Saturdays Vote

Gonz said:
Not voting is a democratic action. If there are 1000 registered voters & only 50% show up, the other 50% are giving their vote to "whomever" or "what the fuck ever".
Click to expand...


But is that democratic? All in how you phrase the question, I suppose. IMHO, if they didn't do it this way, they'd have to simply impose a constitution, and let the next 50 years of gov't deal with amending it. Pretty much what's gonna happen anyways. But at least this way, the public has some form of say initially, and it can't be too unpopular. Not that having a consititution will ever be popular there. Too many groups, most of whom are too willing to kill each other.
 
Gonz said:
Not voting is a democratic action. If there are 1000 registered voters & only 50% show up, the other 50% are giving their vote to "whomever" or "what the fuck ever".
Click to expand...
In the US they only count actual votes though right? ...and we don't even have the near the safety issues getting out to vote that they do.
 
flavio said:
In the US they only count actual votes though right? ...and we don't even have the near the safety issues getting out to vote that they do.
Click to expand...

They have no government, at the moment. This is, or may be, they founding principles for a government. Tis better to have a positive base to work from than nothing & no direction.

What was our founding...someting like 3% of the population was for it. The Constitution wasn't even voted on, on a grand scale.
 
flavio said:
In the US they only count actual votes though right? ...and we don't even have the near the safety issues getting out to vote that they do.
Click to expand...

What other choice do they have? We already know that Joe Q. Turban isn't coming out. That means that the majority of the votes will be gun-toting radicals.
 
Gonz said:
They have no government, at the moment. This is, or may be, they founding principles for a government. Tis better to have a positive base to work from than nothing & no direction.

What was our founding...someting like 3% of the population was for it. The Constitution wasn't even voted on, on a grand scale.
Click to expand...
If you're trying to establish a democracy and many more people vote NO on something than vote YES...than NO it is.
 
Why bother trying to hold together a state where the warring factions obviously do not wish it to be held together?

Perhaps some hints should be sought from Saddam Hussein about how to maintain order amongst Iraq's tribal elements.
 
Because allowing it to splinter into factions along religious and geographic borders will only create 5 mini-countries, each with their own agenda. One or more of which might join Iran or Syria.

Just establishing a Kurdish country will drive it's surrounding neighbours into havok as the Kurds living there try to claim part of those countries as exclusivly Kurdish. Hence, me mentioning Kurdistan earlier.

Map of Kurdistan
 
Bobby Hogg said:
That's different from now, how?

Iraq was always a state founded on false borders. Why work to prolong that?
Click to expand...

On top of Bishs remarks (where did that sensical answer come from?) there is a huge gulf between street crime & government sanctioned torture.

[eidt]And they're off....[/edit]
 
Ratification of the constitution requires approval by a majority of voters nationwide.

However, if two-thirds of voters in any three of Iraq's 18 provinces vote "no," the constitution will be defeated and Sunni Arab opponents have a chance of swinging the ballot in four volatile provinces — Anbar, Nineveh, Salahuddin and Diyala.
Click to expand...

"Today, I came to vote because I am tired of terrorists, and I want the country to be safe again," said the 30-year-old mother of three, who was wearing a head-to-toe black chador dress. "This constitution means unity and hope."
Click to expand...

AP
 
Gonz said:
Remember Afghanistan? John Q Turban came out. enmasse. So did Jane Q.
Click to expand...


And its made squat all difference to,so why all the hotair about it suddenly ending the strife in Iraq,when Afghanistan is still(if not moreso) plagued by instability.
Violence Erupts in Afghanistan Before Rice Visit
KABUL, Afghanistan — About 60 militants ambushed a police convoy as it slowed to cross a river in southern Afghan mountains, sparking a fierce gunbattle that left 19 officers dead in the deadliest blow yet for the fledgling security force, officials said Tuesday.
Click to expand...


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,171816,00.html

Firefights in the country's east, meanwhile, killed a U.S. soldier and wounded three others, while an American special forces chopper was destroyed by fire as it made a hard landing during an offensive. All aboard escaped unhurt.
Click to expand...



And before you once again start espousing the"Well should we just f'in leave it to the Insurgents ???" drivel ,why not just tell it like it is and not sugar coat the realities.Once the Vote fails to reel in the violence ,thats once again going to leave them with egg on their faces trying to blame everyone but themselves for it,when they should have just been truthful amd realistic.It hasn't solved the problems in Afghanistan ,so why pretend Iraq(with far more for people to fight over) is going to go smoothly.
 
A.B.Normal said:
And its made squat all difference to,so why all the hotair about it suddenly ending the strife in Iraq,when Afghanistan is still(if not moreso) plagued by instability.
Click to expand...
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!!!"

You're not supposed to notice.
 
Ah, fuck it. Let the revolution begin. Anarchy all around. Let's have no base. Let's have nothing. Violence begets violence so there's no need to set up a stable government beset with problems when we can just have the fucking problems & no authority whatsoever.

People like you are the reason not enough gets done. Your damned "it's hard so why bother" mentality is useless.
 
Gonz said:
People like you are the reason not enough gets done. Your damned "it's hard so why bother" mentality is useless.
Click to expand...
See, you completely misunderstand. It's not that "it's hard so why bother," it's that it's not working, so why keep doing it. When something doesn't work, intelligent people do something else. Of course, we're not supposed to notice that it's not working, right?
 
Gonz said:
People like you are the reason not enough gets done. Your damned "it's hard so why bother" mentality is useless.
Click to expand...


More like its hard/difficult/messy ,so why not admit that upfront instead of blowing smoke out your @ss ,in the hopes that your masses will blindly follow .From the "end of hostilities" to the current Operation has "dealt the insurgency with a death blow" or "it has made them unable to carry out attacks" to the elections are going to mean the troops can come home .These promises are doing more to undermine confidence in the government(both US and Iraqi) and lower enthusiasm of the People of both countries than those pointing out that the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes.
 
MrBishop said:
Because allowing it to splinter into factions along religious and geographic borders will only create 5 mini-countries, each with their own agenda. One or more of which might join Iran or Syria.

Just establishing a Kurdish country will drive it's surrounding neighbours into havok as the Kurds living there try to claim part of those countries as exclusivly Kurdish. Hence, me mentioning Kurdistan earlier.

Map of Kurdistan
Click to expand...

What makes you think that trying to force the various sections of the Iraqi community into a single democratic state will ever work?

I was only half joking when I talked about asking Saddam for tips, because his rule is probably the only way Iraq can be held together. Without a brutal autocratic regime, it's going to be virtually impossible to hold a state together where several different ethnic and religious groups are vying for absolute power.

So why not split them, and let them have absolute power over their own domains? Iraq was only ever a nation bordered upon colonial lines. Trying to maintain these in spite of the ancient differences between tribes will prove fruitless in a democracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top