If those numbers are even close, I'm impressed. The only person I heard on the news predicting such a high turnout was the Iraqi prime minister. I guess he knows his people better than our pundits.

there were some violent attacks, but around 40 casualties for the entire country qualifies as low violence to me... especially considering the turnought was reportedly very high in some places.

i'm an optimist, generally, and this seems to have gone much better than i expected. under the circumstances, i don't think anyone could've thought it would go much better than it did.

it gives me a warm-fuzzy feeling inside.

QUESTION: does anyone know how this played on Al-Jazeera or Al-Arabiya over there?

I hopped over to Al Jazeera and they were mixed on their reporting. They focused A LOT on the sunni's who didn't show, they talked about the high Kurdish turnout and mostly ignored the huge shiite turnout.

I was disappointed, but not surprised.

That's cause Al Jazeera is owned by Sunnis. What yall dont understand, that in every Arab country, if you are Sunni you ARE the government. If you are Shi'i you ARE the working class. So, you can see where Al Jazeera would be just a tad bit biased.

If the Sunnis didn't vote, screw em. They have had their boot on the throats of 80% of the country for decades. Sure they're not happy about losing their dominant position, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

I note that there is already bitching the the Sunni's are going to be "under represented".

Gee, I wonder who's fault THAT is?

Oh yeah, the United States :rolleyes:

Wow, what a success! Much better than I expected and I expected it to go pretty well. I think a lot of credit goes out to the Iraqi government and the US Government for making this critical election run as well as it did. No matter where you sit politically, you can not deny that Bush did a good job in making sure these elections ran smoothly.

Want to bet? :D

I wont go into all the others. But I have to say, just as predicted by many people here, went smoothly just as it did in Afghanistan, after everyone saying the exact same things on how violent it would be.

Some of you seem to be gloating just a little today. For what exactly? An election that’s taking place half a world away? Being able to say Bush did something "right?" If the Iraqis end up a free and stable nation then good for them. If they do all the work to start their new government and get it up and running then good for them. But, the question that's lingering on my mind is, what do WE as the United States get out of the deal? That's the question all of you need to ask yourselves.

Was it worth it? And if you say yes, then what was it that made this whole mess worth it?

Look under the surface, and read between the lines.

What we get out of an American friendly, free and Democratic Iraq in the Middle East? You sir might need to brush over your geopolitical knowledge, there is a lot to gain there.

A beaming example to the rest of the Arab world on democracy and civil rights.

A vast improvement to the stability of a region.

Return of international respect for the benefits of American foreign policy.

Yeah, I'd say it was worth the cost if successful.

So Iraq is friendly to the US. AND??? One country out of many in the middle east. So is Iran next? What exactly is there to gain? (besides the free society which is what everyone is spewing right now and at the same time I might remind everyone is not the reason we went in the first place) That was my question. Are we just going to be like "ok, your country is free now. Glad we could help. See ya later you'll never hear from us again."

If only it worked the other way too. Is Bush ever going to do anything other than champion a success and ignore a failure? I'm not holding my breath.

of Course it's worth it.

Even if we don't look at a possible trading partner. What about doing it for the good of the Iraqi people. Or are they not good enough to warent a free country to live in. (they weem to want it, but who can say that they schouldn't have it)

Haven't you heard of charity. There is a lot of that out there. It works by people helping others and not asking for anything in return. It goes hand and hand with kindness. That question angers me. It is like asking those hit by the tsunami to send me a check or a free hotel room for helping them.

And what exactly would we trade with a free Iraq? What would they trade with us? They really don't have any currency to speak of. since the givernment is just starting up.

Tsunami/Iraq. Apples to Oranges, seriously. You mean to tell me that you believe that we went over there out of charity?

They have oil, and we are over there helping them set up their plants and that is a big source of wealth.




No, we didn't go over becuase of the kindness in our hearts. But, when we didn't find any WMD's we could have apt. the current PM and left. By staying there and making sure that Iraq gets a goold start Americans are paying with their lives. All to make sure that someone that they don't know doesn't ahev to fear their goverment. We could have easily pulled out right after we took Saddam out, or placed our own people in charge of their goverment. But we didn't and we are paying for it (lives and money) to make sure that we do the right thing.

Thank you for proving my point.

And why are we doing all of this you think? Could it be because:

And Iraq happens to owe us billions of dollars because the Bush admin. has stated that the money we're using to free them is a loan. And how do you think they will pay that loan back?

Thats your whole point??????

Cause we could have put in our own goverment with our hand selected people to get their oil. There is more than greed at play here. Cause if we just wanted the oil we could have just slaughtered everyone and not worried about the people who now have control over their goverment.

