Iraq Election Results

[seinfeldrules]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2326&e=16&u=/csm/20050214/ts_csm/oresults_1

Man a lot of people probably feel pretty dumb right about now.

"Its one big US conspiracy! They will choose who wins!"

Ummmm...

Coming in second behind the religious Shiites' United Iraqi Alliance List (UIA), which will hold about 130 seats in the assembly, was an ethnic Kurdish list that took about 26 percent, or 70, of the seats. The party of the secular Shiite and US favorite Iyad Allawi came a distant third, with about 14 percent, or 38 seats.

Wow, we are such an evil nation fixing elections like that! Hell we gave Allwai a whole 14% of the vote!

The belief that the US is evil =

With that said, the Shiites took the major % of votes at around 50% with Kurds easily coming in second place. The Sunnis pretty much shot themselves in the foot. They should hope the Shiites and Kurds treat them better than they deserve in coming days.

 

[Tr0n]

So who won?

 

[seinfeldrules]

So who won?

The Shiites. I've heard Chalabi may be a possibility for PM, but that was a vague reference from somewhere.

 

[burner69]

Fair play to Iraq. Especially with the turnout of voters. Nice one!

Not meaning to sound cynical, and no this isn't a stab at the coalition, but something bothers me about this:
From what I've read there are three major groups in Iraq; the north who want to split away... I think thats the Kurds or something. Then the centre who want to move into democracy, and then the south... can't remember who they are.
With such a split running through the country I hope the idea of one group running the show dosen't cause more conflict.

Nothing seems to have gotten worse over there though, so maybe they'll be ok.

Here's to Iraq :cheers:

EDIT: Sein, you naughty thing. I hope this wasn't a thread designed to have a stab at anti-US folk... *wags finger*

 

[seinfeldrules]

... I think thats the Kurds or something. Then the centre who want to move into democracy, and then the south... can't remember who they are.

Yeah the Kurds were talking about it if they didnt get some power to work with when making the constitution. I doubt they will talk about that anymore after getting a huge 30%.

 

[GhostFox]

The Kurds have always been oppressed, and have wanted a country called "Kurdistan" consisting of North Iraq and bits of bordering countries for years. If they will stay part of a democratic Iraq or seperate is up in air. It could really go either way. But so far they are very positive on the whole thing.

The Sunni's are a fairly small minority in Iraq, but were treated the best and really oppressed the Shiites, the large majority of Iraq. Their fear is that the Shiites will want revenge for the years of abuse and will use their obvious majority to achieve it. So far the new govt. looks to avoid any of this by planning on putting Sunni's in select high positions, but it is to soon to tell. If the Shiites can curb their instinct for revenge, Iraq has a good chance. If they are out for blood, you will soon see Iraq split into 3 seperate countries. Which may or may not be a bad thing. If history is any indication, multi-culturalism hasn't helped the stability of nations, so they may be better off as seperate lands.

 

[Sainku]

Maybe Iyad Allawi wasnt the favorite, the Shiites were. They just pretended to support Iyad so we wouldn't notice when they rigged the election for the Shiites! America is teh evil!!!


Either way I think this is a good start, :cheers: to Iraq.

 

[seinfeldrules]

EDIT: Sein, you naughty thing. I hope this wasn't a thread designed to have a stab at anti-US folk... *wags finger*

Well, maybe just a litttlleeee. Hearing stern yell about this over the last year could wear a little thin ya know.

 

[Sgt_Shellback]

Dang good start in Iraq... and with Palestians and Israelies making amends now GW could end up with a mark in history next to the Reagan for winning the cold war....

(Wait for it...)

 

[CadetFrench]

Too bad hes gonna make us invade Iran and probably North Korea eventually. :-/

 

[seinfeldrules]

Too bad hes gonna make us invade Iran and probably North Korea eventually. :-/

Well hey, at least Bush cant say NK had WMD, only for it to turn out to be false, they are admitting it! Basically the same for Iran, except they admit to a development program, not the actual nukes.

 

[bliink]

Well, maybe just a litttlleeee. Hearing stern yell about this over the last year could wear a little thin ya know.

Dang good start in Iraq... and with Palestians and Israelies making amends now GW could end up with a mark in history next to the Reagan for winning the cold war....

(Wait for it...)

You know, the fact you both knowingly make comments designed to be inflamatory in regards to other members does not look good.
That can also be known as "Flame bait" or "Trolling"- and thats a 4 point warning, so watch yourselves.

 

[seinfeldrules]

You know, the fact you both knowingly make comments designed to be inflamatory in regards to other members does not look good.
That can also be known as "Flame bait" or "Trolling"- and thats a 4 point warning, so watch yourselves.

Do I need to post quotes to back up my statements? It was a mere rebuttal without having to dig through overwhelming amounts of evidence.

 

[CadetFrench]

^^^ Im confused. How is what they said deserving of warnings? How are they designed to be inflamatory in regards to other members.

 

[bliink]

Do I need to post quotes to back up my statements? It was a mere rebuttal without having to dig through overwhelming amounts of evidence.

