Democracy in Iraq...not (?) - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-15-2005, 03:22 PM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:33 PM
Just because it is printed in NRO does not invalidate it automatically, that particular artitcle is one of the best that I have seen following the election based on its content - not where it was printed. I read NYT, BBC, ABC Newsradio watch PBS Newshour when it is on down here - I certainly won't pick and choose my outlets based on what I think about the issues. You dismissing that article shows a prejudice against certain outlets without even looking at the content of the piece.

A few other pieces from different sources pointing a the same conclusions.

UN officials endorsed the poll
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.as...5&Cr=iraq&Cr1=

Demands for Federalism in South
http://www.iwpr.net/index.pl?archive..._111_4_eng.txt

Since War Shiites want to Build Bridges to Iraq's Minorities
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0210/p07s01-woiq.html
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-15-2005, 03:54 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark


like CBS news or the New York Times.




i will agree about The Nation or Mother Jones

having a bias like NRO

but CBS? come on, the whole network?
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-15-2005, 05:12 PM   #33
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 10:33 AM
No, CBS news.

OK, all the major networks who didn't ask the man who would be president the tough questions.

Let's be honest. We all know who's side Fox News is on, and we all know whose side all the others are on. But I'm sure that's already been played out on other threads.
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-15-2005, 05:17 PM   #34
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:33 PM
It's not that cut and dry.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-15-2005, 09:56 PM   #35
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Not cut and dry, but if you had to bet your life's savings, you'd probably feel comfortable in correctly matching the network with the candidate they support (as many newspapers oficially endorse candidates)
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-15-2005, 11:16 PM   #36
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:33 PM
To an extent, I think that there is bias on behalf of individuals and it can make its way into what is put out there but I do not subscribe to the idea that there is some sort of monolithic liberal media, or for that matter that Fox is a totally right wing propaganda organisation.

There are some notable cases of bias and distortion when covering contentious issues, things like CNN ignoring some of the abuses by the Baathists to stay in Iraq when the old regime was in power or the coverage of the Palestinians ~ the "Jenin Massacre" springs to mind as one of the most outrageous cases of trial by media which later proved to be baseless. Take the good with the bad when dealing with any media outlet.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-16-2005, 12:58 AM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:33 AM
The Lessons of 1787

By Leslie H. Gelb

The New York Times, February 02, 2005


Elections decide who is to govern. Constitutions define the reach and limits of electoral power, and the viability and legitimacy of a government. The new Iraqi National Assembly is entitled to form an interim government that can function as long as its vast Shiite majority and large Kurdish contingent don't overreach. But this Assembly, with the Sunni Arab population underrepresented and the Kurds still a minority, is unlikely to write a constitution that protects minorities and inspires popular loyalty.

Many Iraqi leaders and American officials see this problem clearly and seem to be considering a solution: the new Assembly should forgo drafting the constitution and establish a special constitutional committee for that purpose. Such a committee would be selected to better reflect both Iraq's population and its power elites.

It's easy to keep the process legal and ensure it does not subvert the election. The election law gives the Assembly the responsibility for putting together the constitution. But it does not say the Assembly has to draft the document itself, or forbid it from assigning the duty to another body. Of course, the special body would still have to submit the draft for the Assembly's approval.

Members of this special constitutional committee would be chosen by the Assembly itself and could be Assembly members as well as appointees of the new government. The composition of the committee is critical. It should include Sunni Arabs in sufficient numbers; if they are not given a stake in the new Iraq, most will continue to help their vile insurgent brethren, willingly or unwillingly.

The committee must also engage Iraq's James Madisons and Ben Franklins. The constitutional committee has to include the real power brokers in religion, politics and commerce. It's not at all clear how many of these types were elected on Sunday. American officials probably don't know them all, but Iraqis do.

