The Iraqi Elections Have Begun

[A_Wanderer]

Isn't it grand

First Iraq election votes cast, in Australia
January 28, 2005 - 8:00AM

The first votes in the world in the Iraq elections were cast in Australia this morning.

Polling centres in Sydney and Victoria opened at 7am (AEDT) for nearly 12,000 Iraqi expatriates who have registered to vote.

There was a strong security presence at the Fairfield polling centre in Sydney's south-west, with metal detectors and bag searches.

Organisers said it would be a similar story elsewhere despite Australia being assessed as a low security risk.

The Australian head of the Iraq Out-of-Country Voting Program, Bernie Hogan, said a crowd of people was waiting outside the Fairfield centre when he arrived.

"We had a line-up of probably 60 or 70 people at the front door at seven o'clock," he said.

"They've been slowly but surely being processed and showing their registration certificates and casting their vote."

Voting in Iraq's transitional national assembly elections will continue in Australia until 5pm (AEDT) on Sunday.

Voting inside Iraq is scheduled for Sunday only.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Voters are electing a national assembly that will appoint a provisional government, write a constitution and organise further elections.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/After-Sa...a/2005/01/28/1106850069625.html?oneclick=true

 

[melon]

With all the violence, I wonder if more expatriates will vote than local Iraqis.

Melon

 

[A_Wanderer]

I think that you mayl be pleasantly surprised by the election turnout within Iraq (I estimate between 70% - 85%).

 

[melon]

Well, I most earnestly wish the Iraqis luck and hope violence can be reduced to a minimum.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

I think that you mayl be pleasantly surprised by the election turnout within Iraq (I estimate between 70% - 85%).

That's better than some other long-standing democracies....

 

[PrimaDonna]

I think that you mayl be pleasantly surprised by the election turnout within Iraq (I estimate between 70% - 85%).

Highly unlikely. Take for instance the Iraqi population of SE Michigan (near Dearborn, a city with lots of Arabs and many Iraqis) -- only 10% of eligible Iraqis even registered to vote. This is alarmingly low when you consider that many expats left Iraq in opposition to the old regime so you would think they would embrace this opportunity to vote as a symbol of 'out with the old in with the new'.. But it's impossible to have democracy under occupation. Please read below to see why this election is a farce and invalid:

>> * The American people should be told the truth that we are occupying Iraq, not liberating it.
* Elections held under occupation do not have relevance to democracy.
* What we are doing in Iraq amounts to killing our opponents and
then getting those persons "elected" who support us. These "voters" are
America's people, not the people of Iraq.
* Recently we destroyed an entire city which opposed us. It's meaningless to talk of democracy after that.
* Elections under occupation have been carried out by the Russians in Chechnia and by the Indians in Kashmir. Both have been miserable failures. << (Taken from Dr. Kaukab Siddique's January 18, 2005 radio interview by 850 KOA News Radio, the major news outlet in Denver, Colorado)

 

[A_Wanderer]

I think that the will of the Iraqi people ~ especially the Shiites and Kurds to vote combined with the relative peace in those provinces will mean that there will be decent turnout in the elections.

Those few points are hardly proofs that invalidate the principle of Iraqi's voting for a government and constitution. History will be the judge and as it stands a monumentous thing is being acheived, the first democratic elections in Iraq.

 

[Macfistowannabe]

I don't want to get too deep, but just to comment that I hope the best for Iraq. I hope they will find unity in a matter of time.

 

[DrTeeth]

I read dr. Farid Ayar from the Electoral Commission expects the turn-out to be around 60%. That's higher than most other democracies isn't it?

This is the expected turn-out for Iraqis in other countries, a bit disappointing.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Less than 48 hours left before the people of Iraq experience free decision making for the first time in their country's modern history.
It's a moment of pure freedom but still surrounded by lots of dangers just like any beautiful rose surrounded by spikes.
There is fear from the enemies of freedom who have their weapons already prepared to intimidate us and stop us from choosing our future.
But at the same time we're full of hope as we know that we've put our feet on the right track and even if we make a bad choice once, we know that we will have the chance to reevaluate the situation again.
No more tyrants ruling the country for decades.