Yes, we can get oil from them. But, you make it seem as it is such a bad thing. And before you go and say that this was all for the oil, those counties agaisnt the war were keeping saddam in power so they could get it themselves. I think that our way is a much better, and more humaine way to do it.

That in the end, we went in to economically control Iraq and eventually get our hands on their oil, then yes.

We did. They voted on it yesterday. The government in Iraq will be American friendly. That's already been established.

Are you sure? Really?


The United States purposely slaughtering the Iraqi people in order to get their oil. Ok. Now, under your scenario, we forced our way into Iraq, killed their people, took their oil and gave the insurgents and the rest of the Middle East region a new basis of anti-Americanism. Thousands rise up against us in defiance. That'd look very nice on the world stage. Cowboy diplomacy, is it?

Getting oil from them is not a bad thing you say? And killing innocent civilians is a much more humane way to do it?? Listen to yourself! Please, please get your head out of the sand. Look at the big picture for a minute. In the end, this will be all about oil. All the other dictators in the world haven't been attacked yet. Why? China, Iran, N. Korea, etc can actually defend themselves. Iraq was this little nation that couldn't fight back even if they wanted to. The CIA already knew that there were no WMD's. That's why we attacked. Don't believe me? Then why is Bush going on and on about trying to resolve the N. Korea situation with actual diplomacy? What about cowboy diplomacy? N. Korea is some shittly little country way up there. We can take em! Right?

Maybe France, Canada, and all the rest were trying to get oil for themselves. At this point we'll never know. What pisses me off is that kids had to go and die because of America's thirst for black gold.

We went to war for oil. Again. PLAIN AND SIMPLE. And the fact that there are people out there who think that's ok disgusts me. If I was a parent and I learned that Bush sent my kid off to die becasue he wanted oil for his big oil friends it would really piss me off.

If this was only about oil we would have left Saddam in place and taken sactions off him and let him sell it at bottom prices to get back his military.

But he had WMD's!!

And how would we have gained economic control if Saddam was left in power?

The way I see it, control of Iraqi oil has been taken out of the hands of an unpredictable madman, and placed into the hands of Iraqis who hopefully will use it more productively.

They can vote whoever they want. But, if you want to call it American Friendly go ahead. Beacuse there are millions of American Friendly Iraqis.



Yes, you are right we went in there and slaughtered Iraqi people. To bad those Iraqi's had guns and bombs and were firing them at our troops and beheading people. Not to mention that most of those people that are fighting aren't from Iraq. And those thousands you mentioned, thats less than 1%. Hmmm... Millions turn out to vote, thousands try ro scare poeple into a fasicst state that they want to be incontrol of.


We are at war with N. Korea. Just not fighting. There was never and end to the Korean War, that is why we are still in Korea Guarding the 38th.

Wow, you have no regard for the Iraqis that were killed and Tortured by Saddam. Do you not think that it is better that Iraq is not under Saddam anymore? But you are saying that it isn't ok for us to go in and take him out, but it is ok for other Governments (that aren't under Bush(why i think that you are against all of this) ) can pay the man to stay in power to slip them oil .

And you know what when someone joins the army they better be prepared to go and fight and could die.

I wish I had a nickel for everytime this has been posted.

But the world isn't that black and white.

Was oil a part of the equation? Certainly.

Is that a bad thing? No.

Is there more to the reasons we are there? Absolutely.

Amazing. I'm the only one who sees it wrong to fight wars, to kill people just for some oil because we Americans are too damn stupid to get off our ass and develop an alternative source of energy. Amazing.

Maybe we are headed down the tubes.

You are not the only. One think you seem to not grasp, or you may not even know is that there is major long term geopolitical issues regarding Iraq's oil, it doesn't even pertain to us touching their oil. The fact that you base all this off us not developing an alternate source of energy, leads me to believe you are ignorant to the reality of the situation. In 2003 we got less then 1/4 of our oil from the Middle East (less then 5% from Iraq), we got it mainly from South America and Canada. The issue is that other countries namely China and Western European nations get the majority of their oil from the Middle East. You do the math.

And you quote your source....

Based off my 2003 numbers:

Top 5 as listed by http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20030919.html

Okay, Mojo_PeiPei responded to your request for documentation.

It's time for you to do the same, namely, please post how much oil we've taken from Iraq thus far.

Their throats look alright to me. That 90% turnout in some areas wasn't bad, either.

