A beginner's work in progress.......
You won't find this info in mainstream USA media
Published on January 28, 2005 By dabe In Politics
Would you vote in Iraq, given that you'd be taking your life in your hands if you tried? Would you even know who you'd be voting for? What about where to vote?

These are questions that Iraqis are facing with regard to the "elections" on Sunday. In this article from Speigel, a German website, you'll find some interesting info that our mainstream media won't print. Like the burning truth. First of all, "Meanwhile, many Iraqis say they are not only too scared to vote, but know little to nothing about the some 7,000 candidates from 256 political groups and independents running."

Seven thousand (7,000) candidates? Holy freakin' bomb scare!!! Two hundred fifty six (256) political groups? What's a voter to do?

How about this:
"Here's a quick roundup of Iraq violence from 8 a.m. Thursday to 8 a.m. Friday. We have just one question: Amid all this, would you vote?

*Insurgents attacked a Marine base about 50 kilometers south of Baghdad, killing one soldier and injuring others.

*Street fighting broke out between American soldiers and rebels in central Baghdad.

*Jordanian terrorist and al-Qaida affiliate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi posted a videotape on the Internet showing the murder of Salem Jaafar Abed, a National Assembly candidate and the secretary of interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.

*In Baghdad, a car bomb near an Iraqi police station killed four policemen.

*A car bomb exploded in Samarra (95 kilometers north of Baghdad) killing three Iraqis.

*Two polling stations in Samarra were attacked. One -- a school administration building -- was blown up. Staff had been warned beforehand to leave.

*Sporadic clashes erupted in Samarra between US soldiers and armed men. One Iraqi died.

*In the city of Kirkuk north of Baghdad, rebels attacked seven polling stations with mortar shells and machine guns.

*Also in Kirkuk, insurgents attacked an Iraqi police patrol, killing one.

*In Beiji, also in the north, a suicide bomber struck a US military convoy.

*In Mahmoudiya, 30 kilometers south of Baghdad, three Iraqis died when a roadside bomb missed a US convoy.

*Near Tikrit, a roadside bomb aimed at a US convoy killed an Iraqi.

*On the military base, a US soldier died of gunshot wounds.

*In Ramadi, west of Baghdad, an Iraqi National Guard soldier died when insurgents attacked a school voting center.

*In Baqouba, the body of a former Saddam Hussein loyal was found. He had been abducted by armed men.

*Insurgents shelled the US Marine base south of Baghdad.

*In Baghdad, a car bomb near an Iraqi police station killed four policemen.

*In Basra, four polling stations were attacked. "

Now, I'd venture a guess that if Dubya and his dummies had to vote, they'd sure not risk their lives to go and vote. And, given the mess surrounding this "election", how valid do you think the outcome will be? I'd say not valid at all. An exercise in American hubris, is all. After all, I'm betting that after the elections, nothing, absolutely nothing will change. It will make no fucking difference. Time, I suppose, will tell.

1,600 American soldiers dead
10,000 American soldiers injured
100,000 Iraqis dead
Untold numbers of Iraqis injured
Bin Laden still at large
Saddam still not tried
Afghanistan still not rebuilt
Bagdad still not in control
Iraq in ruins
Dubya still selling his con job about how rosy everything is.

Oh yeah, the elections will really make the difference. And, OJ was innocent.




Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jan 28, 2005
Let's not forget that all of the name recognition people over there (allawi, etc.) are Iraqi exiles that worked for the CIA or for U.S. based corporations. Remember when we liberated Afghanistan and the interim president Karzai was elected to the presidency? He got the interim job since he used to do consulting work for a Houston based company called Unical. Oh yeah, they're an oil - natural gas, etc. company. Do we really think that Iraq will be any different? Liberation in this case is really just the creation of more U.S. client states. Anyone who believes otherwise is either naiive or an ideologue.

