Proving that the Marianas Trench is not the lowest place on the crust of the earth, the Bush administration is busy lowering expectations about the impending Iraqi elections. Apparently, the point of these elections is that they happen at all, not the results or the turnout of the electorate. Seems to me that if that is the standard of the elections, the one that Saddam held where he won 100% of the vote easily exceeds the standard of success set by this Administration.
"I don't think they're thinking of a Plan B. What they have is permutations of Plan A: You go for elections, hope for the best and if it doesn't materialize, you go with whatever emerges -- probably a heavily Shiite government," said Henri J. Barkey, a former State Department Iraq specialist who is now head of Leheigh University's International Relations Department. "Then you hope that this new government will be smart enough and enlightened enough to make an outreach to the Sunnis."Hope. Plan. One of these things is not like the other.
I am with you 100% on this Hal. Can you just imagine how terrible it would be if the elections go well? Imagine the horror of democracy spreading through the Arab world.
After the Gore thrashing and that whole clueless Kerry fiasco I think that success in the middle east might be too much for you libs.
Soviet Union...gone! House....gone! Senate....gone! Whitehouse...gone!
and now democracies replacing dictatorships!!!
You poor babys. My thoughts are with you in this time of sorrow.
Mark
W.......still the PRESIDENT
Gingrich/Chief Justice
Mark, you really are a twisted soul. Yes, something that was completely and utterly unplanned, managed by ideological bozos who don't even know anything about the middle east, and enforced by death squads, collective punishment and torture stands such a fantastic chance of working.
I'm sure you don't miss that soul you used to have, but let me assure you, the rest of us do.
W...... still AWOL, still a liar and still incompetent
I am sorry Mark, but I believe you have a serious deficiency in understanding written word. It is not the very improbable success of the Iraqi election Hal fears, but its very possible failure as an actual, democratic election. If enough people do not vote, because the U.S. military is unable to make the election safe, because the people in charge make it a too early one (probably because of hubris and inability to admit failure), the election will be a joke.
Besides, anyone somewhat well informed can see that it is a distinct possibility that if the Iraqis do cast their votes in a meaningful percentage, the government they elect will be at best, at unfriendly terms with yours. Depending of course upon which parties and/or individuals are permitted to join the race...
Speaking of the Gore trashing, your memory seems a short one, too. Gore had more total votes. Bush only won because a judge appointed by his daddy decided so. That is "real democracy", is it not? Perhaps the Iraqis should copy your system, where a vote to Nader was a vote to Bush, too, because two-party system works so well, does it not?
"Democracies replacing dictatorships"? We will see, and I will certainly hope so. But until Iraq is safe, free from outer influence and a democratic state which upholds human rights, I will continue to mock you and yours.
Don't take it wrong, Mark. I kind of enjoy reading your comments, the ones to shot down one by one. I very much enjoy reading about your blind faith in above authority, like that of a child. And most of all, I admire your bravado and bone-headed resiliency in defending probable torturers-by-proxy, fuck-ups and police state creators. Rock on!
--
Juho Lankinen