Here's some good news...

[PaceAdvantage]

http://www.newsday.com/media/photo/2005-01/16078642.jpg

[CryingForTheHorses]

8 million people voting!!
Thats is 1 huge step for mankind!
God bless Iraq and all the people defending them. I do see a turning point in this war

[ponyplayer]

This will probably piss off the mainstream media who have been predicting low voter turn out because of fear....some wrong reporting from them again, kind of like projecting Kerry a winner on election day... :D

Let freemdom ring.

[ponyplayer]

Oops....should be "Let freedom ring..." ;)

[doophus]

Could be picture of the year! Muslim female voting and displaying the tell-tale purple finger.........stay tuned.

[sq764]

...where are ya?? Several threads about the Iraq election and no input from any of you??

Don't you have ANYTHING negative you can drag out of this? Come on, don't disappoint us all..

[lsbets]

Do you remember when CBS admitted the Busg/Guard story was bogus? We didn't hear from Sec, ljb, or hcap for several days until the left decided which way to spin things.

Its the same now. Bet has class. He said he still thinks the war was wrong, but yesterday was good. We won't hear from the others until the radical left decides how to spin people risking their lives to vote as a bad thing - how bad it is that millions and millions of people stood up to terrorists and chose democracy, even if it is in its infant stages. They'll think of something in a few days, and then they'll be back.

Who knows, they might be having a conference call right now to decide how to spin it. I can just hear the call from Sec's house "Okay, I agree, but hold on, let me put 46 on the line." Does his head face left and then far left during the call as he changes character? It could make a great comedy routine.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I may be wrong, but i think she's wearing lipstick too! Maybe that is news also.

[sq764]

Do you remember when CBS admitted the Busg/Guard story was bogus? We didn't hear from Sec, ljb, or hcap for several days until the left decided which way to spin things.

Its the same now. Bet has class. He said he still thinks the war was wrong, but yesterday was good. We won't hear from the others until the radical left decides how to spin people risking their lives to vote as a bad thing - how bad it is that millions and millions of people stood up to terrorists and chose democracy, even if it is in its infant stages. They'll think of something in a few days, and then they'll be back.

Who knows, they might be having a conference call right now to decide how to spin it. I can just hear the call from Sec's house "Okay, I agree, but hold on, let me put 46 on the line." Does his head face left and then far left during the call as he changes character? It could make a great comedy routine.
"Well Sec, should we just admit this is a great thing for Iraq??"
"Hell no, we can't admit that... Lemme think...."
"I got 3 words for you guys - Diebold - Iraq Headquarters!! We can focus on voter fraud!! We just need to figure out who the Dem candidate is that's losing"

[Secretariat]

...where are ya?? Several threads about the Iraq election and no input from any of you??

Don't you have ANYTHING negative you can drag out of this? Come on, don't disappoint us all..

You really don't understand me. I think it's wonderful that Iraqis are voting in an election. However, I do not beleive the role of America is nation building across the globe. i do not beleive this was the stated reason for invading Iraq nor do I think the war in Iraq has helped us get the culprits behind 911.

This doesn't mean I think the capture of Hussein and the Iraqi people getting to vote is a good thing. I'm not sure if Iraqis know what the people they are voting for stand for but that is a different matter.

my reservations about iraq are not about whether a democracy in Iraq might work. they were that they have diverted our attention from the real enemy under the guise of a threat to the US under a WMD allegation. This was never proven.

Now does capturing the people responsible for 911 seem negative. I hope not. Personally, that is the mission I am interested in. Personally, Israel is now in fear that Iraqi is going to become a secular state. Which is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

I applaud the courage of Iraqis who went out to vote and risked thier lives, particularly the Shiites who rsiekd Sunni reprisals. The Kurds are pro-American, the Shiites according to the Zogby poll want us out by a 69% rate immediately. THe Sunnis for the most part did not vote much in the election.

I posted this article on the What Happens Next thread. i think it is a good overview.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050131/wl_mideast_afp/iraqvotemideastpress_050131102729

[sq764]

I think we all do know you too well....

Your response was typical - a slight reference to a great event for Iraq, the US and Bush, then quickly diverting to other perceived shortcomings that satisfy you enough to cover up your initial recognition..

[JustRalph]

maybe after 9-11 we should be in the nation building business?

I would have never thought so about 5 years back.........but maybe we should being doing some construction in places where evil triumphs over good.......

[ElKabong]

Absolutely right, JR....They still post as if it's 9-10-01.

