"Election-Iraq" turning nasty.

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
No clear winner forseen in Iraq
By Dexter Filkins The New York Times

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2005


BAGHDAD As Iraqi and American troops fanned out Wednesday to prepare for nationwide elections, Iraqi leaders predicted a split verdict from the voters, dividing the country almost evenly between secular and Islamist parties and beginning a period of protracted bargaining that will determine the shape of the new government here for the next four years.

The voting, which is expected to draw as many as 10 million Iraqis to the polls Thursday, will mark the formal end to the American-backed political process that was designed to foster a democratic government following the American invasion in March 2003.

The elections are also expected to lay the groundwork for what could be the beginning of significant reductions in the number of American troops here from their current level of about 150,000.

Iraqi and American official said preliminary results of the election will not be ready for about one week.

The results will determine not just the shape of the next Iraqi government, but will also exert a more lasting impact on the country, due to the special four-month period that Iraqi leaders decided to give to the Parliament to amend the new Iraqi constitution.

The cleric-led Shiite coalition is expected to get the largest number of votes but to fall short of capturing a majority of the 275 Parliament seats that would enable Adil Abdul Mahdi, the group's likely nominee for prime minister, to form a government.

Arrayed against the Shiite bloc is likely to be a largely secular grouping of political parties led by Ayad Allawi, the former Baathist and secular Shiite who has attracted a large following among Sunni Arabs. The Sunnis, who largely sat out the elections in January, are expected to turn out in significantly higher numbers this time and may become the single most influential voting bloc.

Along with the Sunnis, Allawi is hoping to bring together the two major Kurdish parties, whose leaders share his secular outlook. Yet even Allawi's coalition, if it comes together at all, is not expected to gain an absolute majority, at least not initially.

The deadlock sets the stage for a lengthy period of intense political maneuvering, as the two major blocs try to secure the necessary allies to form a government. Some Iraqi political leaders are predicting that it will take weeks - or even months - to form a government. After the January elections, when the Shiite coalition was able to secure a majority, the government did not take power until April.

"We will need much more time to negotiate things," Mahdi said. "Instead of negotiating between two slates, as we did in January, there will be negotiations between three and even more."

The formation of the next Iraqi government is expected to be further complicated and delayed by the requirement of a two-thirds majority vote for the election of a "presidential council" that will nominate the prime minister to the Parliament. That means that any Iraqi leader hoping to form a government will effectively have to muster a super-majority to do so.

In a post-election environment expected to be split, garnering the necessary votes may take time.

In addition, Iraqi leaders say that proposed amendments to the constitution will probably enter into the negotiations over the new government as well, with some members of the Parliament seeking certain changes to the charter in exchange for their support.

This is particularly likely in the case of Sunnis who are elected to the new Parliament; many believe that the new constitution could fatally weaken the Iraqi central government, like the provision that would grant broad powers to smaller regions inside the country.

Finally, the formation of a new government is likely to be further complicated by the demand, now in the constitution, the Parliament pass as many as 50 laws implementing some of its more general provisions.

The shape of that legislation, which is supposed to deal with such sensitive issues as the procedures for allowing regions of the country to gain autonomy, could further complicated the negotiations.

The biggest question hovering over the election is whether to Shiite coalition - a diverse gathering of 18 conservative Shiite parties - can hang together after the election or whether it will be picked apart by other politicians like Allawi, or Ahmed Chalabi, a secular Shiite politician who is leading his own slate of candidates.

At the moment, the two weak spots in the coalition appear to be the Islamic Fadhela Party, whose leaders have threatened to leave, and the Sadr Movement, which is associated with Muqtada Al Sadr, the young radical Shiite cleric.

It is not certain where those parties would go, but they could move toward Chalabi or, less likely, to Allawi.

For their part, the leaders of the Shiite coalition insist that for all the pressure on the alliance to break up they will, in the end, stick together.

"You remember last time, people said it wouldn't last," Mahdi said. "But it did. It is by interest, not by orders. Once people feel it is not in their interest, they will leave."

The single most novel aspect of this election, as opposed to the one last year, is likely to be significant participation among Sunni voters.

All indications are that the Sunnis will turn out in large numbers, except perhaps in Anbar Province, the center of the guerrilla insurgency.

Many Sunni candidates, whom American and Iraqis officials are eager to bring into the political process, say they are running primarily to amend the charter, which they say could, if left unchanged, fatally cripple the central government and push Iraq closer to civil war.

For the moment, the prospect of electing its own representatives to the Parliament appears to have driven a significant wedge into the Sunni-backed insurgency, with some guerrilla groups, like the Baathist-backed Islamic Army, calling for a cessation of attacks on polling centers Thursday.

