• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Iraq election

Help Support Ranchers.net:

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
I'm sure most of you have heard of this by now, but I wanted to be the first to rub it in Disagreeable's face. I'm sure he/she will find some way to turn the successful election into a negative, though.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051215/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_051213231790;_ylt=Ar0Ix5Ex2GR7GelVpc1Pn5hX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
0
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
and never bothered to question the assumptions of their own world-view.

I can see that you have never challenged your own views in the real world.....as they make little sense.......

because on one post war is wrong....we must negotiate..now politics the art of negotiation is wrong we must wage civil war??????

Maybe the air is to thin up there in Ma, add in the liberals blowing hot air has created a high pressure zone, sucking the intellegance out of you folk.....or you have smoked to much pot listening to Dylan????
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,861
Reaction score
4
Election or not....these people have a history many centuries old of being submissive to stronger rulers, be they tribal rulers or dictators.

It's gonna be MANY MANY long years before, if ever, Iraq---or any other Middle Eastern country-- has what may fit the definition of democracy. Heck we don't even have a true Jeffersonian democracy!

Yes, this was one day for them to be happy and hopeful but tradition and centuries of history are not that easy to break away from.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
mp.freelance said:
I'm sure most of you have heard of this by now, but I wanted to be the first to rub it in Disagreeable's face. I'm sure he/she will find some way to turn the successful election into a negative, though.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051215/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_051213231790;_ylt=Ar0Ix5Ex2GR7GelVpc1Pn5hX6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Rub what in my face? Saddam held elections. Saddam had a Constitution. As long as people are being searched before they're allowed to vote, soldiers are standing outside the balloting sites, the borders are closed, there's a curfew, you can't seriously claim this is a "successful" election. The only thing holding this country together (if it is being held together) is the presence of US troops. Once we're out (and we are coming out), who knows what will happen. I don't believe for a second the deaths of 2000+ Americans and 30,000 Iraqis, billions of American dollars wasted, will make us a safer country. I seriously doubt that you do either.
 

mp.freelance

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
502
Reaction score
0
Location
Oregon
Disagreeable said:
Saddam held elections. Saddam had a Constitution.

:roll: I have trouble believing even you take yourself seriously. If you don't see the difference between a free election and an election where there's only one name on the ballot that you're forced to vote for, then you truly are mentally deficient. The more likely answer, however, is that you're so deluded by hatred for Bush that you can't bring yourself to look at the situation objectively.

Disagreeable said:
I don't believe for a second the deaths of 2000+ Americans and 30,000 Iraqis, billions of American dollars wasted, will make us a safer country. I seriously doubt that you do either.

You're right. I don't think it will make us a safer country any more than standing up to Hitler made us safer. We could have just appeased him like the French, and saved hundreds of thousands of American lives. The point isn't a temporary feeling of safety but doing the right thing in the long term.
 

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 4, 2005
Messages
2,464
Reaction score
0
mp.freelance said:
Disagreeable said:
Saddam held elections. Saddam had a Constitution.

:roll: I have trouble believing even you take yourself seriously. If you don't see the difference between a free election and an election where there's only one name on the ballot that you're forced to vote for, then you truly are mentally deficient. The more likely answer, however, is that you're so deluded by hatred for Bush that you can't bring yourself to look at the situation objectively.

I see the difference in Saddam's election and the recent election. But I also see a difference in a real election and what's going on in Iraq. It's quite simply an expensive farce. No international agency will certify the results. They're voting as an occupied country. To pretend it's a real election is ridiculous.

Disagreeable said:
I don't believe for a second the deaths of 2000+ Americans and 30,000 Iraqis, billions of American dollars wasted, will make us a safer country. I seriously doubt that you do either.

You're right. I don't think it will make us a safer country any more than standing up to Hitler made us safer. We could have just appeased him like the French, and saved hundreds of thousands of American lives. The point isn't a temporary feeling of safety but doing the right thing in the long term.

The American people would never have approved of invading Iraq on the basis of humanity. You know that and so did George W. Bush. That's why he lied and mislead us into this war by claiming Saddam had WMDs. You don't want to hear that, of course, you'd rather pretend that we're doing a good thing in that country. It's not true. We are in the process of watching that country fall apart, Iraq's murdering and torturing each other. The only thing holding it together is the US occupation and that's not going on much longer.
 

Latest posts

Top