|
That's what I'm
talking about.
I want to see them
bring in those police agencies they were talking about for
training.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 1:26
PM
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Iraq's Ticking
Clock
How about this...we turn over political
running of Iraq to Iraqis, and we provide security. In other words, let
our military do what it is good at...blowing things up.
Charles
Mims
I am afraid that they never will get it under control and be
able to turn it
into a free self governing country. I am not sure the
terrorists will ever
stop. They just keep coming in Israel... "Elect all
members directly, on
the basis of universal adult suffrage?" What kind of
BS is that? These
shit tites and sooni goony goo goos are never going to
agree on any
thing. Maybe if Bush said that we would be leaving there is a
year the
good guys (if there are any) would get their shit together and
figure
something out.
On Thursday, November 13, 2003, at
09:19 AM, Charles wrote:
I don' t know Tim, yes the
terrorists are using it as a playground, but at least there they are going
up against folks that can fight back. I'd rather see them blowing up
folks in Iraq than in Dallas.
Charles Mims
http://www.the-sandbox.org
<image.tiff>
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Tim Harder
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:31
AM
To: The Sandbox Discussion List
Subject: Re: [Sndbox]
Iraq's Ticking Clock
These
retards..... I could do it in five seconds.... take the US
constitution...
where it say United States.... put Iraq...
This
might not be a popular opinion in here, but I think that Bush needs
to
put together an exit plan for that shit hole..... I would like to see it
done
a soon as possible...
On Thursday, November 13, 2003,
at 07:06 AM, Bethany
wrote:
<image.tiff>
IRAQ'S
TICKING CLOCK
By AMIR
TAHERI
<image.tiff>
November 12, 2003 -- IN
their focus on short-term problems such as power cuts and sporadic terrorist
attacks in Baghdad, the media have paid little attention to the long-term
issues that concern Iraqis in this period of transition - such as the
writing of a new constitution that is to be the cornerstone of a democratic
Iraqi state.
The Governing Council in Baghdad has less than a month
to unveil its program for drafting a constitution and to fix a timetable for
it to come into effect. The Coalition Provisional Authority set a deadline
of Dec. 7, and the latest U.N. resolution on Iraq mentions it as
well.
Last summer, the council appointed a 25-man committee on
constitutional matters, but provided it with no clear mission statement. The
group has toured Iraq, talking to people from many walks of life, but
produced no concrete proposals.
Three views have emerged on how to
form a constituent assembly:
* Have the coalition pick assembly
members on the basis of the same ethnic principles used to form the
Governing Council. The Kurds, the Turcomans, the Christians and the Yazidis
support such a method because it would ensure them proportional
representation in a constituent assembly.
* Have the Governing
Council (with coalition approval) nominate some members - while tribes,
corporations, parties, associations, guilds and cultural organizations chose
others. This view is mainly promoted by Arab Sunni Muslims and some
non-governmental organizations in Baghdad and other major cities.
*
Elect all members directly, on the basis of universal adult suffrage. This
is the view of most Shi'ite religious leaders. The most prominent of them,
Grand Ayatollah Ali-Muhammad Sistani, has issued a fatwa (opinion) to
that effect.
<image.tiff>
Opponents of
direct elections fear that Shii'tes, 60 percent of Iraq's population, would
have an automatic majority in the resulting assembly. That could end Kurdish
dreams for a federal state, while Arab Sunnis, some 15 percent of the
population, would lose their traditional hold on power for
ever.
Leaders of several parties, including some Shi'ite ones, also
oppose direct elections because they fear the emergence of new political
patterns beyond their control. Some returning exiles oppose direct elections
because they fear it might produce a new leadership from among those who
stayed in Iraq and suffered under Saddam.
WHAT should the coalition
do?
First, make sure that the Dec. 7 deadline is met. That is
unlikely as things stand: Most Governing Council members are outside Iraq on
official or private visits; the few left in Baghdad have not met for weeks.