Earlier this week, an Internet message posted by five militant groups operating in Iraq, including Al Qaeda, denounced the elections and threatened to wreak havoc Thursday.

To protect against insurgent attacks, some 225,000 Iraqi police and soldiers, 90,000 more than in January, are taking up positions around the country to try to combat the efforts to disrupt the vote. They are being backed up by American troops.

BAGHDAD As Iraqi and American troops fanned out Wednesday to prepare for nationwide elections, Iraqi leaders predicted a split verdict from the voters, dividing the country almost evenly between secular and Islamist parties and beginning a period of protracted bargaining that will determine the shape of the new government here for the next four years.

The voting, which is expected to draw as many as 10 million Iraqis to the polls Thursday, will mark the formal end to the American-backed political process that was designed to foster a democratic government following the American invasion in March 2003.

The elections are also expected to lay the groundwork for what could be the beginning of significant reductions in the number of American troops here from their current level of about 150,000.

Iraqi and American official said preliminary results of the election will not be ready for about one week.

The results will determine not just the shape of the next Iraqi government, but will also exert a more lasting impact on the country, due to the special four-month period that Iraqi leaders decided to give to the Parliament to amend the new Iraqi constitution.

The cleric-led Shiite coalition is expected to get the largest number of votes but to fall short of capturing a majority of the 275 Parliament seats that would enable Adil Abdul Mahdi, the group's likely nominee for prime minister, to form a government.

Arrayed against the Shiite bloc is likely to be a largely secular grouping of political parties led by Ayad Allawi, the former Baathist and secular Shiite who has attracted a large following among Sunni Arabs. The Sunnis, who largely sat out the elections in January, are expected to turn out in significantly higher numbers this time and may become the single most influential voting bloc.

Along with the Sunnis, Allawi is hoping to bring together the two major Kurdish parties, whose leaders share his secular outlook. Yet even Allawi's coalition, if it comes together at all, is not expected to gain an absolute majority, at least not initially.

The deadlock sets the stage for a lengthy period of intense political maneuvering, as the two major blocs try to secure the necessary allies to form a government. Some Iraqi political leaders are predicting that it will take weeks - or even months - to form a government. After the January elections, when the Shiite coalition was able to secure a majority, the government did not take power until April.

"We will need much more time to negotiate things," Mahdi said. "Instead of negotiating between two slates, as we did in January, there will be negotiations between three and even more."

The formation of the next Iraqi government is expected to be further complicated and delayed by the requirement of a two-thirds majority vote for the election of a "presidential council" that will nominate the prime minister to the Parliament. That means that any Iraqi leader hoping to form a government will effectively have to muster a super-majority to do so.

In a post-election environment expected to be split, garnering the necessary votes may take time.

In addition, Iraqi leaders say that proposed amendments to the constitution will probably enter into the negotiations over the new government as well, with some members of the Parliament seeking certain changes to the charter in exchange for their support.

This is particularly likely in the case of Sunnis who are elected to the new Parliament; many believe that the new constitution could fatally weaken the Iraqi central government, like the provision that would grant broad powers to smaller regions inside the country.

Finally, the formation of a new government is likely to be further complicated by the demand, now in the constitution, the Parliament pass as many as 50 laws implementing some of its more general provisions.

The shape of that legislation, which is supposed to deal with such sensitive issues as the procedures for allowing regions of the country to gain autonomy, could further complicated the negotiations.

The biggest question hovering over the election is whether to Shiite coalition - a diverse gathering of 18 conservative Shiite parties - can hang together after the election or whether it will be picked apart by other politicians like Allawi, or Ahmed Chalabi, a secular Shiite politician who is leading his own slate of candidates.

At the moment, the two weak spots in the coalition appear to be the Islamic Fadhela Party, whose leaders have threatened to leave, and the Sadr Movement, which is associated with Muqtada Al Sadr, the young radical Shiite cleric.

It is not certain where those parties would go, but they could move toward Chalabi or, less likely, to Allawi.

For their part, the leaders of the Shiite coalition insist that for all the pressure on the alliance to break up they will, in the end, stick together.

"You remember last time, people said it wouldn't last," Mahdi said. "But it did. It is by interest, not by orders. Once people feel it is not in their interest, they will leave."

The single most novel aspect of this election, as opposed to the one last year, is likely to be significant participation among Sunni voters.

All indications are that the Sunnis will turn out in large numbers, except perhaps in Anbar Province, the center of the guerrilla insurgency.

