 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Hey, Spiffor. Is Che right that the Iraqi Commies could get 20% of the vote? They could be more powerful than any other party in the new legislature. |
A quarter = 25%. There were elections for something or other in Iraq recently, something very minor. The commies got 25%, the Shi'ites got 25% (meaning there's a lot of Shia support for the Commies), the Sunnies got about 25%, and the Alawi supports got about 25%. These are rough numbers. Actually, the Shia's got the most and the Commies came in second. The breakdown seems to be 75% against the current government, and they all want the U.S. out.
quote:
I wonder how the Iraqi Commies feel about the US? |
I'm sure they're grateful for the opportunity the American invasion provided them, but they want the U.S. out. I'm sure they also harbor grudges against the U.S. for supporting Saddam against them in the 1960s. Saddam was a paid thug of the CIA who killed at least 5,000 Iraqi communists in 1963. The Kurdish communists also likely have mixed feelings, as the U.S. protected them in the 90s, but shafted them in the 70s and 80s.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:18
|
|
I completely disagree with your numbers, che.
The Sunnis are going to boycott the election, so probably won't get much more than 5%, if that. Among the Commies, the PUK is boycotting the election, so I'd put the upper limit on their support at 15-20% (and probably will be lower). Allawi wasn't anywhere as close to as popular as certain Shia Islamist politicians (i.e. Jafaari), even when the circumstances were better (before Fallujah), so I don't think INA will do that well. Frankly, I wouldn't be suprised if he fails to be elected to Parliament. The INC (Chalabi's Party) isn't likely to do any better. Turkmen, a Christian party, other minority parties are also boycotting.
Anyways, the Shia Islamists could easily take a majority of the seats, probably a super-majority of the seats. You also have some of the more radical Shia Islamists (albeit, not large numbers of them, at the moment) boycotting, so what we'll see is a situation where Da'wa and SCIRI get to dicatate absolutely everything.
Last edited by Ramo on 22-11-2004 at 21:12
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
Sorry, friends, but the Bush administration did lie. You can't redefine the word just because you don't like it:
quote:
lie Audio pronunciation of "lie" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (l)
n.
1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression. |
They blatantly presented supposition and intelligence guess-work-- which the community knew might not be true -- as facts. This is lying and you can't get around that. Indeed, Plato, you have taken the position that they planned this campaign of lies out carefully in order to deceive the American and global public.
I would also question, Plato, your position that Bush took an expedient route. They went to war in Iraq with too few troops and so little global support that it has caused chaos and animosity to run rampant throughout the region. The Iraqis that still support Bush largely do so only because of the vain hope things will turn around. The fact is that anyone familiar with rebuilding a country would tell you we simply didn't have enough troops there at the beginning, and we don't have enough now. A highly flawed attempt to change the Middle East is not expedient, it is foolish and dangerous.
We are increasing the numbers of terrorists that want to go after the U.S.A. and coupled with that, Bush is cleansing the Intelligence community of anyone that doesn't toe the party line -- which includes many highly effective and knowledgeable individuals. Terrorism up and Intelligence abilities down is not expedient unless you want more attacks on the United States.
Even if they were trying to be expedient, flawed plans in pursuit of expediency are not inherently expedient.
-Drachasor
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by PLATO
The "split" in the west came at the desire of the French Government. The French had lead the US to believe that they were on board. They had even sent a General to the US command to help co-ordinate planning and troop integration. The first inkling the US had of the French "moral" position against the war was when they saw DeVillipin on TV saying the French could not support an invasion. |
It is true the French position radicalized in January 2003, whereas before, France didn't really know which side to take. Chirac even warned the military, in his new-year speech, that they should be "ready for anything".
I don't think France stabbed the US in the back... Unless our diplomats made our involvement with the US very clear, when our PR pretended to be unsure (actually it didn't pretend much at that point)
quote:
Talk about a power play? The French made a huge one to protect their corrupt money pipeline from Iraq and they did it at the expense of damaging a hugely important alliance. |
Actually, I think there are three realpolitik reason why France radicalized its position like that:
1) Chirac saw the opportunity to make the first Great Disagreement between Europe and the US, thus promoting the creation of a European pole (Chirac strongly wants a multipolar world).
2) January 2003 was the moment when Chirac and Schröder decided to resume the role of the Franco-German couple as the main force in Europe. Since it looked obvious that Europe would agree with their opposition to the war, this stance was a facile way to show who was playing the European Music. You'll notice that all other important countries (UK, Italy, Spain, Poland) who pretend to be in Europe's directorate, supported the war one week later, at Spain's initiative.
3) Saddam was one of our clients. With his removal by the Americans, we would have lost a client. And many others to come, if the neocon agenda had worked (reshaping the ME). That wouldn't be too bad if the Americans were known to be grateful to their allies, but it certainly doesn't look like it. Even last week, Chirac repeated that the British didn't reap enough spoils of war as the Yanks kept everything to themselves (it was wrong to say it publicly, but the statement is true)
quote:
The reality is that as long as there is oil in the ME and as long as the world needs oil there will be power plays by all who are able in this area. Economic dominance demands it. The French are just as culpable in how the ME looks this very day as we are and it sickens me to see them spout of about a "moral high ground" when their pockets are lined with blood stained Iraqi money. |
It sickens me as well. Our diplomacy reeks of realpolitik and greed. The very difference is that our diplomacy uses soft language and the "peace" word, whereas yours uses uncouth language and openly wages war.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drachasor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Spiffor
quote:
The reality is that as long as there is oil in the ME and as long as the world needs oil there will be power plays by all who are able in this area. Economic dominance demands it. The French are just as culpable in how the ME looks this very day as we are and it sickens me to see them spout of about a "moral high ground" when their pockets are lined with blood stained Iraqi money. |
It sickens me as well. Our diplomacy reeks of realpolitik and greed. The very difference is that our diplomacy uses soft language and the "peace" word, whereas yours uses uncouth language and openly wages war. |
The thing about it is, the ME can tell that these nations are just being self-serving, and they HATE it. Any major change in the ME to get rid of terrorism will probably require a change in this aspect of our policy as well. People can and will rebel against things related to a self-serving individual interfering in their lives. If good things happen to be mixed in with this individual, there is a strong tendency to toss those out as well. It can take a long time before the good things get the proper recognition.
-Drachasor
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-11-2004 16:52
|