- #1
- 23,370
- 10,664
Knowing the danger of terrorism, if you were an Iraqi living in Baghdad, would you vote in the upcoming election?
Smurf said:no, we all know the american puppet is going to win anyways, if you support him you don't need to vote and if you don't support him your vote won't be counted.
Smurf said:no, we all know the american puppet is going to win anyways, if you support him you don't need to vote and if you don't support him your vote won't be counted.
russ_watters said:Knowing the danger of terrorism, if you were an Iraqi living in Baghdad, would you vote in the upcoming election?
Think about it this way:russ_watters said:Knowing the danger of terrorism, if you were an Iraqi living in Baghdad, would you vote in the upcoming election?
You lost me in the second sentence, wasteofo2 - are you saying the US circa 1900 was comparable to Iraq circa 2002?wasteofo2 said:Think about it this way:
Picture that you live in the year 1900 in America. Pretty much the whole government is corrupt, in the pockets of trusts. France decides "Man, those Americans have a ****ty life, living under that corrupt government and all, let's go liberate them." So France comes over, destroys our government, kills 10 or 20 thousand civilians with mis-guided artilery fire, has a prison abuse scandal or two, and then sets up elections. Would you vote, Russ?
I'm not saying that the us circa 1900 was comparable to Iraq circa 2002, I only selected 1900 because it was the first highly corrupt time that popped into my head.russ_watters said:You lost me in the second sentence, wasteofo2 - are you saying the US circa 1900 was comparable to Iraq circa 2002?
This election, guys, is the first opportunity these Iraqis have ever had to select any part of their government. Please don't forget that.
I think you miss the point - "wasn't that great" is not a good reason to overthrow a government, so the scenarios aren't at all comparable.wasteofo2 said:I'm not saying that the us circa 1900 was comparable to Iraq circa 2002, I only selected 1900 because it was the first highly corrupt time that popped into my head.
The era really isn't important though. If at any point, America had a government that wasn't that great, and some foreign nation that you hated took it upon themselves to topple it, killed thousands of civilians with mis-guided artillery, then set up elections, would you vote in it?
Dunno, but I doubt anyone alive today in Iraq voted for it.And wasn't there some Iraqi parliment in the early 1900's?
Iraq didn't exist until 193...2?...9? something like that.And wasn't there some Iraqi parliment in the early 1900's?
russ_watters said:If I was living in Germany or Japan in 1945, I would have voted in the elections set up by the Allies - that is a comparable scenario.
Smurf said:no, we all know the american puppet is going to win anyways, if you support him you don't need to vote and if you don't support him your vote won't be counted.
franznietzsche said:thats funny cause they're voting for an assembly, not a president.
That'd be a hell of a lot of puppets. I doubt the administration could remember all their names.
russ_watters said:You lost me in the second sentence, wasteofo2 - are you saying the US circa 1900 was comparable to Iraq circa 2002?
This election, guys, is the first opportunity these Iraqis have ever had to select any part of their government. Please don't forget that.
kat said:Iraq didn't exist until 193...2?...9? something like that.
selfAdjoint said:So Bilal, would you be coontent with a threefold partition, Kurdistan, historic Iraq, and umm, West Iran?
Is it really? Exactly how many poll workers were murdered by insurgents in Japan and Germany? Exactly how many people working as Allied soldiers and police officers were killed by German and Japanese terrorists? Do you happen to recall how many polling places and police stations were blown up by car bombs in 1945 Japan and Germany? I'd say these are fairly different circumstances hombre, as much as ya'll would like to believe it's just like Japan or Germany.russ_watters said:If I was living in Germany or Japan in 1945, I would have voted in the elections set up by the Allies - that is a comparable scenario.
kat said:A better comparision might be with algeria...Although, I understand there was more violence in Algeria.
The current political situation in Iraq is complex and volatile. The country has been facing ongoing challenges such as political instability, corruption, and sectarian tensions. In addition, the rise of extremist groups has further destabilized the region.
Voting in Iraq is considered a risky choice for citizens in Baghdad due to the security threats and violence that often occur during elections. The country has a history of election-related violence, and there are concerns about the safety of voters and candidates.
The electoral process in Iraq is overseen by the Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC). Elections are held every four years, and citizens vote for representatives in the Council of Representatives, the country's legislative body. The winning party then selects the Prime Minister to form a government.
Baghdad citizens face various challenges when trying to vote, including security concerns, logistical issues, and lack of trust in the electoral process. Many polling stations are located in areas with high levels of violence, making it difficult for citizens to safely cast their votes.
Voting plays a crucial role in shaping the future of Iraq. It allows citizens to have a voice in the country's political process and choose leaders who will represent their interests. However, if the electoral process is not perceived as fair and legitimate, it can further fuel political instability and hinder progress towards a stable and democratic Iraq.