We're standing before a historic moment and I won't be exaggerating if I said that it's an important moment for the whole world; we're standing before a crossroads and everyone should watch and learn from the rebirth of Iraq.

Regardless of the winners in the se elections, those who opposed the elections and resisted the change will have to deal with the new reality.

In 48 hours from now, the dying dictatorships and their filthy tools, the terrorists, will find themselves facing an elected legitimate government in Iraq.

The tyrants nightmare is becoming reality, now they will have to deal with the scariest word in their dictionaries; THE PEOPLE'S CHOICE.
The terrorists have challenged the bravery of the Iraqi people but they messed with the wrong people. The people have accepted the challenge; democracy and elections are not a luxury for Iraqis, it's an issue of life or death. And the terror brutal campaign has only made the people more determined to go on with the change.

The results of some recent polls that have shown how determined Iraqis are to hold the elections might have surprised you, but they weren't a surprise for us; we're not the kind of people that kneel to terror and the sights of blood and beheadings.

Saddam had tried all tools of oppression, killing and torture he could find against our people (including WMD's) but he failed to make the people believe in his hateful regime. And that's why the people abandoned him and now, he and his regime are just a bad old tale from the past.

On Sunday, the sun will rise on the land of Mesopotamia. I can't wait, the dream is becoming true and I will stand in front of the box to put my heart in it.

Mohammed.

www.iraqthemodel.com

 

[PrimaDonna]

A more comprehensive look at the elections and democracy in Iraq:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/30/international/middleeast/30democracy.html?oref=login&th

It's the best case of journalism from an American I've seen yet, because it asks what the Iraqis themselves are thinking, in all their diversity.

We owe it to ourselves to hear and expose all different types of opinions, even if we don't like them -- 'cause that's what democracy IS!!

 

[PrimaDonna]

Let the remaining tyrants of the world learn the lesson from this day.

The media is reporting only explosions and suicide attacks that killed and injured many Iraqis s far but this hasn't stopped the Iraqis from marching towards their voting stations with more determination. Iraqis have truly raced the sun.

I walked forward to my station, cast my vote and then headed to the box, where I wanted to stand as long as I could, then I moved to mark my finger with ink, I dipped it deep as if I was poking the eyes of all the world's tyrants.
I put the paper in the box and with it, there were tears that I couldn't hold; I was trembling with joy and I felt like I wanted to hug the box but the supervisor smiled at me and said "brother, would you please move ahead, the people are waiting for their turn".

Yes brothers, proceed and fill the box!
These are stories that will be written on the brightest pages of history.

It was hard for us to leave the center but we were happy because we were sure that we will stand here in front of the box again and again and again.
Today, there's no voice louder than that of freedom.

No more confusion about what the people want, they have said their word and they said it loud and the world has got to respct and support the people's will.

God bless your brave steps sons of Iraq and God bless the defenders of freedom.

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

What a truly inspiring account.

 

[speedracer]

Please read below to see why this election is a farce and invalid:

>> * The American people should be told the truth that we are occupying Iraq, not liberating it.
* Elections held under occupation do not have relevance to democracy.
* What we are doing in Iraq amounts to killing our opponents and
then getting those persons "elected" who support us. These "voters" are
America's people, not the people of Iraq.
* Recently we destroyed an entire city which opposed us. It's meaningless to talk of democracy after that.
* Elections under occupation have been carried out by the Russians in Chechnia and by the Indians in Kashmir. Both have been miserable failures. << (Taken from Dr. Kaukab Siddique's January 18, 2005 radio interview by 850 KOA News Radio, the major news outlet in Denver, Colorado)

I guess when he says "opponents" who "oppose us" Dr. Siddique means "people who are trying to kill random Iraqi civilians as well as military personnel".