PA, great picture! Have saved it and sent to a few Kerrybots I know. It rips their guts to see a free-voting Iraq.

Sec,

If saddam hadn't played hide and seek w/ the WMD he did/ did not have, if he didn't openly crap on about 2 dozen UN sanctions that were aimed at his oppressive and aggressive regime, if he didn't FIRE UPON OUR AIRMEN during routine recon missions, someone with a pulse might listen to you.

However, you'll have to settle on lbj, hcap and doctor timmy (or whatever his/ her name is).

[ljb]

I am glad to see the people of Iraq voted. I must have been confused, I thought we invaded Iraq because they had wmds. Instead it was a voters rights issue. I get it now, thanks fellows.

[Tom]

One thing is now very clear to the entire arab world....the radical wack-o's DO NOT HAVE THE HEARTS AND MINDS OF THE PEOPLE. Just as communism fell, so will the islamic menace. The people of the Ukrane REFUSED to allow a phony election, Afgahnistan is fighting to maintain its freedon. The koran is being replaced by constitutions.
The whole islamic idea is oppression and people are becoming willing to stand up and say no to it. I think W's message in his inauguration will be expanded in the State of the Union....stay tunded for liberty, coming to a nation near you.

[sq764]

I am glad to see the people of Iraq voted. I must have been confused, I thought we invaded Iraq because they had wmds. Instead it was a voters rights issue. I get it now, thanks fellows.
Does that make it any less significant?

[Tom]

I am glad to see the people of Iraq voted. I must have been confused, I thought we invaded Iraq because they had wmds. Instead it was a voters rights issue. I get it now, thanks fellows.

Just what did you think was going to happen, even if we did find them? This was inevitable. Or are you still listening to that boob Kerry? Did you forget Afghanistan? I remeber you saying you were in favor of invading them and going after OBL. Didn't their elections give you a clue, or did the DNC conference call neglect that fact?

BTW, more Iraqi's braved death to vote than your Bruce Sprungspring concerts did. Hehehe. Is there a lesson here for 2008?

[ljb]

Here is an interesting old news story:
U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote :
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terror

by Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times (9/4/1967: p. 2)

WASHINGTON, Sept. 3-- United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here.

[lsbets]

Sec, prior to the UN appearance, I seem to remember all kinds of left wing pundits and representatives all over TV stating that Bush's goal of going into Iraq to start a democracy in the Middle East was impossible. If the only stated reason for the war was WMDs, why would they have been talking about Wolfowitz' plan to reshape the middle east? Get real man, wmd's were one of the reasons and the burden of proof was on Saddam, and he did not produce the proof, but there were many, many other reasons, including the first real democracy in the Middle East. We're not there yet, but we are a hell of a lot closer thanks to Sunday's election. And I am damned proud to have been a part of it.

[Secretariat]

Sec, prior to the UN appearance, I seem to remember all kinds of left wing pundits and representatives all over TV stating that Bush's goal of going into Iraq to start a democracy in the Middle East was impossible. If the only stated reason for the war was WMDs, why would they have been talking about Wolfowitz' plan to reshape the middle east? Get real man, wmd's were one of the reasons and the burden of proof was on Saddam, and he did not produce the proof, but there were many, many other reasons, including the first real democracy in the Middle East. We're not there yet, but we are a hell of a lot closer thanks to Sunday's election. And I am damned proud to have been a part of it.

First of all the Constitution of the United States does not give the Executive power the authoirty to declare war, it gives that to Congress. Congress reviewed the information passed on by the President and voted to give him authorization to use force if deemed necessay due to what was defined as a "grave" threat due to the WMD and chemical weapons threat. There was no Senate debate about bringing democracy to the region. In fact the executive branch was to update Congress every 60 days on the progress against the threat of WMD's.

Sometimes our memory does fail us, so I post a pretty conservative archive from CNN from right after the War Vote by Congress (certainly CNN is no bastion of the so-called liberal media). Please read what the vote was about, and please tell me where the word democracy fits in OR the securing of the oil fields.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/

[JustRalph]

Sec, you still don't get it. No matter the reason we went, we were going to have to do this kind of work. In spite of you and Ted Kennedy........we will stay around and finish it this time. That was the problem with LBJ, he didn't have the nads to put the bombs were they needed to be, and he ran away crying to his ranch in Texas.........exactly the opposite of our Republican Prez.

[JustRalph]

http://watch.windsofchange.net/iraq_election.htm

more pictures.............

http://watch.windsofchange.net/pics/bag12101300821.jpg

[JustMissed]

LEAD, FOLLOW OR GET OUT OF THE WAY.