As a practical matter, these local leaders would provide the political cushioning necessary during the yearlong drafting process and would be essential to the final passage of the constitution. The public vote on its approval comes a year hence and requires a nationwide majority. But Iraqi leaders have agreed that the constitution can be blocked by a two-thirds vote in three of the nation's 18 provinces. That could happen in the three Kurdish provinces or in the four controlled by Sunni Arabs. With such stalemate would probably come civil war.

The Shiites would still rightfully form a majority of the constitutional committee, and they could insist on giving themselves strong constitutional powers in a centralized government. But that would be a mistake.

The only workable government would be a confederation with three largely autonomous regions -- Kurds in the north, Arab Sunnis in the center and Shiites in the south. The central government in Baghdad could be given limited powers under a Shiite majority, and large, mixed cities could receive ''special status.'' But whatever power-sharing arrangement is contrived in the new constitution, it has to embody a political deal that creates a legitimate government, a government that Iraqi forces will fight and die for.

This political legitimacy is what's missing from Washington's strategy. But instead of debating a political solution, all Washington seems interested in talking about is how many Iraqi troops have been trained, whether the figure is 4,000 or 120,000. The United States trained more than half a million South Vietnamese troops and trained them well. But the South Vietnamese never had loyalty to their government equal to that of the North Vietnamese or the South Vietnamese guerrillas to their cause.

We need to evoke just such a cause now if we are to avoid defeat by the insurgents of Iraq. The great majority of Iraqis don't want to be ruled or have their lives ruined by these monsters. But they must have a government that commands public loyalty and hope, and looks as if it can prevail.

For all the truly heartwarming effects of Sunday's elections, the political imperfections of that vote cannot be overlooked. But those imperfections can be overcome by a special body that drafts a constitution with powers, values and protections worth fighting and dying for.

http://www.cfr.org/pub7662/leslie_h_...ns_of_1787.php
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-19-2005, 04:33 PM   #38
Babyface
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Lets not forget some other examples of trespassing on sovereign nations. Does anyone study history anymore? Latin America anyone? Of course we support elections in foreign countries as long as the results benefit our economic interests. In Chile the democratically elected communist Allende was hated by the US and assassinated. However, we supported the militant rule of Pinochet.
__________________
chenoa is offline  
Old 02-19-2005, 07:30 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Do you study history?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 01:06 PM   #40
Babyface
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Yeah, in college. Not the most lucrative degree to have, but I do great on the Trivia machine down at my local pub. Thats where I've honestly used it the most. Sad.
__________________
chenoa is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 03:55 PM   #41
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 05:33 AM
then you have heard of the Cold War. Not making excuses for the decisions you disagree with, but I thinkn eliminating the context is also wrong.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 05:33 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:33 AM
U.S. in Secret Talks with Iraqi Insurgents
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 11:19 PM   #43
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 10:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
then you have heard of the Cold War. Not making excuses for the decisions you disagree with, but I thinkn eliminating the context is also wrong.
thank you for pointing out what all the far out liberal cynics (that's me being diplomatic) seem to forget: the Cold War.

Yes we have dirtied our hands and not everything we have done is excusable but there was the USSR that had swallowed up Eastern Europe and was looking to exert its influence on the Western Hemisphere in Central and South America. This was a superpower whose leaders killed millions of its own, had enslaved countless millions more and who threatened to"bury our grandchildren".
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-20-2005, 11:23 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:33 AM
that is going to far


we are capable of burying our own grandchildren
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 03:17 AM   #45
Refugee
 
knox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago, IL, USA
Posts: 1,611
Local Time: 05:33 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
U.S. in Secret Talks with Iraqi Insurgents
That's an interesting story.

However, the only way I can support such negotiations if they explicity rule out the notion of permitting Baathism or Islamic fundamentalism from entering the new Iraqi governmeny.

Using them as a source of intel to counter Iranian intelligence is an interesting development, though. For the time being, I'll take this as a sign that the powers-that-be have decided to increase their human intel operations, which is a good thing.
__________________

__________________
knox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com