Are you trying to say you were not making that post in an attempt to bait other members?
Because it sure looked like it to me.

^^^ Im confused. How is what they said deserving of warnings? How are they designed to be inflamatory in regards to other members.

You haven't been here for long, but I suggest you read the sticky in here, and my posts at the end of various closed threads in this section.
The rules here (in politics) have become far stricter, because people fight like 2 year olds.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Are you trying to say you were not making that post in an attempt to bait other members?
Because it sure looked like it to me.

No it was in response to a question/statement. Over the last year people have been claiming that Allawi was going to be a shoe in because of how corrupt the US was. They claimed that he would be placed in power through puppet elections aimed at ultimate US control (behind the scenes) in Iraq. I'm sorry that that offended me in some way and I slightly gloated for the US being vindicated, I dont see how that is any more baiting than any other comments other members make.

 

[bliink]

I'm sorry ... I slightly gloated for the US being vindicated

Thank you. Try not to do it again.
If everyone makes an effort, the section can be civilised.

 

[Sainku]

Thank you. Try not to do it again.
If everyone makes an effort, the section can be civilised.

I think its more just a regular informative news post with a slight in your face left/right undertone, something which is common here. This is something that will always be in political fourms, civil or not the left/right for some reason just like to throw dirt at eachother.

Off-topic but what happend to warnings being invisible, I thought it was more effective as it couldnt be used in a look at my cool scar sort of way.

 

[CadetFrench]

because people fight like 2 year olds.

Seriously do 2 year olds discuss politics? And I dont think this section can truely be civilized, I am studying politics in school and they are far from civilized. All it is is arguing.

 

[CptStern]

The Shiites. I've heard Chalabi may be a possibility for PM, but that was a vague reference from somewhere.

Ahmed Chalabi:

In the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, under his guidance the INC provided a major portion of the information on which U.S. Intelligence based its condemnation of Saddam Hussein, including reports of weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to al-Qaeda. Much of this information has turned out to be false. In addition, many observers point to the cozy political and business relationships between Chalabi and some members of the United States government, including some prominent neoconservatives within the Pentagon. Chalabi is said to have had political contacts within the PNAC, most notably with Paul Wolfowitz, a student of nuclear strategist Albert Wohlstetter and Richard Perle who was introduced to Chalabi by Wohlstetter in 1985. He also enjoyed considerable support among politicians and political pundits in the United States, most notably Jim Hoagland of The Washington Post, who held him up as a notable force for democracy in Iraq. Chalabi's opponents, on the other hand see him as a charlatan of questionable allegiance, out of touch with Iraq and with no effective power base there, and an escrow







who's eating crow now?

 

[Sainku]

who's eating crow now?

Uhh, no one. Its not even official, he said it was just a vauge reference.

Good job making bad out of good though. :thumbs:


...talk about flame baiting...

 

[CptStern]

Ahmed Chalabi, the New Yorker

For years, he had been America’s staunchest Iraqi ally, and he had helped the Bush Administration make its case against Saddam, in part by disseminating the notion that the Baathist regime had maintained stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons, and was poised to become a nuclear power. Although Chalabi developed enemies at the C.I.A. who disputed his intelligence data and questioned his ethics, he forged a close bond with Vice-President Dick Cheney and many of the top civilians at the Pentagon, such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Under-Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith, and Under-Secretary of Defense William J. Luti. Yet now that the occupation of Iraq appeared to be headed toward disaster, he said, many in the Administration had united in making him the scapegoat. As Chalabi saw it, he had understood America too well, and had been too successful in influencing its foreign policy. “There is a smear campaign that says I am responsible for the liberation of Iraq,” he said. Then he added with a chuckle, “But how bad is that?”

Between 1992 and the raid on Chalabi’s home, the U.S. government funnelled more than a hundred million dollars to the Iraqi National Congress. The current Bush Administration gave Chalabi’s group at least thirty-nine million dollars. Exactly what the I.N.C. provided in exchange for these sums has yet to be fully explained. Chalabi defined his role simply. “I clarified the picture,” he said. His many critics, however, believe that he distorted it. Diplomatic and intelligence officials accuse him of exaggerating the security threat that Iraq posed to the U.S.; supplying defectors who offered misleading or bogus testimony about Saddam’s efforts to acquire nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons; promoting questionable stories connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda; and overestimating the ease with which Saddam could be replaced with a Western-style democracy.




read more

 

[Brassm0nkey]

Stern, your quite predictable.

 

[CptStern]

Uhh, no one. Its not even official, he said it was just a vauge reference.

Good job making bad out of good though. :thumbs:


...talk about flame baiting...

http://washingtontimes.com/world/20040330-094240-7127r.htm

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1241127,001301600004.htm



"The former Iraqi exile leader who helped found the Iraqi National Congress, Ahmad Chalabi, is seeking his country's highest office and says he has accepted an informal nomination to be prime minister."

source

 

[Tr0n]

Well they finally got the election done...I'm happy for them.

 

[Sainku]

Well, if thats what the iraqis want then so be it. That is what it is about after all, freedom.


