Iraqi Elections?

[mburbank]

George Bush needed two things from the Iraqi elections for political reasons. They had to be soon, so he could say "Freedom was on the March" and they had to be after the election, so if they failed miserably it wouldn't affect his chances of getting re-elected.

By timing the Iraqi elections to his own political needs he's crafted a perfect no win situation. The elections HAVE to take place on time. Anything else would be a huge victory for the insurgents. No even marginally credible election CAN take place by the end of January and poorly staged obviously phony elections will be a HUGE vitcory for the insurgents.

Here's why I think there is no way anything but a farce can take place by the end of January.

The end of January is 2.5 months away. There is currently no established way for candidates to get on ballot. Voter registration has not taken place and no method for registration has been developed. Even if by the time I finsh typing this alll of Iraq is peaceful and under interim government control (and who among you thinks that's going to happen?) that would give 2.5 months to stage the first election ever in Iraq, from a starting point of absolutre zero for election infrastructure.

Add to this that the Sunni's are threatening to boycott the election, a move that would certainly invalidate the results.

Add to that, there's a state of declared martial law that IF it ends on schedule will end just a handful of days before the election. Can you call an election conducted in every aspect except the actual voting a democratic election?

The obvious argument, "A flawed election is better than no election at all" needs to be examined.

Under the circumstances I've described, why would any Iraqi accept as legitimate the outcome of such an election? Only one reason. Their guy won. Everyone else will reject the election, and they'll be right to do it, because it's an obvious farce. When two thirds of a country rejects an election, you can't call it an insurgency anymore. It's a civil war.

By tailoring the Iraqi elections to meet his own political needs, W. has virtually insured civil war in Iraq.

[Anonymous]

But freedom is still on the march. A flawed freedom is better than no march at all. Simple as that.

[Drev]

Does the Iraqi elections really matter? I'm not going to be the bit suprised if there are attacks during voting OR whoever wins is killed in less than a week. :/

[Bass]

How are the Iraqis going to be able to get a "fair" election when there are people here in America who think that our elections are full of conspiracy and sabotage? Also would they even elect somone that's good for their country? I hear storys all the time about how women will leave one abusive guy and end up with another, as if they are drawn to abusive men, won't the Iraqis do something kind of similiar since they are so use to being ruled by Sadam?

[Baalzamon]

Its obvious that since allawi is backed by the U.S, he will "win"

Do you really think that they would be allowed to elect just anyone?

[Ant10708]

I don't know, someone here had a good theory about Chalabi(sp?) being elected since all of a suddent the U.S. broke ties with him and to be successful in Iraq you need to not seem like your a US puppet.

[Ant10708]

And that the U.S. wanted him to win and the whole breaking ties thing was a clever ploy.