Election in Iraq

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: DougR
Date: 14 Feb 05 - 01:01 PM

Sorry, Ron, but your posts don't bother me a bit. The arrogance you show in your posts from time to time (particularly when you preach to someone) is a bit amusing though.

DougR

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: dianavan
Date: 14 Feb 05 - 01:02 PM

Ron - I am not overwrought about Iraq instituting Sharia immediately. Sistani has already said that Sharia will be the rule of law for Muslims in Iraq and that the constitution will have to be in line with the law of the Koran.

It may not happen right away but, I think, the Iraqi govt. will pay lip service to western democracy until they are in a strong position to impose the laws of Sharia. Read what Sistani has said regarding the constitution.

At this time, the Kurds seem to want positions of power within the new govt. They would rather be independent but it seems they are trying to achieve a compromise.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Feb 05 - 10:57 PM

Dianavan-

From what I read and hear, al-Sistani does not in fact have the intention of pushing for Sharia in Iraq. Again I ask you for your source that he does have that intention, with exact quotes by him. According to a radio program dealing with this issue tonight, including Iraqis (as well as American Enterprise Institute people and Washington Post correspondents), what he intends is that the constitution to be written is compatible with Islam but that Iraq is not ruled by clerics, nor does he intend to make Sharia the law of Iraq. What is more likely is that it will vary by region--in some areas religious law will have more application than in others, for instance in forbidding the sale of alcohol at certain times.

If you have contrary information, please share it---with sources.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: Ron Davies
Date: 15 Feb 05 - 11:03 PM

Doug--

All you have to do is actually read a thread before you comment, and start quoting non-Bushite sources rather than constantly regurgitating half-digested lines by Limbaugh, Hannity etc, and we'll get along fine.

I'm fully aware there are many positions on political issues---but sources and facts count--or there's no point to debating.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: dianavan
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 04:45 PM

Ron - You said, "what he intends is that the constitution to be written is compatible with Islam but that Iraq is not ruled by clerics, nor does he intend to make Sharia the law of Iraq."

What I said is, "Sistani has already said that Sharia will be the rule of law for Muslims in Iraq and that the constitution will have to be in line with the law of the Koran."

I don't see the big difference. Are you splitting hairs?

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 11:30 PM

Dianavan--

1) It's likely this discussion will be a moot point. Without a clear majority--- (the Shi'ites took 48.2% of the votes, which according to the way the voting system works, will give them a slim majority in the new parliament--140 of 275 seats (Wall St Journal 15 Feb 2005)---they will need a coalition partner. Therefore, even if they wanted to, they will not be able to install a Shi'ite theocracy in Iraq.

They will have to compromise with their coalition partner. It seems evident to me that partner has to be the Kurds. Not only are the Kurds the #2 vote-getters, but if they are not included in the government, they will have no incentive to send oil revenues from their part of Iraq to the central government.

2) Yes, I am splitting hairs, just as if I were to allege that the Jerry Falwell brand of Protestantism is different from that of Martin Luther King or Philip Berrigan. What's your view on this?

From what I read and hear, the Iraqi Shi'ite leaders, including al-Sistani, are not enthusiastic about a Saudi or Iranian-type Moslem state.

Thus, for many reasons, Iraq will not be a state ruled by Sharia.

Still waiting for any evidence from you that it will.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: Ron Davies
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 11:35 PM

Obviously, William Sloane Coffin would have been a better choice for my comparison than Berrigan. But the parallel holds.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: dianavan
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 03:20 AM

Ron -

1. You're right, it is now a moot point. One thing for sure is that the Kurds do not trust the Sunnis and that Kurdish Islam is more mystical than a Theocracy could ever tolerate. For some reason the Kurds are putting a lot of faith in the U.S. (oh-oh) and it makes you wonder about the electorate in general. Lets face it, the oil fields are in Kurdish terristory so of course the U.S. will be their buddies. You don't suppose the U.S. will help the Kurds gain independence and then try to control the oil fields, do you? This is getting messier and messier.

2. There are many forms of Protestants but they must all learn the apostles creed, "...I believe in the holy Catholic Church,..." so basically Christians all have the same roots. Through time, there have been many splinters and reformations. Every congregation is different but they all share a similar belief system.

If you want to relate it to the situation in Iraq, the U.S. should get out and let Islam sort it out. Seems that everyone except the Kurds are hoping that happens.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: DougR
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 10:38 PM

Ron: but it's perfectly acceptable for you, Amos, and others to quote Bushhaters and expect that we accept that as truth, right? I don't think so.

DougR

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 10:50 PM

Dianavan--

Kurdish Islam will probably not be a crucial element.   The Kurds are by and large rather secular in outlook and more prosperous than the rest of Iraq, already somewhat Westernized, but also with ties to Turkish culture (there are 20 million Kurds in Turkey).

Not all the oil fields are in Kurdish territory. The US (and the UK) wants access to all of them, so would want to avoid choosing between between an Iraqi state (for which many US and UK soldiers have already died) and a Kurdish entity. As I said earlier, the Kurds
1) are in the driver's seat as to makeup of the Iraqi parliament
2) are also aware that outright independence would bring enmity of many larger neighbors (especially Turkey, with its own 20 million Kurds).
The Kurds cannot even claim outright ownership of Kirkuk for the same reason.

My point with the parallel between Islam and Christianity is that in both cases there's a whole range of strictness of belief. In Islam, it's not Sharia or nothing--just as in Christianity it's not Jerry Falwell or nothing.

Believe it or not, Bush wants to get out of Iraq ASAP--so long as the US has access to Iraqi oil. He definitely wants to stop the body bags coming back from Iraq--as long as the dead are Iraqi, no sweat off his nose. He may even have sense enough (though this is presuming a lot) to realize how damn lucky he is that the despised UN made possible an Iraqi face on the resistance to the insurgency.

Of course he's too stubborn, narrowminded, obtuse, and duplicitous to admit the whole invasion was made just to fulfill his own pre-conceived plan, without any regard to facts.
Remember what he said when, in debate, he was asked to name any mistakes he'd made in the past 4 years.

Interesting you would raise the possibility of Kurdish independence in exchange for control of the oil fields in Kurdish Iraq. A variation of that is, in fact, a fall-back position of the Bush "administration", according to the Wall St Journal editorial page, usually a pretty accurate reflection of Bushite plans.

The idea would be that if Iraq does disintegrate into warring factions, the Iraqi oil fields being targets, the US would choose to intensify support of a Kurdish de facto state; indeed the US has already been supporting that state since the end of the Gulf War.
At that point, control of the oil fields wouldn't even be necessary. The Kurds would know who their #1 protector is and access would be no problem. But this is not a Bushite goal, since by doing this they would be alienating both Turkey and whatever Iraqi state existed.

Subject: RE: Election in Iraq
From: Ron Davies
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 10:53 PM

Read my posts for once, Doug R, and stop staring at Rush and your own navel.

That's right, Bush-haters-------as in my main source of criticism of Bush and Bushites-----the Wall St Journal, as I like to say--that well-known leftist rag.