 

[PrimaDonna]

Originally posted by speedracer
I guess when he says "opponents" who "oppose us" Dr. Siddique means "people who are trying to kill random Iraqi civilians as well as military personnel". [/B]

The problem is the US military is killing resistance fighters who have a legitimate reason to oppose the presence of the US military in Iraq. We call these men "terrorists," but really they are resisting a US-imposed government. I feel sorry for the US service men and women who are sacrificing so much while they probably genuinely feel they are helping the people of Iraq by freeing them...but this is also imposing Western style democracy there, where it isn't unanimously wanted. By killing the "opponents," we are trying to silence a legitimate argument --

"US and British occupation of Iraq is regarded as the re-emergence of the old colonialist practices of the western empires in some quarters. The real ambitions underlying the brutal onslaught are still highly questionable - and then there are the blatant lies over weapons of mass destruction originally used to justify the war. There were no great victory marches by the occupiers, nor were they thrown garlands of flowers and greeted in triumph."
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8245212D-39CC-4E6E-80FF-2E1F29F72BC5.htm

And "Rather than extremist foreign fighters battling to the death, the marines are mostly finding local men from Falluja who are fighting to defend their city from what they view as an illegitimate occupier. The motivations of these fighters may well be anti-American, but they are Iraqi, not foreign, in origin." http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9FA18AFB-F2C9-4678-8E6A-3595D91B83A1.htm
...I liken the Iraqi opposition to the colonial Americans who fought being controlled by the British. I bet there are Iraqi insurgents quoting Patrick Henry right now, saying "Give me liberty or give me death." He fought colonization by the British just as insurgents are fighting foreign control by the Americans (and the British).

It's complicated -- Iraqis suffered a lot under Saddam, so it's great that he's gone -- but it seems that this liberation is being done without looking at the realities on the ground.... http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ADCA48CC-9307-466B-BA18-82724CAA7484.htm

Basically what I'm saying is we can't win the peace if we don't look at the legitimate concerns of these insurgents. If we keep passing opponents off just as "people who are trying to kill random Iraqi civilians as well as military personnel" we'll never get to the root of the insurgency and the disasters will go on. You can't kill an ideology by killing people. And by killing tens of thousands of Iraqis for dubious reasons is only going to strengthen the anti-American ideology.

 

[wolfwill23]

Highly unlikely. Take for instance the Iraqi population of SE Michigan (near Dearborn, a city with lots of Arabs and many Iraqis) -- only 10% of eligible Iraqis even registered to vote. This is alarmingly low when you consider that many expats left Iraq in opposition to the old regime so you would think they would embrace this opportunity to vote as a symbol of 'out with the old in with the new'.. But it's impossible to have democracy under occupation. Please read below to see why this election is a farce and invalid:

>> * The American people should be told the truth that we are occupying Iraq, not liberating it.
* Elections held under occupation do not have relevance to democracy.
* What we are doing in Iraq amounts to killing our opponents and
then getting those persons "elected" who support us. These "voters" are
America's people, not the people of Iraq.
* Recently we destroyed an entire city which opposed us. It's meaningless to talk of democracy after that.
* Elections under occupation have been carried out by the Russians in Chechnia and by the Indians in Kashmir. Both have been miserable failures. << (Taken from Dr. Kaukab Siddique's January 18, 2005 radio interview by 850 KOA News Radio, the major news outlet in Denver, Colorado)

One serving of humble pie, coming up.

 

[STING2]

The problem is the US military is killing resistance fighters who have a legitimate reason to oppose the presence of the US military in Iraq. We call these men "terrorists," but really they are resisting a US-imposed government. I feel sorry for the US service men and women who are sacrificing so much while they probably genuinely feel they are helping the people of Iraq by freeing them...but this is also imposing Western style democracy there, where it isn't unanimously wanted. By killing the "opponents," we are trying to silence a legitimate argument --

"US and British occupation of Iraq is regarded as the re-emergence of the old colonialist practices of the western empires in some quarters. The real ambitions underlying the brutal onslaught are still highly questionable - and then there are the blatant lies over weapons of mass destruction originally used to justify the war. There were no great victory marches by the occupiers, nor were they thrown garlands of flowers and greeted in triumph."
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8245212D-39CC-4E6E-80FF-2E1F29F72BC5.htm

And "Rather than extremist foreign fighters battling to the death, the marines are mostly finding local men from Falluja who are fighting to defend their city from what they view as an illegitimate occupier. The motivations of these fighters may well be anti-American, but they are Iraqi, not foreign, in origin." http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9FA18AFB-F2C9-4678-8E6A-3595D91B83A1.htm
...I liken the Iraqi opposition to the colonial Americans who fought being controlled by the British. I bet there are Iraqi insurgents quoting Patrick Henry right now, saying "Give me liberty or give me death." He fought colonization by the British just as insurgents are fighting foreign control by the Americans (and the British).

