Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is Iraq a soveriegn nation? Were those elections "legitimate"?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
XOKCowboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-24-06 08:58 PM
Original message
Is Iraq a soveriegn nation? Were those elections "legitimate"?
We'll see soon. According to AmericaBlog and Newsweek...

A timetable for withdrawal of occupation troops from Iraq. Amnesty for all insurgents who attacked U.S. and Iraqi military targets. Release of all security detainees from U.S. and Iraqi prisons. Compensation for victims of coalition military operations.

Those sound like the demands of some of the insurgents themselves, and in fact they are. But they're also key clauses of a national reconciliation plan drafted by new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who will unveil it Sunday. The provisions will spark sharp debate in Iraq—but the fiercest opposition is likely to come from Washington, which has opposed any talk of timetables, or of amnesty for insurgents who have attacked American soldiers.


OK so the Iraqi government, elected in the much vaunted "free elections" of a few months ago, are trying to take control of their country. It is THEIR country isn't it? Their freely elected government, right? Well I'll bet you that the strongest objections will come from "the fatherland" (read Bush/Cheney and their lackeys in the Congress).

Read the AmericaBlog article here http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/06/bush-vistis-baghdad-iraqi-pm-wants.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FloridaPat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-24-06 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. We didn't invade Iraq to bring democracy. We are building 12
permanent military bases and the largest embassy in the world for 2 reasons: 1. give Halliburton a hell of a lot of money and 2: make sure Iraq does what we want it to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XOKCowboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-24-06 09:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Time to change the Talking Point re: Invading Iraq
We both know we'll never get out of Iraq as long as there's a drop of oil there or we get a different administration.

Just pointing out the hypocrisy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-24-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. What do you think they'll come up with next?
If we haven't "brought Democracy" to Iraq. And if their elections meant nothing...

NOW why was it we invaded?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-24-06 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Because corporate America backed the whole idea..... above
everything else, what is good for American corporate interests is the right thing to do. Fortunately other nations read us loud and clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
5. W flies in to a separate country without notifying their
government. That says it all.

What will be interesting is that the VAST majority of Iraqis want a time table. We'll see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XOKCowboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. This will blow all kinds of Repuke Talking Points...
completely out of the water. Is it "cutting and running" when the leaders of Iraq tell us to get the hell out?

Oh and what about amnesty? Very volatile topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-25-06 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. I guess American troops are seen as inconsequential deaths
But Tony Snow set the stage....2,500 is just a number.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC