Bush considers accelerating Iraq election timetable

WASHINGTON, May 25 (Reuters) - The Bush administration is considering moving faster toward self-rule in Iraq by bringing forward the date for its first national elections from next January to as early as this fall, people familiar with the matter said on Tuesday.

Some administration officials have resisted the idea, arguing that the violent turmoil in the country would preclude holding elections any sooner than January for a national assembly, which would then pick a transitional government.

But the White House is seriously considering accelerating the timetable, sources said. It is seeking input from the United Nations on whether it would be feasible to hold elections this fall or winter, a few months ahead of schedule and closer to the Nov. 2 U.S. presidential election.

"Obviously we want to see it done as soon as possible, if we can, if it's feasible," said one source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

more…
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N25431114.htm

elections."

god. I can't believe they're further manipulating an entire nation just to save their own asses.

wait a second. yes. I can believe it. idiots.

when he loses here in Nov. he can run in bagdhad, give them taxcuts and leave no prisoner behind...

:evilgrin:

that he's killed over 750 of our men for an election ploy?

After June 30th, they will not have any say in what goes on in Iraq.
There is also a good chance that a civil war will erupt over there as soon a power is handed over because we have done such a good job of
securing the peace.

to see if elections can be held during periods of total chaos. Next up, November in Amerika.

Seriously, how can a sharply divided country have Democratic elections during an all out street war? If there's anyone who thinks it's feasible, it's the idiot boy king.

Is that what they mean by "full" sovereignty for Iraq?

From an AP story:

He said that the United States would keep its troop level at the current 138,000 as long as necessary but that commanders were constantly reassessing needs. "If they need more troops, I will send them," Bush pledged.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040525/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_15

They whipped this up to fast (and right on the heels of the speech) for it to be anything else.

I think they are running it up the flag pole to see if anyone salutes OR they will blame the UN guy (Karimi?) if he states the obvious-that it is too soon- and they will say he is obstructing.

They love "obstructing" to describe anyone who isn't in lockstep.

IraqPlan speeches in the next few weeks, despite what BushCo originally said. This speech was a flop, and had to be, for it was delivered by a clueless fool. . .

then when things get even worse AND more of our troops get killed, well you can only guess who'll be blamed

Geez-us. Talk about a cabal of anti-democracy tricksters.

This administration,...ugh,...it's priorities are becoming ever more so crystal clear: (1) Use overwhelming (including unnecessary) force to gain POWER over the country (2) Create "new words" so that no laws apply to our venture (3) Buy off anyone who's for sale (4) "Paint" a pretty picture for observers (5) Don't worry about repercussions,...just put out fires as they come (6) If all else fails, pretend we are being reasonable.