The Iraqis are moving forward.

The Afghans are moving forward.

The Palestinians are moving forward.

The U.S. is moving forward.

The whole world is moving forward and be damned if we are going to let John Kerry, Ted Kenndy, Sen. Boxer, Hilarary Clinton or Howard Dean or any other of you 'do nothing' cowards get in our way.

George Bush saw a chance to lead, took the lead and hasn't and isn't go to look back.

"How many years can a mountain exist
Before it's washed to the sea?
Yes, 'n' how many years can some people exist
Before they're allowed to be free?
Yes, 'n' how many times can a man turn his head,
Pretending he just doesn't see?
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind,
The answer is blowin' in the wind."

JM

[ljb]

While I agree it was a good thing to have elections in Iraq, you folks are overlooking a couple of points. First we did not invade Iraq to provide elections to the Iraq citizens and second the election has not lowered the number of terroists wanting to kill us by any amount. Why must you all fall to the neo-con propaganda ? This quagmire in Iraq is a mess and we will all be paying the consequences of the neo-cons mistakes for years to come.

[sq764]

While I agree it was a good thing to have elections in Iraq, you folks are overlooking a couple of points. First we did not invade Iraq to provide elections to the Iraq citizens and second the election has not lowered the number of terroists wanting to kill us by any amount. Why must you all fall to the neo-con propaganda ? This quagmire in Iraq is a mess and we will all be paying the consequences of the neo-cons mistakes for years to come.
The topic of this thread is 'Here is some good news'....

The election went on, 8 million Iraqis risked life and limb to vote, this is GOOD NEWS.

Why can't you for once, just agree it is good news, then move on? Whatever the motive was for going to Iraq does not take away from how significant this election is for Iraq, the US and the world...

[lsbets]

Well, ljb, I'm living it, and I say what quagmire? While there is certainly bad news, the insurgents have not been able to accomplish any of their main objectives since April. Doesn't sound like a quagmire to me. There was no large counter offensive during the Fallujah fight - they tried some attacks around Mosul and were not able to sustain operations. There were no large attacks during Christman and New Years, and there was no mass bloodshep during the elections. Sound pretty positive to me. Look at the big picture, the Iraqi people showed they have more confidence in our ability to secure the polls than in the insurgents ability to kill them. They stood up to the terrorists with a voice crying out for an escape from tyranny. I'm sorry that things are not going as badly as you would like.

[ljb]

Lsbets,
You seem to have misinterpeted my posts. I would like nothing better then to have Iraq install a government tommorrow. One with the strength to control their country and send the U.S. Troops home on the next day. But that is not going to happen. Inspite of the successful election we are still ruling, running the country. We will probably be there long after you have served your time. This is why I call it a quagmire.
Also, the terroists are doing well in the mountains of Afghanistan/Pakistan.

[PaceAdvantage]

Personally, Israel is now in fear that Iraqi is going to become a secular state. Which is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

What am I missing here? Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a secular state.

[Tom]

The ONLY way we were going to be in and out of Iraq quickly was to nuke them to oblivion. Weh nI suggested that, you guys were all over me. Anyone who did not know that we were going to be there for a the long haul is not thinking. Remeber the words regiem change? That was the tip off. Quagmire? i don't see one. Exit strategy? Appears to be working. Everything Bush has not waivered on has happened. We have two new infant democracies in arab states - RED states, now, heheh, we have one terrorist haven turning over its WMD to avoid SH's fate, we have many, many new free people who are more on our side than the terrorists, and the terroroist themselves are fighting, losing, and dying in Iraq instead of threatening us at home. They are now unable to even wage large battles at home anymore. And meanwhile. all the oppressed muslims in other arab states are watching and learning. freedom will not be dnied, and the islamic menace cannot exist amoung free people.
I would say that we are moving faster and smoother than we were in WWII.
remeber the Battle of the Bulge? What a quagmire that was. Would you guys have been in favor of pulling out and coming home then?
Suppose for a minute that the whole Iraq thing never happened, that after Afghanistan, we focused only on OBL and did find him. Do you not think that that would have spawned countless more terrorists and martyrs for his cause?
Now, people all over the middle east are watching the terrorists fail, and people rise up against them. This is the best way to win the war on terror - to make people free and enlightened. This is how communism fell. People would no longer accept oppression. This is how our nation started - we would no longer accept the iron rule of Brittian.

