 |
 |
Baton Rouge Links |
 |
|
|
Last 10 Logins |
|
|
|  |
|
| LSU Tigers Baton Rouge Louisiana: Forums |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TigerU.com Forum Index -> Campus Greens at LSU
| Printable Version |
 |
Author
|
Message |
View previous topic
:: View next topic |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
lsuhockey4
I'm a Newbie!
Joined: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 23
Points : 0
Status: Offline
|
 Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 10:13 am
Post subject: Iraq elections not Legit |
  |
|
Everyday Iraq seems like another Vietnam. Think 72% is a high voter turnout? South Vietnam had an 83% turnout in its 1967 Presidential election.
(see: "U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote: Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror", The New York Times, September 4, 1967 http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news3/nytviet.htm )
"It's likely that the carnage, collapse of infrastructure, widespread rape, looting, etc. will continue in Iraq, and that more civilians and U.S. troops will die until the U.S. ends the occupation -- and may continue after the occupation, too, because of the breakdown of civil society and infrastructure caused by the invasion," said Ann Link, member of the Green Party of New York State Committee.
In Iraq, just as in Vietnam, we should not recognize an election run by an occupying military power as legitimate. This is because the invaders (USA) administered the vote, not the Iraqis.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Sunny
Veteran Poster
Joined: Sep 20, 2003
Posts: 688
Points : 380
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 12:00 pm
Post subject: |
  |
|
the reason the "occupying military power" organizes the election, is because there is no government left after the corrupt dictatorship is no longer in power. Hence there is nobody left to organize it.
|
____________
No participation, No reciprication! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
TheDude
I've been around a while
Joined: Feb 01, 2004
Posts: 259
Points : 98
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 1:46 pm
Post subject: Re: Iraq elections not Legit |
|
|
| lsuhockey4 wrote: | | In Iraq, just as in Vietnam, we should not recognize an election run by an occupying military power as legitimate. This is because the invaders (USA) administered the vote, not the Iraqis. |
Would you rather Saddam Hussein administer it?
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Mooshell
I've been around a while
Joined: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 260
Points : 0
Location: Somewhere ouuuut theere!
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:03 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Sunny wrote: | | the reason the "occupying military power" organizes the election, is because there is no government left after the corrupt dictatorship is no longer in power. Hence there is nobody left to organize it. |
EXACTLY.
Before you go off making whiney claims about Iraq Mr. Greenie, perhaps you should do a little research on democratic transitions and realize that it is impossible to complete a democratic transition after overthrowing a regime in a state where there are no democratic institutions AT ALL without an occupying military force. It doesn't make the vote illegitimate, it makes it POSSIBLE. There would be no vote in Iraq if the military pulled out.
I'm assuming since there are three distint factions of people in Iraq (the sunnis, the shiites, and the kurds) and only one of those groups lives on the land with resources, if left to themselves for a "legitimate" vote they would break up into three states and those that don't live on the land with resources would be forced to find a way to capitalize on sand or die. Yeah, that sounds MUCH better than having a military-occupied election.
In my opinion, we should just pull out and let them kill themselves. Then Americans at home could stop their whining, our soldiers could stop dying, and then it'd be up to the U.N. to decide if the Iraqi people are worth going in to save or not.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
LEstay
All Around Nice Guy
Joined: Jun 09, 2004
Posts: 1064
Points : 900
Location: Houston, Tx
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:19 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| Mooshell wrote: | | ... and then it'd be up to the U.N. to decide if the Iraqi people are worth going in to save or not. |
And we already know how worthless the UN is.
|
____________
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
rwnugent
Sexiest Man Alive
Joined: Sep 16, 2003
Posts: 2353
Points : 1262
Location: baton rouge
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:34 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
I think the elections have as much legitimacy as possible. Some news agencies reported that the Sunni Muslims boycotted the elections and now claim that they lack legitimacy because of that fact. I do not support the war in Iraq and I beleive that we should have never been there. This is just another example of trying to force a democracy on a people who don't want it and will probably fail at it miserably. I don't understand how a group of people can say they aren't going to vote when given the chance and then say the election isn't legitimate because they didn't vote. Those people are just fucked up and better left to themselves.
|
____________
"That´s my opinion I could be wrong." -Dennis Miller
Procrastination is like masturbation. It seems like a good idea at the time time but in the end you´re just fucking yourself. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Mooshell
I've been around a while
Joined: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 260
Points : 0
Location: Somewhere ouuuut theere!
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 2:54 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| rwnugent wrote: | | I don't understand how a group of people can say they aren't going to vote when given the chance and then say the election isn't legitimate because they didn't vote. |
Yeah, seriously. They can't claim to not be represented because they chose not to vote. They chose not to be represented by doing that.
In terms of "forcing" democracy on people, "forcing" democracy on Iraq is the only way Iraq has a chance. Otherwise they'll all kill eachother, and the people who live where there are resources will take control of them all and everyone else will be screwed.
IDEA!! We should make a reality show! Like "survivor" kinda, with a Sunni, a Shiite, and a Kurd (and a representative of any other people groups that may be present in Iraq), and whoever is left in the end gets all the oil and resources! Of course, the set would get suicide-bombed on the first day, and that would ruin the whole thing
*sigh* I go back to my letting them kill eachother idea. We know they don't have WMD now and the rest of the world seems to think they know better than we do about Iraq, so let's let them have their way!