<img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RQDrAjMVKulnw2SkFw*lmgkc8R6Tg!H4kxLoawmYg02pMlGO6n6e5TjY73H0r9MENiIRhBnLLOv84DYTfSEsMFI3kbJW6*8DeMhdgMtXmys/i1.jpg?dc=4675508268962885876></img>

<img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RQDvAjQVbOkkYRs1RE2CatBxCV!eM26z!ZIE0DsmAkpHMoqkqK8HIZ*9wmGzUacABAAZogkTELGsD4nGl7YquHGJBQ7HeMBf9B976kya2UM/i2.jpg?dc=4675508269003126539></img>

<img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RQDvAjUVrulDDGA46cX7XR1CjPnuN2tAaontjtBm12lYPMlCcGZEmZJ3rD*cDq4tT2djKURu*7hmm!4MJ6!rP62NLf5kGg*es!GRp5W7DuI/i3.jpg?dc=4675508269040163473></img>

<img src=http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0RQATAzYV8OkKfl26NhiavIq09Wzt1AH1CRI0eGNwvXXSb6FJv5xPhVFB1ecOrCq0uTHbdmjVxVU9AcbeHF1UK2hqXGmz7U49LnNmiZPBxAs/i4.jpg?dc=4675508269072969070></img>

Yes, voting there (and in Germany, Iran, Syria, etc.) required courage.

Unlike many US voters, who think it's too difficult to drive down the street to the polls, the Iraqis apparently value the privilege of voting.

John Kerry isn't president.

I never said that we got all our oil from Iraq. I don't really see the point of your scarcastic remark. No one's received anything from Iraq in the past 2 years for obvious reasons. I just find it odd that we go to war just to get our hands on it.

I never said you did, so please refrain from future "straw man" arguments.

Again, please post something that will give credibility to your claim that "we go to war just to get our hands on it."

I'm assuming you're referring to the current conflict.

You want facts, read the ENTIRE thread. Tell me anything I've stated is false.

Why don't you offer some type of debate instead of trying your best to silence someone when their opinion doesn't exactly match yours since I'm so out of whack.

Can I be immature for a second and say that it comes as a great joy to me that people Rdr4ever and Raveneye were unequivocally wrong about the elections (short of some massive bomb shell being dropped that would otherwise discredit)?

It is posts and mentalities like yours that give aid and comfort to the terrorists and insurgents in Iraq, asserting things like there is no point in voting, and painting pictures of doom and gloom. It does nobody any good, if anything it does harm, those assholes see shit like that and push just a little harder, trying to get the paper tiger to meow.

*You can't publish that article johnny. It goes against the war. You might be helping the terrirosts*

I can see it now. Students already think our rights should be surpressed so I can totally see this coming.

Like I stated earlier in this thread, because I don't wholeheartedly agree with Bush and this war that makes me a traitor and I'm aiding the terrorists right? What a fucking crock. Don't feed me the "don't question government in a time of war" bullshit either. Bush did a lot of fucked up things in this "war" and for him to even think that people will just blindly follow him and his lies is absurd. Our duty as citizens is to question our government, not become pawns just because "war" is declared and we should just automatically "rally behind the president" like sheep.

I think for myself. I suggest you do the same for once.

I think we're clouding the issues:

I was/am against the war but I still recognize that the elctions are a success. You really can't deny it unless it's some really elaborate scheme involving a Hollywood shoot with a ton of extras in the desert.

You know, good for them, you can still applaud the success of an election while standing by your belief that the war was wrong. It's just different issues (unless you believe the ends justify the means which is dangerous and sKetchy policy).

There's no need for petty bickering, none of us truly know the answers or can predict the future. All we have are opinions and in this case (as in others) some of us were right and some of us were wrong in regards to certain elements). It doesn't mean one was right or wrong before or will be right or wrong in the future. Each case is independent of the other. Obviously there are many on this board who are divided ideology wise and politically. But that should not impede political discourse. It is good to stay on track and try to maintain the standard of discussion by using relevant material and backing up with sources.

So in sum:

The election went well. Yes, I think that's a cause that everyone can celebrate. But it doesn't neccessarily demean or counter Rdr4ever and Raveneye etc opinions per se. They had their opinion and you had yours. It appears that this time or in this instant that they were incorrect. Me too. I also thought the elections were going to be a fiasco (and same with many people) but it looks like I'm wrong here. NO big deal, I don't really have a problem with that. It doesn't mean that everything I say or all my opinions are wrong either.

In a weird way, I'm proud of the Iraqis for coming out and voting. All politics aside, I must say that I felt a twinge of emotion(especially as a proud American) when I read about the droves of people who came out and voted. It truly is an incredible process and I am always cognizant of the fact how precious the right to vote is. It looks like we could learn a thing or two about participation eh? Anyways, since they don't have Florida or Ohio, it looks like they'll be ok (Ha! I had to get that in there, LOL!)