Paul Bremer, the interim administrator, should summon them back to Baghdad
to make sure that the deadline is met.
Second, publish a set of
principles to guide the writing of the new constitution. This need not
be longer than half a page but should include basic points such as legal
equality for all Iraqi citizens regardless of gender, religious faith,
language and ethnic background, the holding of free and regular elections, a
multiparty system and governance based on respect for human rights and the
rule of law.
Such controversial issues as whether Iraq should be a
bi-national state, Arab and Kurdish, or whether Islam is recognized as the
state religion should be left for the assembly to decide.
Nor should
the coalition insist on imposing a federal system. Iraq came into being as a
unitary state in 1921 and cannot be transformed into a federation
overnight.
Third, decide the method of forming the assembly.
Direct elections are the wisest course, for numerous reasons.
Holding
elections would amount to a dramatic reassertion of Iraq's national
sovereignty, and establish a direct bond between the people and those who
will write the new constitution.
Members of an appointed assembly
would have no such link; they would be beholden to the authority that
appointed them. Appointed members would bring with them ethnic loyalties and
partisan prejudices that might come into conflict with the broader interests
of a nation in transition.
What about fears of Shi'ite domination?
Groundless.
The Shi'ites are as divided politically as any other
community of more than 15 million people. They offer a complete
socio-economic spectrum, from peasants and tribal people to urban workers,
middle classes and wealthy businessmen and landowners. They also have at
least 10 different political parties, ranging from Communist to moderate
conservative to Islamist. There is no possibility of a single, monolithic
Shi'ite bloc emerging in an elected assembly.
One real problem with
elections is that there is no usable electoral roll. The last credible
census was held in 1957 - and Iraq has seen no free elections since
then.
But this argument is more effective against the idea of an
appointed assembly. If we don't know how many people live in, say, the
Kurdish areas, how could we know how many seats to allocate to
them?
There would, of course, be no problem if Iraq were considered
as a single constituency with all people voting for all assembly members.
Anyone above age 16 and holding an Iraqi identity card would be able to
vote. But such a method could produce an almost exclusively Shi'ite
assembly, even those elected come from different, or even opposing,
political backgrounds.
One solution is to accept the existing
provinces as individual constituencies. Various methods of population
counting could also be used. This might be rather messy, and some votes
would "weigh" more than others. But the practice of democracy is nowhere
perfect.
Could the terrorist threat make holding elections impossible
in some parts? The threat is wildly exaggerated, affecting just over 1 per
cent of Iraq's territory. But even then one must not allow a small number of
terrorists to dictate the course of events. In areas where it may not be
considered safe for people to go to the polls, it is possible to co-opt
members in consultation with local leadership groups.
ONCE the
coalition has opted for direct elections, it should invite the United
Nations to supervise the process on the basis of a clearly defied and
strictly limited mission statement. The assembly must be seen as a
reflection of the will of the Iraqi people and not as a creature either of
the coalition or of parties and groups that, each in its own way, belong to
old Iraq.
But for the United Nations to foster this, it must undergo
a change of heart - accept the liberation of Iraq as a positive event, and
abandon dreams of imposing on the country another, albeit milder, form of
Arab despotism. If the United Nations cannot summon the needed vision and/or
courage, an international supervisory body could be formed with the help of
nations that support democratization in Iraq.
Iraq needs a political
process that leads to the emergence of an elected government within a
realistic time frame. The constituent assembly could be in place by next
summer. It could complete its work by next autumn, submitting its proposed
draft to a popular referendum a year from now. That could be followed by the
formation of a government of transition to hold general elections early in
2005.
THE Koran says that Satan fears one word above all:
Allah.
The various demons of Arab despotism and fascist Islamism also
fear one word above all: democracy. It is important that Iraqis hear that
word again and again and every day - until all those demons are
defeated.
E-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<image.tiff>
<ass
clown.jpg>________________________________
Changes to your
subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
________________________________
Changes
to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
________________________________
Changes to your subscription
(unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
|
