan - 2000 Parliamentary Election, 60.62%.
· Italy - 2001 Parliamentary Election, 81.44%.
· United States - 2004 Presidential Election, 60.7%


If you’re curious about how other Middle Eastern countries stack-up go to the following links from the NationMaster website:

Government type

Civil and political liberties

Democratic institutions rating

I applaud the people of Iraq and I think the brave turnout indicated the level of intensity the population of Iraq have for self-determination; good for them.

I hope the naysayers and those who felt that the Iraqi couldn't handle democracy are taking note.

Even the Europeans viewed the election as a triumph and otherwise critical heads of states made several favorable remarks about the elections and the turnout.

The United States did a good thing and I'm glad.

I’m also glad I’m on the same side as the Iraqi voters.

[OperaTenor]

Hi Haggis,

Thank you for all that research.

"I hope the naysayers and those who felt that the Iraqi couldn't handle democracy are taking note."

Is that a blanket reference? I don't recall anyone here on the BBB espousing the belief that Iraq couldn't handle democracy. I started a thread, "Iraqi Democracy", and the general sentiment seems to approval and support for the process.

In the same NPR program I referred to in that thread, a commentator compared the percentage of Iraqis who voted to the percentage of Americans who voted in this last election. He highlighted the significance of the dangers Iraqis faced to acheive the same numbers we did here in our safe, comfortable voting environment. I took that as a huge compliment to the Iraqi people.

In asking myself the same question(not out loud, however), I believe I would, and I would do everything I could to cajole my neighbors to get out and vote while I was at it. But then, I'm the same guy who'd try to run over insurgents when I saw them trying to execute somebody.

[piqaboo]

I'd have left and moved OI years before, and voted abroad. I am an unrepentant coward. I'm also slow to size up a situation and respond. I'd be signing the ransom note before I realized I'd been kidnapped.

I think a number of us have expressed concerns (I know I did) that a country made up of tribes, with tribal leaders, might have a tough go of it as a united democracy/republic. I think I even suggested a situation might develop similar to the Balkans. I have always hoped to be proven wrong. And things are looking good for that hope. Having no hat to eat, I'll have to eat my words. I hope I get to.
(Helen Grace, chocolate letters. Should take years!)

[shostakovich]

From Haggis: "I hope the naysayers and those who felt that the Iraqi couldn't handle democracy are taking note."

Gee, I may have suggested something along those lines.

In order to retain my status as card-carrying cynic, I have to take a guarded view of the election. There's no question the voters deserve applause for turning out. Was the motivation desire for democracy or getting rid of the Americans? Actually, it hardly matters, because possible democracy DEPENDS on getting foreign forces out. The administration has mentioned plans for 120,000 troops in Iraq for a minimum of 2 years. That's probably realistic. So, while the vote was a milestone in Iraq, they can be seen as starting on their own 20-yard line (football metaphor courtesy of superbowl on the mind), with a long way to the goal. There will be many ups and downs between now and whenever "then" is. So I'm going to wish Iraq much luck, but will hold off for now on the word "democracy".

And, now, to secure my position as C-C C, let me predict there will not be a stable democracy in the forseeable future, if at all. The next hurdle is creating a constitution. I expect this to be too difficult to keep on a time line without US supervision. That will dim the hopes of those (mostly Iraqis?) who thought the elections would start moving US forces out of the country.
Card-Carrying Cynic (who starts with dim hopes)

PS: In the last paragraph of the last page of the last 2004 Newsweek, George Will states,
"The pleasures of pessimism are that pessimists are often right --- and are delighted to be proved wrong."

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Sorry, Shos. Razzberries.

I'm going with the gal-down-the-hall's uncle's take on the situation. Moving from the US, back home. Taking his wife and kids. May he and all the other ex-pat Iraqis make their home better with their return.

[shostakovich]

Well, they are obviously optimists. I shudder to think what's in store for them.
Shos

[haggis]

"Remember - Bush said this was a "Crusade". Poor choice of words."

Are you just assuming he used the word inadvertently or do you have some knowledge that would lead you to that conclusion?