[Secretariat]

What am I missing here? Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a secular state.

Well, i think you're missing a lot. Democracy is the people of a country selecting thier leaders freely. However, those results don't necessarily mean they are in Americas or Israel's interests. For example, Ayatollah Khomenini asked for Hussein's ouster in the 80's while we were siding with Hussein. Now today we basically fulfilled Khomeini's wish for him.

Iran today is happy about the Iraq election because it means the Shiites will gain control of the Iraqi government due to the heavy vote from Shiites. Iran is basically Shite, and Iran itself is a cleric state.

Israel is concerned that what might occur in Iraq is another Shite cleric state like Iran, and Iraq may even become allies with Iran which acording to Cheney has nuclear capability. Israel's concern about Iraq is now a dawning realization that an allied Shiite Iran with allied Shite Iraq could pose a double threat to their Israel's safety.

69% of Shites polled by Zogby in Iraq wanted US troops out of Iraq IMMEDIATELY after the election. Many of these people did not vote to please GW, but because Sistani urged them to vote. The Shite clergy will wield enormous power in this government, and normalizing relations with Iran concerns Israel. Previously, they were distant neighbors.

A democracy elects leaders, but it is what those leaders do that is really important. Israel is in a difficult position because they are a state where no one can be a citizen unless they are Jewish. When Muslim countries deny freedom of religions to other religions they will point to Israel as denying Muslims freedom of religion and the right of citizenship.

Our position is Israel is our ally which places us directly at odds with Muslims. Will Israel allow citizenship of non-Jewish Muslims? Doubtful. The point being is that the safety of Israel is not more assured with the capture of Hussein, or a democratic election ,and their fear of a cleric allied Iraq-Iran is a real possibility for them.

[JustRalph]

Well, i think you're missing a lot. Democracy is the people of a country selecting thier leaders freely. However, those results don't necessarily mean they are in Americas or Israel's interests. For example, Ayatollah Khomenini asked for Hussein's ouster in the 80's while we were siding with Hussein. Now today we basically fulfilled Khomeini's wish for him.

That is a very shortsighted view of things. The world doesn't live in a vacuum. Our interests changed. We changed. To not do so would be foolish. We support whomever is more valuable to us in a particular time frame. When they lose their value or commit acts that we can no longer support........we change the nature of our support. Even if it means moving our support to another country or regime that isn't perfect.

[Tom]

Don't forget, after Gulf War I, we encouraged the Iraqi's to revolt and them left them out in the cold to get slaughtered by Hussein. Bay of Pigs part II.
Can you balme them for not trusting us right off the bat? We had to earn thier trust back. I would say our promise to give them free elctions did the trick.
Of course there is the chance they will not vote for things we like. It is thier right. And we will respect it.

[PaceAdvantage]

Well, i think you're missing a lot.

No, I think you mis-typed, and you didn't even bother to read your own words before your long reply to me.

Here are your words that I was originally responding to with my "What am I missing"

Personally, Israel is now in fear that Iraqi is going to become a secular state. Which is kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

Now, those are your words...."Israel is now in fear that Iraq is going to become a secular state."

Why would they fear that? That's the way things were under Saddam.

Did you make an error in stating that Israel is in fear of a secular Iraq? Because your most recent reply says that Israel would fear a more Iran-like government in Iraq, which is FAR MORE religious in nature.

[lsbets]

ljb "Lsbets,
You seem to have misinterpeted my posts. I would like nothing better then to have Iraq install a government tommorrow. One with the strength to control their country and send the U.S. Troops home on the next day. But that is not going to happen. Inspite of the successful election we are still ruling, running the country. We will probably be there long after you have served your time. This is why I call it a quagmire.
Also, the terroists are doing well in the mountains of Afghanistan/Pakistan."

Interesting definition of a quagmire -we'll be there for a while. Doesn't sound too quagmirish to me. And I'm not quite sure what the terrorists doing well in Afghanistan would have to do with a quagmire in Iraq. Also, I guess it depends on how you define doing well. If contsantly being on the run, having to look over your shoulder, and suddenly noticing that 3 or 4 of your friends went missing the day before and you're not quite sure why, then yes, I guess you could say they're doing well. Their well coordinated offensive actions certainly hint at how well they are doing. Oh, wait, there have been no well coordinated offensive actions to speak of since we booted them out of power. Silly me, I almost bought the liberal line.

[Secretariat]

Did you make an error in stating that Israel is in fear of a secular Iraq? Because your most recent reply says that Israel would fear a more Iran-like government in Iraq, which is FAR MORE religious in nature.

