The Upcomming Iraqi Election!!!

[Nightfire]

What do you guys think, should the election in Iraq be postponed? please don't just write a yes or no, write your reason.

i believe that it shouldn't because it will make us look bad...that we can not continue an election because of some terrorist group who wants to interfere with the election.

but that's just me, what do you guys think?

[leejo]

I think it should go as planned. What purpose does delaying the election serve? Proponents merely claim that the situation is too unstable for free elections now, but I haven't heard suggestions about how delaying them will bring about stability. The strategy in this effort from our perspective is to create a political environment that takes the air out of the insurgents' sails. An Iraqi government of, for, and by Iraqiis is a strong step in that direction.

Conversely, what happens if the elections are delayed? Well for one thing, the US prestige is damaged. While egos should be left at home in matters like this, it has strategic implications. I've been reading T.E. Lawrence's timeless 27 Articles and I believe that they suggest that delaying the election will bring down both the Sunni leadership in place now and the coalition in the eyes of the man on the street, neither of which is acceptable.

After an election, foreign "supporters" of the insurgency will be on more untenable ground. Right now, it's alleged that Syria and Iran are assisting insurgents. A recognized, elected Iraqi government puts them in a more perilous position and creates a better environment for the US to use force if necessary to make them stop.

I just don't see what delaying the vote does for us. SSDD if we do that. An election now may be flawed, bloody, imperfect, etc., but it will represent progress.

[Tempus]

The 'winner' of the elections is already decided. The question is only: should the show go on on-time. For the US, that answer is obviously yes. The only problem is that a disputed election (where not everyone can vote, or they feel threatened when they do) will cast more doubts on the legitimacy of their appointed president.

[leejo]

This isn't an election with one winner - all sorts of positions are being filled. Yes Allawi may already have an insurmountable advantage as the de facto incumbent, but that doesn't mean that the election is rigged - people may vote for whom they please without fear of US intimidation or coercion.

With regard to people feeling safe, etc., I will wait to see how folks turn out. There were similar predictions of doom before the Afghanistan election and people turned out in droves.

As far as casting doubts on legitimately elected (not appointed) leaders, the American left is writing the book on that and the world is watching, so I think it's safe to say that the political losers in this election will make that claim. Hopefully without any significant success.

In any case, I don't see a viable alternative. The UN, the insurgeants, and our political enemies, including the American left, would like nothing more than to keep the status quo in Iraq. How does that help, and who does that help? Why is it better for the average Iraqi on the street to delay the election?

[DudeMan]

i believe that it shouldn't because it will make us look bad

i trhink that statement is quite wrong, the election should be postponed if there are questions about voter safety, candidate saftey or rigged elections.

to wipe the notion of postponing it because it will make you look bad is dangerous./

i myself think it should go ahead, because violence has been falling in ira, and the vast majority in iraq want these elections to be held.

[DudeMan]

Originally Posted by DudeMan

i trhink that statement is quite wrong, the election should be postponed if there are questions about voter safety, candidate saftey or rigged elections.

to wipe the notion of postponing it because it will make you look bad is dangerous./

i myself think it should go ahead, because violence has been falling in ira, and the vast majority in iraq want these elections to be held.

on the other hand i feel the hand of history about to smack me in the head, this looks like the elections that followed the versaiiles treaty, im not sure these elections are the big thing iraq has been promised.

[leejo]

Well alrighty then: http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...395833334.html

Well I guess it's easy to armchair quarterback something like this. Alawi's pals are getting blown up and shot all around him, so...

[CaveDog]

Originally Posted by leejo

I just don't see what delaying the vote does for us. SSDD if we do that. An election now may be flawed, bloody, imperfect, etc., but it will represent progress.

Well, I would presume to give our troops the benifit of the doubt, and assume that they are making a difference there. Thus, with more time will come more stability, in that, our boys are busting ass to get rid of terrorists and such.

You could say that holding a legitimate election and getting a legitamate government there is the only thing to bring a close to the insurgency, and I would tend to agree, but to say that there would be no change day-to-day seems wrong. Aren't we being told that the situation is improving?

[leejo]

Originally Posted by Tempus

The 'winner' of the elections is already decided. The question is only: should the show go on on-time. For the US, that answer is obviously yes. The only problem is that a disputed election (where not everyone can vote, or they feel threatened when they do) will cast more doubts on the legitimacy of their appointed president.

Bump. Didn't turn out this way. The "appointed" president's party got 14% of the vote.

Also, Sunnis admit poll boycott blunder and ask to share power