Thought this summed up the elections pretty well, taken from cptsterns article.

"Iraqi people voted out a government which had the support of the United States and 150,000 troops in Iraq, with funding 50 times more than the other lists combined, especially on TV time. They did that in the face of major threats by terrorists. The Iraqi people demonstrated this can happen."

 

[Mechagodzilla]

It is still getting rather tiresome that every second conservative thread is addressed directly to Stern.
That's the sort of thing that PMs are for.

But anyways, the counter-argument to this could very well be "the US still controls 15% of the government" so you're probably not off the hook yet.

 

[gh0st]

Stern - the Iraqi people choose whoever they want. I'm sure they arent the least bit concerned about what you think about the man. You and I have the freedom to vote for whoever we want based upon his merits and past, why shouldnt the Iraqis? Seems the only person who doesnt want them to freely vote is you, who would dig up fault with whoever they would choose. Whoops - its none of your business who they pick. Its so easy to type a name into google and find bad things about him/her/it. Accept democracy in Iraq and get on with your life. I'm very happy things turned out how they did.

 

[Steve]

It's nice to hear good news about actual progress in Iraq once in a while. 'Course, I guess I'd hear it even more if I did my own research instead of just watching CNN all the time. But anyway, I'm glad to hear about this. Let's just hope they draft a constitution that is fair to all and...umm...stuff?

 

[Raziaar]

Come on Stern. Applaud the elections. You know you want to. You don't have to be so concrete about this right now. Feel good for the Iraqi's, that they have exercised freedom, without turning this whole thread into a debate war.

 

[MjM]

All i can say i guess is good luck. Now they just need a constitution that everyone in Iraq can live with. The hard part.

 

[Raziaar]

All i can say i guess is good luck. Now they just need a constitution that everyone in Iraq can live with.

Constitution of 14. Satisfied with that?

No.

Reroll. 9. Satisfied?

Hell No.

Reroll. 18. Satisfied?

Woohoo, I R tough, resistant to poisons an stuff!




Heh. Sorry. D&D flashback. :dork:

 

[mortiz]

I'm sorry, but at the end of the day I doubt many of you have any real feelings about the state of Iraqi democracy. Unless you're linked to Iraq in some way, i.e. through family, I doubt any of you really care.

 

[Steve]

I'm sorry, but at the end of the day I doubt many of you have any real feelings about the state of Iraqi democracy. Unless you're linked to Iraq in some way, i.e. through family, I doubt any of you really care.

So, because we're in no way linked to Iraq, we can't be compassionate human beings and citizens of the planet Earth? Speak for yourself, buddy.

 

[mortiz]

So, because we're in no way linked to Iraq, we can't be compassionate human beings and citizens of the planet Earth? Speak for yourself, buddy.

For a start, compassion for things we really have no idea about isn't in the human markup and secondly after reading some things I've read I find it hard to believe some of you have any compassion at all anyway. At the end of the day, you can argue until the cows come home, but you, just like me, have no real idea of what's going on.

 

[Steve]

For a start, compassion for things we really have no idea about isn't in the human markup and secondly after reading some things I've read I find it hard to believe some of you have any compassion at all anyway. At the end of the day, you can argue until the cows come home, but you, just like me, have no real idea of what's going on.

Whether or not our scope of the reality over there is at all accurate doesn't mean we can't hope for the best.

You know what, though? Let's not start this thread down that inevitable path of flames, ya?

 

[seinfeldrules]

who's eating crow now?

Certainly not me, certainly not the US, and definitely not the Iraqi people. They can choose whoever they want as PM now, its no longer in the US' control. I can sure as hell tell you its a better choice than Saddam.

 

[^Ben]

This thread stinks of kiddy wee, and oneupman ship.

Well GG to Iraq only a couple of decades untill everything else is sorted out.

 

[burner69]

I said what I said earlier in jest Sein, and I think you picked up on that. Yeah, us cynical lefties deserve some threads aimed at us.

But Raziaar, remember this is politics, Stern has a valid viewpoint and you can't tell him not to express it. I mean, do you really think the Iraqi people knew much about any of the people they voted for, other than through campaigns, leaflets, or simply what side they represented. I'm sure if you asked the majority if they were aware the guy who might (or has?) ended up as their leader has some strong ties to the US they'd say no.

Just as we know very little about what goes on in the background in our elections. I mean the Gore/Bush election was just a joke, and yet Bush is president. I really don't understand that at all. In the land of the free a guy who wasn't elected get's in? What the hell happened there?

I really hope that Iraq sorts itself out, but with so many people hating the west, having people elected with largely unknown ties to the US could result in some really bad things. We have to be careful, and not just shrug off info like Sterns because it's not optimistic

 

[CptStern]

Certainly not me, certainly not the US, and definitely not the Iraqi people. They can choose whoever they want as PM now, its no longer in the US' control. I can sure as hell tell you its a better choice than Saddam.

just as the cia funded the Ba'athist coup (1963) that eventually put saddam in power, so to will they have a hand in shaping iraq for generations to come ..except now they dont have to be secretive ..they'll have one of their paid stooges do it for them