So, no, I wouldn't vote.
on Jan 28, 2005
Yes, I would have a back bone to fight for freedom. Good old Teddy realy is showing his spinless back bone at not letting others elect thier Governmental representatives. It is a sad time when members of a major (will be minor at this rate) America political party does not want to give others a chance at freedom and liberty.
on Jan 28, 2005
Heeeeeeeelllllllll no I wouldn't vote.
on Jan 28, 2005
Are you kidding me? I'm WAY too much of a coward to vote in those conditions.
on Jan 29, 2005
i would vote....to make life better for my children, and their children.....why should I be afraid of death?

What is interesting to me, and it would be funny, if not so shamefully, sadly pathetic.....is that Dabe, the "fighter of freedom" doesn't think ppl should vote.....the democratic party, not for democracy....yet again....
on Jan 29, 2005
I'm sorry, but you can't just hand democracy and freedom over to people like it's some kind of packaged gift . . . as you might have noticed, our "gift" isn't welcome in Iraq. The place is a mess . . . would you want to live there? And now we are asking people to vote, even though they aren't even informed enough to know who stands for what or what impact any given choice will make, while bombs are going off in the polling places and people are being murdered indescriminately. I would not risk my life to vote for something I knew nothing about . . . I would be too busy trying to keep my children safe in a savage, chaotic environment such as Iraq, and trying to make good use of the limited water, electricity, and resources I had so that my family could survive.
on Jan 29, 2005

If I were a Shi'ite Muslim, I would stay home, and hope that the majority (who represents me) would cast a ballot in my favor.


If I were a Sunni Muslim, I would raise hell because I know that I'm "gonna get it" once the results come in.


If I weren't religious, I would look at them all: Shi'ite, Sunni, and Christian invaders in contempt.

on Jan 29, 2005
What you are asking is:

If you were just freed from slavery in 1870's Southern U.S., would you vote?
If you were a sheriff, militia member or federal troop, would you defend a newly freed man's right to vote?

If you were a Black student in 1960's U.S., would you go to school on the first day of "integration?
If you were a sheriff, National Guardsmen or federal troop, would you defend the Black student's right to attend the school?

If you were a woman in 1920's U.S. would you vote?
If you were a sheriff, militia member or federal troop, would you defend a woman's right to vote?

It was not that long ago in our own country that people faced abuse, torment, bigotry and yes even death to exercise their newly won right to vote. We look back and applaud the bravery it took to stand up and tell the world that come what may, they were going to exercise their rights!!!

I, for one, am in complete and utter awe of all Iraqis who are willing to defy death to exercise their rights (as I am with those who did the same in Afghanistan... especially the women who faced an added threat). They are truly heroes and deserve nothing less than the deepest respect and honor of all who claim to love liberty!!!

Look at those who aren't in Iraq, but are still eligible to vote at one of the many voting places around the world. Here in America there are 4 polling places. Thousands of Iraqis are spending who knows how much money and travel up to hundreds of miles in order to cast ballots.

Compare that with the whining and total BS that went on in our own election.

"But my polling place is a whole mile further away than this one. Why can't I just vote here?"
"An ID to register to vote? Why, that is just too much to ask!"
"I had to wait in line for hours, just to vote. Why don't they understand that I need to get to the store before dinner?"

Why(ne) Why(ne) Why(ne)!!!!

Many so-called Americans care so little about their right to vote that they either don't bother, or they take part in registration and voter scams because they are too immature and hate filled to see that they are destroying what others killed and died to give them.

We are witnessing something of eathshaking historic importance here. Freedom has a foothold and the only way it will fail is if those who love freedom fail to recognize that! We already know that there are people willing to kill to prevent it, now we must put all our hope and trust in those who are willing to face death to realize it.
on Jan 29, 2005
Bravo, ParaTed2k.

Of those questions you asked, I would say yes to all. But especially the second half of each question.

It is those who will help other people to vote for freedom, that will most likely keep their own.

It is those who refuse to help others to receive the freedom to vote, that are most likely to lose their own freedoms.

That's My Two Cents
on Jan 29, 2005
Anyone who believes otherwise is either naiive or an ideologue


Oh no, sqrrldrw called me names!!! How on earth is my fragile self esteem to recover?? ;~D
on Jan 30, 2005
Excellent riposte, ParaTed2K. Insightful to you.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Jan 30, 2005
Okay, I guess it's time for my serious response.