Many Sunni candidates, whom American and Iraqis officials are eager to bring into the political process, say they are running primarily to amend the charter, which they say could, if left unchanged, fatally cripple the central government and push Iraq closer to civil war.

For the moment, the prospect of electing its own representatives to the Parliament appears to have driven a significant wedge into the Sunni-backed insurgency, with some guerrilla groups, like the Baathist-backed Islamic Army, calling for a cessation of attacks on polling centers Thursday.

Earlier this week, an Internet message posted by five militant groups operating in Iraq, including Al Qaeda, denounced the elections and threatened to wreak havoc Thursday.

To protect against insurgent attacks, some 225,000 Iraqi police and soldiers, 90,000 more than in January, are taking up positions around the country to try to combat the efforts to disrupt the vote. They are being backed up by American troops.


sure.......there IS a clear winner.......and it is who controls the massive invading military there. Everything else is just window dressing.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
just read this on another site:

I guess the Iraqis are more afraid of US forces if they DON'T vote than they are afraid of "insurgents" if they DO vote. Now there's a foundation for a secure democacy for you.


and it resounds of truth. :x
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Success of Post-Election Iraq Depends on U.S. Change of Course
U.S. Manipulation of Electorate Undermines Legitimacy of Elections, U.S. Military Presence Will Undermine New Iraqi Gov’t

WASHINGTON - December 15 - Statement by Former U.S. Congressman Tom Andrews, National Director of the Win Without War Coalition:

Iraqi citizens go to the polls today following an election that was marred by the revelation of Bush administration attempts to manipulate the Iraqi electorate. The emergence of a government perceived as legitimate by the Iraqi people will require a change of course by the Bush administration.

The legitimacy of Iraqi elections were undermined by revelations in July of White House covert plans to manipulate elections early this year and recent reports of U.S. attempts to shape Iraqi public opinion through the placement of fake news in the Iraqi press.

President Bush’s unwillingness to announce a plan to remove U.S. troops within a clear time frame and his refusal to renounce the use of permanent U.S. military bases there undermines his rhetoric about Iraqi democracy and will undermine the legitimacy of the new Iraqi government. It is time for a fundamental change in direction.

Iraq can’t move forward with 140,000 unwanted U.S. troops, the largest embassy in the world, and with Iraqi public opinion behind a timetable for withdrawal. Two-thirds of Iraqis are opposed to the presence of U.S. troops according to a poll released on December 12 by ABC News and Time Magazine.

Rami Khouri, Editor-at-large of the Beirut based regional newspaper The Daily Star made it clear in Sunday’s Washington Post that the U.S. military presence in Iraq is the main obstacle to a politically legitimate Iraqi government:

“The single most important thing Iraq needs today is a politically legitimate government, from which security and other attributes on national and social normalcy would follow. America’s military presence and its political intervention in Iraq are the main obstacles to such a government and to a secure society in that country. Withdrawing U.S. military forces would prod and push Iraqis to agree more quickly on an inclusive and ideologically democratic government system.”

The political parties and coalitions competing in today’s election were divided along religious and sectarian lines and the campaign deepened these divisions. The security forces that President Bush is hoping will “stand up” so that U.S. forces can “stand down” are made up primarily of militia units that retain their original sectarian loyalties.

Arab voices through the Cairo process are helping change the dynamic in Iraq in a positive way and are filling a role that the U.S. no longer needs to play. They are calling for the withdrawal of U.S. forces to make this possible. The President must work with the United Nations and Iraq’s Arab neighbors on a process that supports Iraq during the withdrawal of U.S. troops.

The way out of Iraq begins by genuine respect for the will of the Iraqi people and their desire for a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq. The president can begin to demonstrate this respect by putting an end to the attempted manipulation of Iraqi public opinion with fake news written by Pentagon contractors, the unambiguous announcement that the U.S. will not maintain permanent military bases there, and the immediate initiation of a coherent plan for the withdrawal of our forces in 2006. This will not only give vast majority of the Iraqi people what they want but the new Iraqi government its strongest chance for success.

US ...change course?? and give up their new "possession"??? Don't think so...
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4533600.stm

bushcon. indulges in some self praise...........again. Calling the Iraqi "elections" historic.

Notice how it continues to be all about the Bushcons and the US and the Iraqis are just a bit player in all this???

The Iraqis never had a chance from the onset. They have been made vulnerable for years due to sanctions and Xtreme leadership........so in comes the big fat bully with all its guns and promises..........they might just buy into the US sales pitch (BS rhetoric )......not realizing they are selling out THEIR country.

