LOL!
Posted on 11/24/2006 6:46:08 PM PST by kristinn
But I don't suppose you're much interested in the truth, are you? Much more fun to be cute and insult in ignorance, eh?
If Saddam was feeling benevolent and they could get out of Baghdad and the areas around that quickly enough...sure....
or they are racist imho.....
"risking their lives" to vote, has little to do with being ready. they have, so far, shown themselves unable to form the institutions (free of corruption) and security apparatus needed to sustain a democracy. anybody can vote and dip their finger into an inkwell.
LOL!
I'll just be glad when he hangs. This period leading up to his execution's not helping any with the violence. Atleast he's got his fair trial which is more than anybody (except maybe the UN)can say about his victims
I'd be willing to support the plan to partition Iraq.
If it was just a guestworker program I would be for it. But it is not, within all the bills they kill the 1996 expansion of the RICO Act.
Saddam's connection to Al Qaeda alone trumps WMD
I wish we could dip our fingers in inkwells to make the RATS lose every election. However, we had corruption galore in some of our vaunted institutions, hadn't we? LOL
Al Qaeda terrorists, Iranian agents and Syrian agents disrupting a democracy has little to do with the large majority of Iraqis being ready for democracy.
no, I am talking about the sitation we have - right now.
look, I was onboard with this thing. I figured that within 9-12 months, iraqi security forces could have been developed to secure the country. it hasn't happened.
US forces are presently hamstrung in iraq - because its not our country, we have this democracy over there now that is not ready to secure itself, not able to sustain the institutions needed to host a democracy (corruption, allegiance to militias instead of the elected government, etc) - but Maliki will not allow US forces to do much about it. so what do we do? do we sponsor a coup to overthrow Maliki? do we re-declare ourselves the military occupier of iraq and invalidate their elections? there aren't alot of good options available, that's why you see Baker looking into some backroom deals for a "regional plan" - which is going to involve the US having to agree to some very unpleasant things over there.
Me too. As long as we can track them and control it.
Another MAJOR reason we should not cut and run is that Syria and Iran are most likely next on the list and going there from neighboring Iraq makes more sense than Murtha's redeployment to east asia plan.
Good news here
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1744380/posts
Yeah like we are free of corruption...
the first job of any democracy - is security. if it can't secure itself, it can't sustain itself.
the iraqi police forces - are generally regarded as just a bunch of guys looking for a steady paycheck. the army is in much better shape, but still lacking. and the government apparatus is loaded with problems - look at the new thread running now, Maliki just fired 3000 employees for being loyal to the militias and not the elected government. this is what it means to be "not ready".
They should have been executed on the spot. That's 3000 more added to the streets.
but the comparison to make - is whether the United States could have sustained itself from 1776-1787 in that environment, not a comparison of the US today to a new democracy in iraq.
So do the liberals in this country.
I for one can't believe some of the cowardly comments I have been reading on various threads, I wanted to send them all a white chicken feather but I don't have that many white hens!
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.