Do You Care If Iraq Becomes A Democracy Or Not?

At this stage in the game, I really could care less. America has too many problems already. I feel awful for the Iraqi people, but they'll be able to build something on their own. We have to get out of this country soon...or else we're gonna be there for the next 20 years.

Who are we to dictate what form of government other nations should have?

And in case they make a mistake, they should have the right to reaffirm that choice or make a new one every few years.

Hey, that sounds familiar...

A 'democracy' is where the majority of the people get to elect the leaders and set the rules.
In iraq a 'democracy' is likely to have tendancies to islamic law, and economically they have been used to the infrastructure and resources belonging to the state with health care and education being state provided.

So an iraqi democracy would probably be a Socialist-Islamic state.

I think that is reasonable but it is about 180 degrees from what Bushco wants.
They want to exploit everything for profit, auction off the countries commons and have permanent military bases and a CIA/Embassy controlling everything with an iron fist.

why didn't his own people overthrow him?? Why did they need our help???

Really ...if 25 million people in Iraq hated the man...why didn't they pop him off at one of his rallies? Hell even one of the Baathist friends of his could have killed him and staged a coup...and yet they didn't...

This war is a front to open up the spigots of oil into American oil company coffers.

One of Saddams role models was Stalin. Both were very good at getting rid of anyone who disagreed, and their families and friends.

Also not everyone hated saddam, many people close to him prospered very much.

Even our rebellion need some help and our tyrant was an ocean away.

The problem is that they should become whatever they are ready to become. You really cannot force culture of democracy on people that do not wish it. Now if they came to us asking to be taught how to live life similar to us we may have a chance. But they are a different people with a different culture.

""The problem is that they should become whatever they are ready to become. You really cannot force culture of democracy on people that do not wish it. Now if they came to us asking to be taught how to live life similar to us we may have a chance. But they are a different people with a different culture.
""


Everyone is ready for democracy. Anything else is some form of exploitation.

The alternatives to democracy are Aristocracy, Theocracy or Plutocracy.

So your premise is that the people are not able to rule themselves.
I reject that. They may not have the ability to keep the non-democratic forces from seizing control, as we have, but that is not an indication of their 'readiness' or ability to be democratic.

Its a question of what they think the right thing to have is. Its like trying to force democracy on the Vatican. If a people believe that they are supposed to behave in a certain manner then telling them they are not is futile. We may believe it is in there interest to cast aside older archaic systems but we cannot make them believe this. We can guide them and advise them. But force will not work in this circumstance.

The trouble is that we have a deeply seated trust in society. We believe that our social functions cover our needs. We trust our institutions to hand out justice and keep things running smoothly. We have abdicated some of our control to our society in the name of having a better running society.

This trade may not be apparent to some. Justice is a particularly tricky subject in this format. Our form of justice stops people from extracting vengence. When someone harms us it is natural to want to strike back. This is simply how our brains are wired. But such a system can lead to massive chaos with generations of blood fueds. Thus we abdicate our claim to vengence to the society.

This is something that may prove very difficult to many in Arab society. Their sense justice takes a much more personally responsible path. They see justice as something thye must take part in. They are very wary of any system that removes them from dealing out punishment.

Democracy takes a great deal of trust in our fellow human. It is not something that just comes naturally to a society. Might and force come much easier. It makes more sense to many as well. Democracy is nearly impossible to force on a people that do not seek it. It has to be owned and desired or it will be left by the roadside at the nearest opportunity.

And how do you propose we find out "what they think the right thing to have" is?

The one with the strongest militia? The one that fits Az's view of Arab society? How about letting Iraqis with strong views on the subject go around the country explaining them to other people, then the Iraqis can let everyone know by writing what they think the right thing is on a slip of paper and putting it in a box to be counted.

Sound fair?

Its not really a question of what is fair. Its a question of human nature. We can see all the benefit in democracy in the world. But if the people or Iraq do not share our view they are not going to embrace it.

Simply put many people in Iraq view democracy as morally corrupt. It allows voices from those that spread evil to be heard. It removes moral certainty and replaces it with moral relativism. Democracy is a poison to theocracy. And if the people believe in theocracy then they will view Democracy with disdain.

Its not about what is fair. Its a question of what we can and cannot do. It would be wonderous if we were able to establish a fully funcitonal constitution for them. Complete with rights for everyone in their society. But without their embracement of this it will not happen.

