Posted on 12/06/2004 5:10:58 PM PST by Congressman Billybob
HELL, NO.....STAND AND FIGHT!!!!!!!!!
yes, it should be delayed. if the security siuation remains as it is currently, it shoud be delayed. the iraqi forces are not able to provide security.
if the election is held, there will be massacres at many polling places. that will be the only story that gets any media attention regarding the iraqi election.
delaying the election will not "cripple iraq" - its simply an acknowledgment of the realities faced on the ground there, and that more time is needed to correct them.
Postponing an election on the premise that somebody might get hurt empowers those that are opposed to democracy. The next time they will up the ante to prevent elections. You can't negotiate with terrorists. Besides, would the elections be postponed because of weather.
Doc
Good stuff, CB. After listening to the Iraqi PM (Sunni) today (when he was with Bush in presser), I'm convinced the people of that country want this date to hold.
Yes, we should go ahead. If the Sunnis want to terrorize their neighbors or boycott the election, that's their business.
I don't know how often we have to point out that in this life, nothing is perfect. That's especially true of politics. If we wait until everything is perfect, we'll wait forever, because the terrorists, encouraged by the delay, will just start making new problems.
Let the Iraqi elections go forward, come hell or high water. Delay IS NOT AN OPTION. Any delay will only exacerbate the problem. Hat's off to you Congressman Billybob...
YES!
Shortly after he!! freezes over and tasks the terrorists in self survival without our help.
You have some "reality' arguments.
However,The delaying elections will probably be demoralizing to the Iraqis that want their own government. The Iraqis surely should be able to figure out a process for the elections. Why not take Florida's model....we took WEEKS to get our election done with all the pre-election day voting and lots of alternative polling places.
Uh, I am not hearing the UN really getting involved to figure out a process.
Just, for God's sake, keep Jimmy Carter outta 'der!!
Can't have the elections early, of course, but holding the elections in Afghanistan pretty much shut up the nay-sayers there, and we need to do the same in Iraq.
As a general practice, I look at the position taken by the NYT, and take the OPPOSITE position. Works 99% of the time!
how many people waiting to vote in florida were gunned down by AK47s and car bombs? if you don't think that is going to happen on election day in iraq, you are mistaken. absent some quick turnaround in the security situation there, it will.
I would say go forward with this election, if you could convince me that time wouldn't help solve this problem. But indeed, time is what we need to kill more insurgents, train more iraqi police and get the ones on the job now to actually start shooting back, etc. how many people a re you willing to see die to hold the election on 1/30?
Thanks for the bump,oceanview----A good read,but I still feel the way I feel.
The early elections didn't have bombs going off all over the place and raging terrorists----ooops,insurgents,trying to kill anything that moves.
yes. and again, notice how few posts these iraqi threads on FR get these days.
How far back will multiple massacres at the voting precincts
set the democratic process back?
Security must improve dramatically or the voters will not go to the polling place, making election 2005 in Iraq a joke.
Keep American and other Coalition troops back about 5 miles back from the polling places and let the chips fall where they may.
aaaaaaaangh.
wrong answer.
will security be better in 3,6 months. no the bad guys will see they forced a delay and step up the attacks.
if the sunni's do not get thier voice heard then they are to blame for allowing the terrorist safe haven for so long.
let them lose out not the 14 districts that are ready.
How far back will multiple massacres at the voting precincts
set the democratic process back?
_______________________________________________________________
Probably not as great a setback as postponing them would have. Postponing over "security concerns" pretty much assures the terrorists that they can disrupt any process that they see fit.
Typo -- didn't you mean 30 January, 2005?
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.