Yes, it was my error. Typo, meant to type cleric rather than secular state.

[lsbets]

Simply because 60% of Iraqis are Shia and virtually all of Iran is Shia, does not mean that they would be united. There are deep differences between them. Two of the most obvious are Iraqis are Arabs, and Iranians are Persians. There is a lot of historical distrust there. Second, the Iraqis consider them to be the center of the Shia world because of the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. The Iranians consider themselves to be the center of the Shia world. There is a bitter rivalry among Iranian and Iraqi clerics. Don't think it is a slam dunk love fest between the two. Iraq won't end up a client state of Iran.

[Exactaman]

who brought up the vietnam election. i hope that was a joke and not an actual comparison.

it's great to see the people over there voting. this is going to have a big impact in the middle east. we're over there busting our asses for these people, and for nothing more. we could have left hitler over there, yeah everyone loves him when he's not running their country. then, hey just leave him alone, everything is fine, it's fine.

iran is having it's own problems now, this is going to shake things up over there a bit too, you watch. and for god's sake, who cares if isreal likes it?

[Suff]

Absolutely! And now they have something to fight for. Thats the Rub. They have a little taste of Freedom... Individual power. It should be contagious...and they hopefully will get greedy for it. And most importantly , want to fight for it and defend it.....

Then we can pack up and come home, or move on to the next Threat. Hopefully wiser and stronger and better Prepared.

Americans love a fighter. 8 or 9 million people risked life and limb to go Vote. Its our Duty as a Free Nation to see them through.

HOw to do that is the only point of discussion now.

[so.cal.fan]

Well said, Suff.

[Tom]

Yup. Tip o'the ole fedora to Suff.
We can argue all day over why and how we got there, but the fact is we are there and we might as well make the best of it. Whinning doesn't help anyone, well, except maybe Sec and Ljb. :D

[Secretariat]

Simply because 60% of Iraqis are Shia and virtually all of Iran is Shia, does not mean that they would be united. There are deep differences between them. Two of the most obvious are Iraqis are Arabs, and Iranians are Persians. There is a lot of historical distrust there. Second, the Iraqis consider them to be the center of the Shia world because of the holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. The Iranians consider themselves to be the center of the Shia world. There is a bitter rivalry among Iranian and Iraqi clerics. Don't think it is a slam dunk love fest between the two. Iraq won't end up a client state of Iran.

Makes you wonder why Israel said they were wary of an Iraqi-Iranian alliance.

[JustMissed]

It is doubtful but I hope Iraq incorporates the separation of Church and State in their new constitution. That would go a long way to solve a lot of future problems.

Trouble is that Priest, Rabbis & Clerics have a long history of attempts to run governments or a least control kings--and the Clerics are not going to give up easily.

IMO, one of the worst things Bush ever did was give Federal money to private religious groups to perform various social sevices.

Even though those groups do a good job, it is going down a road I believe we should not be traveling. Going to be kind of difficult to tell the Middle Easterners that they shouldn't have the Clerics running the government and we at home are giving the Salvation Army bushels full of money to treat dopers and whiskey heads.

JM

[Equineer]

Preliminary election results from Iraq indicate lukewarm support for Allawi's U.S.-backed ticket of candidates.

Of course, Sunni leaders still claim the entire election is invalid, with Sunni clerics proclaiming that binding elections cannot take place until all U.S. troops leave Iraq.

However, because the Kurds had far and away the highest election turnout, they will capture a much larger share of the National Assembly seats than their percentage of the population.

Kurdish leaders Talabani and Barzani have already demanded that Talabani must become either the new President or Prime Minister of Iraq when the National Assembly convenes. Otherwise, they caution that their only recourse will be to support secession from Iraq since Kurds overwhelmingly voted for secession in a regional referendum... notwithstanding strong U.S. opposition to an independent Kurdistan nation.

Meanwhile Shiite Ayatollah al-Sistani's ticket holds a commanding preliminary lead (1,100,00 to 360,500) over the U.S.-backed ticket of interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, the Shiite secularist.

Because of low voter turnout among Sunnis, it appears likely that the Talabani/Barzani Kurdish ticket and Ayatollah al-Sistani's Shiite ticket will both capture more National Assembly seats than Allawi's ticket.

The big winners appear to be Ayatollah al-Sistani and Kurdish leader Talabani. It will be interesting to see how they will perform as the new major deal brokers if a unified secular Iraqi government remains a firm U.S. objective.