How do you propose to find out if "the people of Iraq share our view" or not?

There is an amazing cultural blindness in *'s party. They just assume that you can wave the word freedom around and everyone gets on board and agrees about what it means. Talk to some people sometime and you will find out that there is a world of difference in how they see the world. What freedom is to us may be oppression in the eyes of another.

How about all of them?

By voting.

We also should have FAIR ELECTIONS!

I'm waiting for the day Canada invades the US to "bring democracy and freedom to the region."

Then maybe all the Freeptards can sign up to be the victims of "harmless frat pranks" since what happened at Abu Ghraib seems so trivial to them.

(whew, I'm outta the 700 club)

The way I see it, you just can't have enough Duct Tape to cover Bush's ass on all his crimes!

But not to "bring stability to the region"--that means coddling the worst of the Israeli extremists, ensuring a steady supply of oil & supplying us with a base for attacking Iran & Syria.

They already had elections. Not free ones--but they appreciate the concept. Some local ruling councils were set up just after Saddam fell--but they were discouraged by the invaders.

Democracy is a great system & I believe many people around the world want it. But the people they elect might not agree with the people we elect (or the people we DIDN'T elect)--so they "aren't ready" for democracy.

And I don't agree with death, torture & rape as good advertisements for democracy.

"Bring stability to the region" doesn't necessarily mean what the neocons say it does -- after all, they were wrong about everything else. Don't let them own that term.

...we put in place a puppet government that will clear the way for big American companies to dominate the oil production and other reconstruction efforts for the next 50 years. Ask why BushCo has money to rebuild Iraq and pull it's 25 million citizens out of poverty, but can let 45 million Americans sink further into poverty here at home. Sorry, I just don't buy Bush's line here.

... in this poll.

I voted yes ... only because I disagreed with the premise of "no".

Democracy isn't merely elections. They've had "elections" in Iraq for many years.

I've recently read a history of Iraq and the conclusion that I've come to is that "democracy" won't be coming there any time soon. For 80+ years, it's been nothing but occupation, coups, pogroms, and assasinations.

The only person who brought any kind of stability to the place was ... you guessed it! ... Saddam Hussein. In fact, until he started his pointless war with Iran, the country had been in a kind of renaissance ... education, women's rights, culture.

So what do I think Iraq needs? Either another strongman to hold the place together, or a split of the country into 3 states, under a weak central government.

Iraq democracy, my ass.

Democracy is a concept that must come from within -- it cannot be imposed from the outside. Additionally, an eventually Iraqi Democracy might appear significantly different from the US version of Democracy.

:shrug:

there, that is very, very clear.

When we have an HONORABLE president, they will ask him or her for our assistance when they want it.

The suggestion that we can "force" a "democracy" on any country is laughable, in lieu of total annihilation/capitulation, a la Japan/Germany.

But I'm not willing to see US soldiers killed to achieve it. I'm not for killing thousands of civilians to achieve it.

Iraq's government is the concern of Iraqis. I wish them the best, but I'd prefer that my tax dollars not fund murder and imperial politics.

and let them choose what they want.

IMO a "democracy" was never that viable an option, given a number of factors including the political make-up of the country and the fact that democracy isn't something that can be imposed from outside overnight. It takes years if not centuries to build the institutions and basic understandings necessary for democracy. It took the West thousands of years -- and we obviously still don't have it right.

So it's not that I "don't care" -- it's mostly that I never thought it was a doable "goal" (or reason for war, whether trotted out before or after the fact) from the outset. I haven't changed my mind.

it would be nice if we could get a government at least as stable as the one we ousted

It's none of our business and not our place to 'assign' their government.

It's for the Iraqis to decide. I wonder how our democracy would've have developed had it been force fed from another power.

to see a blunt question like this. Like many people, I would answer that it is high time Americans got back in the general habit of asking foreign policy questions like how much do I care, how much am I willing to risk or sacrifice, and what are the chances of success? How much do I know about the people, the region, and the current situation? As (a young) Cheney would ask, do we have "other priorities"? Not to mention that my own life is short and there are over 6 billion people running around the globe to help or not help. This may not be the perfect alternative, but look how weird things are getting.
P.S: Thanks to Wetzelbill for posting the Strauss stuff in the "Bush, Conservatives, and Conservatism" forum.

But having our troops and "independant contractors" there is a hinderance, not a help.

We need to let the UN take over and then pay massive reparations. It's never going to happen while Bush is president though.