If the question is would I, personally, vote in Iraq, then no. I am a coward, and however much I wanted freedom, I would be scared out of my mind.
If the question is do I want Iraqis to have a Democracy, then yes. I think they deserve to be free.

The thing is, I have always had something against invading a country to change their ideals to yours. There was once a man who convinced himself that his ideals were right. And so he invaded other countries to change theirs. This man's name, of course, was Adolf Hitler.

Now, I know what you're saying. "But that's different, Hitler had terrible ideals and wanted to murder people. We're right." I will agree that Hitler's ideals were wrong. But is anything ever really right? It is true that our government is fair to the people, and has worked for us, but any form of government can work if the right people control it. Take this analogy. Julius Caesar toppled a Republic and became dictator of Rome, and his succesors became Emperor. The Republic was evil and corrupt and oppressed the people. Caesar was fair and just, and beloved. So really, it isn't the government, it is the person.

I am in no way suggesting we are evil. We are benevolent, and we are trying to change things for the good. These are just my thoughts on war for the purpose of changing the government. Again, I do hope Iraqis can achieve their Democracy. They deserve it.

Well, that's all I really have to say. All that's left is to sit back and get me and my views torn apart.

Until I have to defend my position,
NJF
on Jan 30, 2005
The thing is, I have always had something against invading a country to change their ideals to yours.


Excellent post NJF, the only thing I would say in rebuttal to the above quote is, in invading Iraq we are not forcing the the people to change their ideals, we have given them an opportunity to voice their ideals a form a government around them.
on Jan 30, 2005
NJF, I agree with paraTed. Excellent response. And yes, I posted the question seriously. Of course, I do not want the elections to fail. Of course, I'd like to see democracy thrive in Iraq. These are clearly givens.

But, I am very skeptical of the process. First of all, as is no secret, going to the polling places will be very dangerous. Will the insurgents succeed in disrupting the elections? Yes, to some degree I think they will, and already have. As reports are coming in, 29 people have already been killed at the polls. This is really sad.

But, I disagree with paraTed's assertion that the US has given the Iraqis the opportunity to voice their ideals. In some remote way, I do concede the point. But, the ends to achieve this means is as horrific as they come. Democracy at the end of a gun, resulting in upwards of 100,000 dead Iraqis. I do not trust the Bush adiminstration in their "lofty" goals for Iraq. They lied their way into this war, they lie every day about the "progress", and they will lie about the outcome. In fact, I would find it very hard to believe that the US will eventually leave Iraq to its own devices

if a hardline Islamic cleric is elected, then we Americans will have succeeded in nothing but altering the government from one of a secular dictatorship to one of an islamist tyranny. If Allawi is elected, then USA will have succeeded in setting up its puppet government in Iraq, enabling the US to stay forever and expoloit the oil fields, which is what I do think was the primary goal, the thinly veiled hidden agenda, in the first place. No matter how we look at it, the Iraqis will not see a true democracy. And, the point of course to my original article is that whoever they choose, they'll do so at great peril to themselves and their families. The choices are bogus. The neocons' intent is bogus. Hopeffylly, the desired outcome, true democracy, will some day come to fruition.

I would fight for freedom. I would fight for the right to a democracy. But, I woldn't risk my life, limb and family for what is happening today. But, I remain an optimistic skeptic.

Thanks all for your replies.
on Jan 30, 2005
Despite all the terrorist insurgent intimidation, despite Zarqawi's declaration of "all-out war" on the election, despite the last-minute designation of polling places; despite all those logistical & psychological hurdles, somewhere between 60% and 70% of eligible voters braved the risks and went to the polls. That's a great turnout here in the US, where "disenfranchisement" means missing out on the Sausage-McMuffin with Cheese because the polling line was too long & they stopped serving them @ 10:30.

Let no one minimize the significance of this day for the Iraqi people. They deserve our highest respect and have earned our continued support. It may be taken for granted by many, but freedom is as powerful as ever.

Cheers,
Daiwa
2 Pages1 2