Or maybe President Bush chose it for what it connotes, declaring a western war against fundamental Islamic fascism?

"I hope the naysayers and those who felt that the Iraqi couldn't handle democracy are taking note."

Jeez, guys put away the hair shirts and the "whip, self flagellating, manualy operated, one ea.”

I was mainly referring to the Ted Kennedys and Babs Boxers of the world who are so wrap up in partisan politics that they actively root for the enemies of America.

OT, PLEASE tell me you didn’t vote for Boxer!!

[OperaTenor]

Originally posted by Haggis:

OT, PLEASE tell me you didn’t vote for Boxer!!

No, I didn't.

This time........

:snarky:

<Ed: "You don't serioulsy think you can hold that over his head?!! You're not givin' the guy any credit if you do."

"Oh shut up. I don't need any more reminders that I'm in over my head, thank you very much.">

PS. That's why I despair of the two party system. People get so wrapped up in being an ass or an elephant they lose sight of the integrity of individual issues.



<small>[ 02-01-2005, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: OperaTenor ]</small>

[Trumpetmaster]

Haggis,
I think he used the word crusade "Inadvertently".
and did not realize how it would be taken.

Before he was president, I thought he was a hard nosed stubborn SOB and a "RedNeck".

His words and actions prove me correct on my thoughts.

Regars,
TM

[piqaboo]

Haggis, not whipping. They had an election, people showed up (in droves). Thats a good sign.
Next important step: count ballots, announce winners, winners are allowed to continue living.
So are people with purple-dipped fingers.

next important step, winners are allowed to take power. No coups, or other violent take-overs.

Iraq gets that far, I'll move from hopeful to cautiously optimistic.

[haggis]

TM

Thank you for the clarification.

[OperaTenor]

Originally posted by TrumpetMaster:
Before he was president, I thought he was a hard nosed stubborn SOB and a "RedNeck".

His words and actions prove me correct on my thoughts.

I used to think the same. Now I think he's simply spineless.

[Trumpetmaster]

OT,
Spineless. Don't think so. Hardnose Yes!
He is really sticking to his convictions and moving forward to make changes in this country.
I think he reacts much too quick on issues.
Don't like his methods or some of his policies,
but don't think he is spineless.
TM Editorial Over

[OperaTenor]

Aahhh, that would be where we may differ in our perceptions. My opinion is he performs the function of puppet for the group(any or all of: PNAC, CAP, Rapture Right, big business, etc.).
When he was running, and during his first months in office, I heard him and Laura say things I took to be fairly moderate, non-intrusive, and sometimes downright socially responsible. Since 9/11, and even more so since we invaded Iraq, it seems to me his tone has changed more into strident right-wing militant rhetoric, and it seems pretty obvious to me that he's merely a mouthpiece and figurehead for that agenda.

But, that's just my opinion.

[Trumpetmaster]

You know what people say about opinions! (Smirk)

[GreatCarouser]

OT, I consider our President many things but spineless isn't one of them. Things have obviously changed since the Viet Nam era.

[OperaTenor]

Yes TM, and they all stink.

Yep, stickin' with spineless. He doesn't have the backbone to stand up for his own personal convictions, if what I read about him early on in his presidency had any shred of truth to it. He seemed like a pretty tolerant guy then. Now, he and tolerance aren't even in the same county. To me, that's a character trait that just doesn't change like the wind in a person who has any strength of character(read: backbone).

I'm amazed the man can even sit up straight unassisted.

[dai bread]

The word "crusade" should be deeply embarrassing to Western governments when used in the context of modern Middle Eastern politics.

The Crusades were a series of assaults on the Holy Land in general, and Jerusalem in particular, extending over some 300 years if I remember correctly. Christians wanted control of the place. So did Muslims.

The end result was that the Holy Land went to Muslim control, where it stayed for about 500 years until 1917, when the British kicked out the Ottoman Turks. Even now, the Holy Land is not in Christian hands.

[Trumpetmaster]

dai bread,
Thanks.
That's why I believe Bush mis-used the word and offended so many people. He or his writer(s) need to choose words wisely.
TM