How would one feel if one had to choose between two evils??? :x
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Ocean Breeze said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4533600.stm

bushcon. indulges in some self praise...........again. Calling the Iraqi "elections" historic.

Notice how it continues to be all about the Bushcons and the US and the Iraqis are just a bit player in all this???

The Iraqis never had a chance from the onset. They have been made vulnerable for years due to sanctions and Xtreme leadership........so in comes the big fat bully with all its guns and promises..........they might just buy into the US sales pitch (BS rhetoric )......not realizing they are selling out THEIR country.

How would one feel if one had to choose between two evils??? :x

Okay.

Now we're going to lock horns.

I just watched the bloody left wing CBC call this election "among the freest ever held in the Arab world"

Turnout was "high", with some line-ups to vote were so long voting hours had to be extended. This despite threats of violence.

It seems the Iraqis have "bought into" democracy in a bigger way than we in the west, who are damned apt to sit on our fat, safe arses on election day. BTW, I found your attitude in that "bought into" paragraph absolutely condescending. Typical of the left. Despite all evidence to the contrary, they are the sole holders of truth in the world.

You and the lefties have made this all about Bush.....instead of concentrating your intelectual efforts on helping the Iraqi people, you have concentrated on bringing down the man who is their benefactor. That debate has come to dominate the entire scenario.

Bush is to be congratulated. He has freed a nation.

If (and that is a big "if") this Parliament is a success, and that leads to a reasonably stable Iraq,the Americans will withdraw the vast majority of their troops over the next couple of years.

It will then have all been worth it.

Won't it?
 

no1important

Time Out
Jan 9, 2003
4,125
0
36
57
Vancouver
members.shaw.ca
RE: "Election-Iraq" turni

Well Bushie said again yesterday Troops are not leaving Iraq on his watch. It will basically be a puppet government of the Americans anyways. There can be no true free elections in Iraq as long as the Americans are there. It also would not surprise me if election is rigged anyways, to make sure a pro American Interest government gets in.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Bush is to be congratulated. He has freed a nation.
:roll: :roll:

that might be the superficial spin and that might be what the sheeple are buying into. Makes for a nice glossy.

But the reality is that Iraq is under the US control and has been since the first bomb dropped. The troops WILL stay in Iraq ....in one form or another........for one excuse or another.

Bush only "freed" Iraq from SH and his goons so Bush &goons could run it from behind the scenes. BushCo the puppet master now too.

Smoke and mirrors...

Now.......If thing start working out better for the Iraqis and some genuine reconstruction takes place.......that is THEIR doing , as it WAS their country. ......well one can only hope for the best for them.........as there is no going back now.

one question remains: Who /what will 'free" the Iraqis from the Americans??? and of course ......do they want to be REALLY free and independant of the US clutches?? If the Iraqis feel the losses and destruction was worth it........and I hear it from them... fine. It is their lives and their country. ( well, sort of)
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/dec2005/iraq-d16.shtml

so this might have been an "election" for who they want as local leader..........but the real leader will continue to reside in the US and was not on the ballot.

Of course some will say........that even this is better than what they had.

.......IS IT??? and who is to determine that???

Iraq is NOT free and independant. .........but as long as it knows what the conditions are and is content with them..... so be it.

this does not make what georgie porgie did any better , smarter, or wiser. Georgie boy humiliated himself, betrayed himself for the lust of power.... and did criminal acts to do it.

One might expect georgie to make one of his secret trips to Iraq to visit his new population now instead of just the troops. THAT Might be more honest. Who knows they might even stage a photoshoot with Iraqis throwing flowers at him. ( paid to do so , of course). Ah.....the hints of Rome and how they showed their adoration for .......
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
69
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
You accuse the other side of sensationalizing this Vote, but you seem to toil so hard in numerous posts to point out everything negative with it.

The central point should be in hoping for the better.

Over 11 million Iraqi voters look at it quite differently than you do.

What's more important for you is that we and they fail, because if we don't fail we might think what we did was right after all.

I think you're right about that fear. I don't think we should feel what we did was right ---- even if these votes lead to something better.

We really mucked it up, but it's ashame the world isn't rooting and honoring those brave enough to rebuild that country.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Over 11 million Iraqi voters look at it quite differently than you do.

that is likely very possible. Not sure they have much choice but to live in hope........now. The other option would be despair.

But then I am not a mind reader and cannot say what the Iraqis truly feel anymore than they can......without being shunned if they speak the truth.. ( or called terrorists /other names and then killed by the US. )


(jimbo.......that was very close to a personal attack. not called for. I am NOT the frichen topic ......so please stay on topic ....amd we can agree/disagree on the issues.......as it should be ...... you know better than reducing yourself to the poster bashing level ... :roll:

We really mucked it up, but it's ashame the world isn't rooting and honoring those brave enough to rebuild that country.

why would the world "honor" the Major US CONTRACTORS that are handling the rebuilding in Iraq?? Sheesh.
 