It's complicated -- Iraqis suffered a lot under Saddam, so it's great that he's gone -- but it seems that this liberation is being done without looking at the realities on the ground.... http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ADCA48CC-9307-466B-BA18-82724CAA7484.htm

Basically what I'm saying is we can't win the peace if we don't look at the legitimate concerns of these insurgents. If we keep passing opponents off just as "people who are trying to kill random Iraqi civilians as well as military personnel" we'll never get to the root of the insurgency and the disasters will go on. You can't kill an ideology by killing people. And by killing tens of thousands of Iraqis for dubious reasons is only going to strengthen the anti-American ideology.

These so called "resistance fighters" spend their time trying to kill as many civilians as they possibly can. The United Nations has approved the operation in Iraq which is being carried out by a coalition of nations with the help of the Iraqi people.

Democracy is wanted in Iraq where today over 60% of the registered voters are voting in the election!

In killing the "resistance" the United States, other nations and the Iraqi people are preventing a small group of people from imposing their radical idea's and dictatorship on the rest of the people in Iraq. You may not kill an ideology, but you can prevent it from taking control of a country or preventing the people of that country from moving foward with democracy.

Afghanistan is already a very different place than it was four years ago, and Iraq is moving into a new world as well.

The removal of Saddam was an absolute necessity for the security and stability of the region and the world and the best government to replace that evil regime is a democracy where for the first time, the people of Iraq will be able to decide their future.

The resistance fighters are indeed terrorist! How could anyone bombing unarmed civilians at a polling place not be considered a terrorist? How could anyone that claims that democracy is against ISLAM and that anyone who chooses democracy will be killed, not be considered a terrorist?

 

[Nostradamus]

With all the violence, I wonder if more expatriates will vote than local Iraqis.

Melon

Care to tweak your statement?.. and by tweak I mean rephrase.

.Nostradamus

 

[speedracer]

Basically what I'm saying is we can't win the peace if we don't look at the legitimate concerns of these insurgents. If we keep passing opponents off just as "people who are trying to kill random Iraqi civilians as well as military personnel" we'll never get to the root of the insurgency and the disasters will go on. You can't kill an ideology by killing people. And by killing tens of thousands of Iraqis for dubious reasons is only going to strengthen the anti-American ideology.

I can think of a couple "root causes" of the insurgency. Neither of them seems particularly legitimate to me.

 

[drhark]

>> * The American people should be told the truth that we are occupying Iraq, not liberating it.
* Elections held under occupation do not have relevance to democracy.
* What we are doing in Iraq amounts to killing our opponents and
then getting those persons "elected" who support us. These "voters" are
America's people, not the people of Iraq.
* Recently we destroyed an entire city which opposed us. It's meaningless to talk of democracy after that.
* Elections under occupation have been carried out by the Russians in Chechnia and by the Indians in Kashmir. Both have been miserable failures. << (Taken from Dr. Kaukab Siddique's January 18, 2005 radio interview by 850 KOA News Radio, the major news outlet in Denver, Colorado)

Utter nonsense. Point by point.
*We liberated Iraq from this evil dictator Saddam Hussein. We continue to liberate Iraq from those who would enslave them. You may technically call this an occupation while we're attempting to root out thugs.

*Who wrote this pearl of wisdom? Sounds like a Ted Kennedy talking point. Sunday's election is proof that this election was relevant. Members of the elected parties will construct the Iraqi constitution. Then they'll vote again to ratify it. This will also be relevant.

* Utter fucking nonsense.

* We cleared out an entire city to find and kill the enemy. Now for those who need a definition, the enemy is not someone who merely "opposes" us, but someone who shoots at us.

* I can't speak for Russia and India nor would I want to

I have to conclude that Dr. Kaukab Siddique is full of shit. (Pardon my Flemish)

 

[melon]

Care to tweak your statement?.. and by tweak I mean rephrase.

I see you didn't read my follow up statement:

"Well, I most earnestly wish the Iraqis luck and hope violence can be reduced to a minimum."

But the least you could have done was owe up to who you were, rather than hide behind an alter.

Melon