The Current Situation in Iraq and the Upcoming Pol

[eamad mazouri]

The Current Situation in Iraq and the upcoming political develop

Here is a new report by PINR on the situation in Iraq and the new developements that might unfold as the power is transfered to the Iraqis by June 30.
http://www.pinr.com/

[RebelWithanAK]

A better article. June 30th is the deadline, yes. Whether we meet it is another concern.

[eamad mazouri]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (RebelWithanAK,)
A better article. June 30th is the deadline, yes. Whether we meet it is another concern.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
The concept of meeting the deadline is constantly changing. It could mean trnsfering power to the current IGC.

[rmnunez]

If anyone thought the June 30th deadline was for transfering power to a genuinely representative and democratically elected government in Iraq, I'd like to know how they figured that was going to happen with all those terrorists or insurgents running roadblocks and blowing things up.

[Samildanach]

Typically Bush is looking for a way to withdraw American troops from the region pending the election. All options for transferring power back to the Iraqis will be investigated because it will be seen an opportunity to allow American troops to return to America and to decrease the expenses that are currently being incurred due to the war. What will happen is somehow a few months before the election, America will say there part in the 'liberation' is basically complete and withdraw/try to hand the whole mess over to the UN. This will allow Bush to claim there is stability in the region and claim to have had a successful war. Both good election ploys, the question is what morons will believe him and will it all hold together until the election is over or will the whole situation blow up in his face. It all depends on the timing.

[eamad mazouri]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (rmnunez,)
If anyone thought the June 30th deadline was for transfering power to a genuinely representative and democratically elected government in Iraq, I'd like to know how they figured that was going to happen with all those terrorists or insurgents running roadblocks and blowing things up.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
I don't believe in that.That is a very complicated process and it will take long time.

[jose]

http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?C...=-1#Post1282517

How many soldiers have died in this war? how many have died from wounds ?

[rmnunez]

Sistani appeared for a time to expect an overseeing council that was representative could be elected but he couldn't explain who would supervise the election of this overseeing council. At some point there must be some sort of designation or appointment process before the elections can be called.

Terrorists will find easy targets in large crowds of peole are gathered at polling places, fear they may will keep people away. This means something has to be done to bring the terror incidence to a minimum. Additionally, to some extent terrorist incidents discredit the US and by implication, those it backs for the new government.

[eamad mazouri]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (rmnunez,)
Sistani appeared for a time to expect an overseeing council that was representative could be elected but he couldn't explain who would supervise the election of this overseeing council. At some point there must be some sort of designation or appointment process before the elections can be called.

Terrorists will find easy targets in large crowds of peole are gathered at polling places, fear they may will keep people away. This means something has to be done to bring the terror incidence to a minimum. Additionally, to some extent terrorist incidents discredit the US and by implication, those it backs for the new government.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>
I agree with you.Security comes first.Plus ,elections held in the absence of democratic atmosphere result in undemocratic consequences.
The terrorists are color blind when it comes to targets.
For years, all these organization were functioning outside Iraq, including the Shiites which where in Iran.The only liberated area was Iraqi Kurdistan.They all humbly came to Kurdistan to meet Kurdish leaders. They have agreed more than once on the federalism the Kurds are seeking. Now look at them as soon as Saddam is gone, they found themselves in Baghdad, they are, just like previous Iraqi governments, denying the Kurds that right, and are asking Kurds to trust them.That is what al-Sistani is calling for.The Shiites ,in fact were the first partners of the Kurds calling for federalism. Now they think they can rule the whole country, why settle for a Shiites territory?

[rmnunez]

Sistani's concern regarding the Kurds has to do with the perception their right to veto constitutional amendments gives Kurds some additional political power other minorities and the Shia don't have. Bargains struck before Saddam got ousted would not be seen the same now that circumstances have changed so dramatically. Back when Shia and Kurd were working together opposing Saddam, the Kurds obviously had an advantage (more autonomy). Now that the Coalitioneers are there the Shia have an advantage (demographics).