Roy

Electoral Member
Nov 23, 2005
218
0
16
Alberta
i was actually surprised by the election running as smoothy as it did. i think some of the people here are wanting the elections to fail so that they can blame the US. i on the other hand hope for the best for iraqis and the americans so that they will be able to leave iraq asap. from what i heard on the news there is an expected turnout or around 70% which is higher than in Canada. 8O
 

Roy

Electoral Member
Nov 23, 2005
218
0
16
Alberta
it makes me happy when i see the people in iraq finally having something positive, and seeing all the smiling people and the fact that even sunnis came out to vote is a major blow to the terrorists and fascists. obviously this is not the feeling amongst all iraqis but it seems positive. i hope the US will be able to train the iraqi forces efficiently in 2006 so we can witness a pullout sometime next year.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
69
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Well Roy, good point of view.

Even the cynics have a rational point of view too, but the cynics were never part of ANY CHANGE for the good.

The cynics will point out every problem and they should.
But it will be up to the Iraqis debating and discussing with each other how to get through this without the help and hope of the world.
 

Roy

Electoral Member
Nov 23, 2005
218
0
16
Alberta
Even the cynics have a rational point of view too, but the cynics were never part of ANY CHANGE for the good.

thing is that i really understand why the cynics dislike bush and the current war, and i have to say that i don't blame them. i think the iraq war was was totally illogical in terms of finding the 9/11 perpetrators, the ignoring of the UN (although the UN is sometimes the problem, not the solution), rushing to iraq without even finishing the logical battle in Afghanistan, and host of other problems. bush is not my ideal leader to say the least.

having said that though i feel to many people are just looking for the worst in iraq to blames the US to justify their selfish beliefs. i met a guy a couple of day ago who said that every time an american soilder is killed cant help but smile :roll:

all i hope for is that the US will be able to leave iraq SECURE sometime this upcoming year and that iraqi people will be able to have democracy, so 10 years down the road we will be able to see a stronger iraq. i don't think any person on this board will disagree with that.
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
all i hope for is that the US will be able to leave iraq SECURE sometime this upcoming year


wanna bet it will NOT happen. Bush already said the troops aren't leaving on his watch..........(or something similar.)

might well be that some of us have become mighty cynical.....and JUSTIFIABLY so. Some of us DESPISE being LIED to and particularly about WARS, kILLING, DEATH< TORTURE......and about anything else under the sun. Some of us "cynics" cannot comprehend (and don't want to) ......how some can be so gullible so as to follow the party line. and particularly when the party line changes more often than some folks socks. THey just sway with the wind.......and live on "hope".......rather than hard "FACTS".

So sad to see how quickly so many forget the varying reasons the bush criminal gave for his wars......and each time the population applauded as if on cue. ( no wonder most of this planet thinks "americans" are brainwashed..........as getting an original thought from them ( generally speaking) is impossible)

when bush settled on freedom and democracy......away they all went and bought into that too. Meanwhile ATROCITIES OF HEINOUS nature were/are taking place since the elective invasion of CHOICE.

Would have been surprising if the election had not gone off rather smoothly..........considering Iraq was under LOCK DOWN......and the amount of US MILITARY PRESENCE around.......making sure they voted..

all is never as the media conveys it.. and the media will convey whatever slant is going to favor the US.......with a bone or two for the Iraqis.
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
69
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Roy has probably posted the most balanced point of view on
these elections.

Representative democracy has one attribute quite different from a dictatorship.

You get to see daily headlines of problems.

We are a vicarious race, living through headline after headline, news shows, articles, editorials and these matters pound
us daily, but no news comes from a dictatorship.

Another 10 years of a dictatorship has a calming effect on
the democratic world. No news is good news.


:)
 

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
 

jimmoyer

jimmoyer
Apr 3, 2005
5,101
22
38
69
Winchester Virginia
www.contactcorp.net
Pulling all groups into the election process will inevitably splinter the groups dedicated towards violence ---only if those voters get a sense of some say in power.

But, that's A BIG IF.

I've seen we voters complain how our votes mean nothing because we didn't win, we didn't get what we
wanted.

But there's a reason why they call elections a race.
In a race you make the effort. If you came in second, was your effort meaningless?

You were given no guarrantee to win. You were only given the right to put on your sneakers and try.

Is there a better method than elections?

Tell me if there is.