“Who decides when this will be???”
This doesn’t answer my question. You had claimed that the Iraqi government wants us out of Iraq. How is the petition you cited different than the current stance of the Bush administration?
“Iraq has made Islamic Shria law the central tenet of their constitutional law.”
You appear to be introducing a new arguement here. Nowhere does the Iraqi constitution even mention Shria law, and specifically bans takfir, making the implementation of Shria law impossible without violating the constitution.
“Was it really in our best interests to replace a brutal secular dictator with an equally brutal form of Islamic law?”
I don’t consider Saddam secular. I also don’t believe that a democratic state anywhere is comparible to Saddam’s regime. I considered Saddam a sworn enemy of the U.S. and I recognize the fact that he was in blatent violation of a cease fire in which we sacrificed lives to achive. I don’t blame the current atrocities in Iraq on the Iraqi government, I blame them on Al Qaeda, Iran, and Syria. So the comparison is invalid to begin with.
“What a mess the neo-cons have created.”
Sounds like a blame-America-first approach. Iraq was a mess when Saddam was in power (as seen by hundreds of thousands unearthed from mass graves). The U.S. and her coalition allies are helping to create an democratic Iraq who fights against common enemies (ie, Al Qaeda).
A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.
Article 89: Second: The Federal Supreme Court shall be made up of number of judges, and experts in Islamic jurisprudence and law experts…"
What happens when some parts of the Iraq Constitution conflict with "No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established."?
What would an Islamic "Federal Supreme Court" decide?