I'll cut off my nose! That'll teach you, Mr. Facey-face!
Babble on.
American and Iraqi troops have re-taken the city of Samarra. The fact that they have had to "re-take" any territory since the collapse of the Baathist government still makes me shake my head. But that's another day's rant.
For today, I'll confine my incredulity to comments from Muhammad Bashar al-Faidhi, a member of the Association of Muslim Scholars in Baghdad, responding to the victory in Samarra:
"These policies will increase the anger of the Iraqi people," he said, "and if the government insists on resolving the crisis in this horrible American way, then we expect that the Iraqi people will not cooperate in any forthcoming election or any other political program." (bold by Babbler)
I've reread this quote a few times now, and I still can't see where al-Faidhi-for-brains is going with this. If Iraqis follow his advice and don't show up to elect their own government, then what happens next? How exactly will this facilitate the departure of 'horrible' American troops? If refusing to govern yourself takes you any closer to freedom, I confess, I don't see how.
If ever the phrase 'cutting off one's nose to spite one's face' could be applied, it's here. I hope to God Iraq has better leaders to offer its long-suffering citizens than this.
Babble off.
posted by Babbling Brooks @ 2:03 p.m.
9 comments
9 Comments:
Push the gray cells just a wee bit farther........closer to the edge....yep..now think: these are close kin to those who believe that strapping 900 lbs of explosives to your chest and blowing yourself (nose ++++) up will somehow bring about a better life.And don't get me started on the subject of the mothers that send these 18 year olds to wreak THEIR revenge. I'm afraid common sense is a misnomer. It isn't all that common. Blog on!
I still can't see where al-Faidhi-for-brains is going with this . . . If refusing to govern yourself takes you any closer to freedom, I confess, I don't see how.Why do you equate Iraqi non-participation in elections/political programs run by American officials with a lack of willingness to govern themselves?
Presumably Al-Faidhi (nice slur on his name, by the way, very intelligent) would prefer to see the US leave Iraq so that Iraqis, themselves, can work out their own political programs.
Anonymous 2:34, try to follow the bouncing ball here.
Al-Twitface wants the Americans gone. The Americans won't leave until an elected Iraqi government tells them to. Therefore, this bozo should be encouraging every Iraqi citizen who wants the U.S. off Iraqi soil to participate in the elections - not to boycott them.
Again I ask: if Al-Moron and his gang of roving idiots have a non-suicide-bombing-and-decapitating-hostages plan to get rid of the Yankee presence without participating in elections, I'd love to hear the details. Of course, I'm not holding my breath.
BTW, about my 'slur': at Babbling Brooks, I reserve the right to fiddle with anyone and everyone's name as I see fit. It comes with having had to deal with "Omen" and "666" jokes since I was in grade school.
At least I post my name.
BTW, about my 'slur': at Babbling Brooks, I reserve the right to fiddle with anyone and everyone's name as I see fit. It comes with having had to deal with "Omen" and "666" jokes since I was in grade school.Ahhh yes, the "I was wronged and so I am justified to wrong others" argument. Very sophisticated.
If non-participation in an election (or spoiling a ballot for that matter) is a legitimate form of democratic protest in Canada, why shouldn't it be in Iraq?
Consider if Al-Faidhi was successful in convincing every Iraqui citizen to boycott the elections - don't you think that would send a pretty strong message?
It seems equally ridiculous to participate in an election under terms imposed by a foreign government, than it does to attempt to subvert the process from the beginning.
Note, I'm not saying I agree with Al-Faidhi's perspective, only that it is a perfectly reasonable form of protest.
- my name
I've never said I'm 'sophisticated.' I leave 'sophisticated' to the tortured left.
I don't think abdicating your social responsibility is a valid form of protest - in Canada, in Iraq, or anywhere else you care to name. Vandals, children, and the mentally incompetent spoil things. Adults look at their options and make the best decision they can - even if the choices are between bad and worse. Spoiling a ballot is petulance, pure and simple. It contributes nothing to good government.
If you don't see anyone on the ballot worth voting for, run yourself. Otherwise, hold your nose and cast your vote with the rest of the grown-ups.
Sorry, but that is just a ridiculous attitude. It reminds me of the old Soviet "elections" in which everyone on the ballot was from the Communist Party, or, for that matter, the fact that Sadaam won the last "election" in Iraq with over 100% of the vote.
It seems to me in these situations it is better to protest the election than to contribute to its legitimacy by voting.
Do you really believe that any old Joe-Iraq can get his name on the ballot in the current election? The fact is, it is a skewed election process from the beginning - why legitimize it with participation?
Do you really believe that any old Joe-Iraq can get his name on the ballot in the current election? The fact is, it is a skewed election process from the beginning - why legitimize it with participation?Fact-check, my Anonymous heckler: 500 signatures on a petition gets your name on the ballot. UN oversight of a European-style PR ballot is skewed?
But why let the truth get in the way of a little barking at the moon, eh?
And if a rabidly anti-american, theocratic government gets elected, do you believe that the US will willingly leave?
A vast majority of the American public wouldn't tolerate the administration going back on it's word on this issue. Republicans would abandon Bush in droves if he disregarded the democratically-expressed will of the Iraqi people.
If a new Iraqi gov't says leave, they'll leave.
Post a Comment
<< Home