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
LEstay
All Around Nice Guy
Joined: Jun 09, 2004
Posts: 1064
Points : 900
Location: Houston, Tx
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 3:49 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
I think it's the Sunni's fault if they didnt vote. At least it wasnt the no-Baath party.
(corrected for Mooshell... thanks!)
Last edited by LEstay on Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:39 pm; edited 1 time in total |
____________
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Mooshell
I've been around a while
Joined: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 260
Points : 0
Location: Somewhere ouuuut theere!
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 3:51 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| LEstay wrote: | | I think it's the Shiite's fault if they didnt vote. (Dont you just love that? Shiite). At least it wasnt the no-Baath party. |
It was the Sunni's who didn't vote.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
PhatLipMagee
Regular
Joined: 1103266256
Posts: 76
Points : 0
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:07 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
Pardon me...but uhhh...
This past Presidential election had a 60.7% turnout. We've been a "Democracy" for over 200 years. Iraq is still in it's Democratic enfancy and they got 72%. And that isn't legitimate enough?
Get your facts straight...
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Mooshell
I've been around a while
Joined: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 260
Points : 0
Location: Somewhere ouuuut theere!
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:15 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
| PhatLipMagee wrote: | Pardon me...but uhhh...
This past Presidential election had a 60.7% turnout. We've been a "Democracy" for over 200 years. Iraq is still in it's Democratic enfancy and they got 72%. And that isn't legitimate enough?
Get your facts straight... |
Ooo I was totally going to mention that and I forgot!
and btw.. We only got 60% out to vote and there was no physical threat on any of our lives for going to a polling place. Insurgents in Iraq were threatening the lives of those who would go out and vote and STILL 72% showed up.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
lsuhockey4
I'm a Newbie!
Joined: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 23
Points : 0
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:30 pm
Post subject: iraq |
|
|
Several things at work here. First of all democratic transition. Need we go into the examples of utter failure of real democracy in any country that had an oppressive regime overthrown that had no history of democracy? The point being that the U.S. committed an offensive attack on a soverign nation as we have done many times before. Because the U.S. invaded and destroyed all the infrastructure and disrupted the lives of everyone in the country; it becomes the job of the U.S. to establish some simblance of government. This war was not about liberation or democracy in Iraq, it was about oil. Keeping cheap oil cheap is not worth (currently) $156 billion, 1600 plus killed soldiers, 100000 plus wounded soldiers, not to mention the Iraqis that have died and have gotten mangled due to the invasion. Don't blame the Sunnis that didnt vote. We are, according to the late Ronald Reagan, "The City on the hill" as far as democracy goes. When Iraqis look at our last "election" and see that more registered voters did not vote than voted for the "winner" Bush, what are they supposed to think? Just like the some Sunnis, 67 million Americans know they wont get a fair shake and boycott the election. And I brought up the 72 percent to contrast it with the debacle in Vietnam where 83 percent showed up to vote with the threat of being killed by VietCong.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
PhatLipMagee
Regular
Joined: 1103266256
Posts: 76
Points : 0
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 5:01 pm
Post subject: |
|
|
blahblahblah...
bitchpissmoan...
Get a life...
and fuck the greens...I'm sorry I ever voted for any of their candidates.
Won't happen again.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
lsuhockey4
I'm a Newbie!
Joined: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 23
Points : 0
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 5:37 pm
Post subject: iraq |
|
|
More "bitchpissmoan"ing, my figure was a bit off. That was 78 million Americans who abstained from voting not 67 million. Furthermore, Iraq and Afghanistan have recently joined the list of 119 "democratic" nations worldwide. Of those 119 nations, 109 including Iraq and Afghanistan have the fundamental right to vote, not included in the 109 nations is United States of America. Iraqis enjoyed automatic and same day registration, which is prohibited in most states in this country, including Louisiana. All political parties were allowed to participate, while in our own nation the corporate controlled democrats and republicans shut out third parties from debates and the media. Am I whinning about things, you bet I am. I complain about our system because we deserve better. I protest our involvement in other nations' affairs, because what we do there comes back to us here in some form or another.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Mooshell
I've been around a while
Joined: Apr 26, 2004
Posts: 260
Points : 0
Location: Somewhere ouuuut theere!
Status: Offline
|
Posted:
Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:20 pm
Post subject: Re: iraq |
|
|
| lsuhockey4 wrote: | | That was 78 million Americans who abstained from voting not 67 million. |
That's 78 million dumbasses who are too stupid to realize that not voting is EXACTLY what "corporate america" wants you to do. You can whine and cry all you want, but those 78 million people didn't vote for your candidate and they had every option to. Who are you to say that all 78 million were "protesting"? I'm willing to bet everything I have that a large percentage of those were people that were too lazy to get off their couch or just plain don't care about politics. You people think you are so smart, but "corporate america" has you exactly where they want you. Hows it feel?
Third parties are shut out from debates because there isn't enough support to make it worth anyone's time. If you want to be heard, get your butts mobilized so that you have more than only 3%-5% of people voting for your candidate. "Waa waa waa we don't get any air time!" Bring a candidate that's actually noteworthy, and show us that more than 5% of the nation actually cares, and maybe things will change.
Until then, go ahead and whine and moan, block traffic, and sit at home on election day. That REALLY changes things. REALLY.
Last edited by Mooshell on Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:22 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
| | | | | | |
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
