Iraq Holds the elections this forum opposed...again.

[JW Frogen]

Shame on you PA, shame on you!

In your time in history, your only time in history, you chose personal despair and your personal sense of peace over Iraqi freedom and a future for Iraqis.

You and your ideas of peace were always more important to you than what Iraqis wanted, and you critsised those far more courageous than you who risked their lives, yes died, to bring Iraq freedom you not only take for granted, but freedom you are too jaded and self indulgently cynical to understand the value of. (Because you have never had to lift one finger to earn it.)

Thank God you were wrong, or rather were ignored.

Iraqis turn out in record numbers for crucial elections

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/fe ... ns-turnout

[JW Frogen]

The worst person on this forum in this moral indictment is Scorpion.

He was preparing to be (or playing at) being a warrior, yet proffered nothing but defeat and personal, if fashionable, despair concerning Iraq. All he ever did is live at home with his mother and gobble down her fish fingers while declaring the real men fighting could not win.

He was the toy warrior any real warrior prays they never have to fight with.

I really hope he is selling furniture and not still pretending to be a warrior.

[TomB]

Yes, holding an election somehow makes things all shiny, sparkly and happy happy. Mugabe does it regularly and Zimbabwe is a paradise.

Unfortunately Dorothy, the Iraqi people don't agree with your view and only half of them felt that it was safe to step out of their bomb shelters long enough to vote.

[Pastafarian]

As though somehow holding elections makes up for not finding WMDs, not finding links with al Qaeda etc etc.

[Jovial Monk]

JW I admire your passion for democracy in Iraq, but shall we wait to asses 'success' until after all CoW troops leave?

[JW Frogen]

Well Tom, as Iraq has had larger voter turn outs than most non-mandatory voting democracies, even with the threat of death, I would argue that the Iraqi people do agree with me, or want what I have, the political ability to determine their own future.

A right you enjoy (or not) but would have denied to them as the little brown people can not have what we have, can they now?

Even though they have risked far more for such freedom than you ever will Tom.

[Jovial Monk]

False dichotomy there JW.

It is not democracy v seven years starvation followed by invasion & insurrection.

Question is, could democracy have been brought there any other way? (Bribing Sadam & sons to go fuck off to Saudi or something?)

And was democracy the real goal? If so, why have we not invaded Zimbabwe???

[JW Frogen]

The only false dichotomy here junky monk is the statement that if we can not free everyone everywhere all at once we should not act to free anyone ever.

That strategic and economic interest can not be combined with idealism.

Yours is an idealism of inaction that every tyrant counts on.

[Jovial Monk]

And the other answer is that Zimbabwe has no oil.

[JW Frogen]

Neither does Japan, most of Western Europe and South Korea, all liberated and protected to this day by the US military.

But to the moral point, should we allow those who live with oil to die because we will not, can not liberate those without oil?

Is the Left really calling for all or nothing, which means, according to reality, nothing?