Despite the Naysayers (and Bush-haters)…

Iraq Forum

…an estimated 60-70 percent of Iraqis braved the terrorists and have chosen freedom and democracy.

The historic moment has proved to be a huge success!

Yet one more stake plunged into the naysayers' hearts (and those of the terrorists). Those in the U.S. and abroad who hate Bush and America more than they wish freedom and democracy for the Iraqis said it couldn't be done. First First they said the U.S. couldn't take Baghdad without months of major battles and tens of thousands U.S. casualties. They were wrong. Next they said that the troops were being bogged down and it would take months to reach Baghdad. They were wrong. Then they said the exchange of power to the Iraqi interim government couldn't possibly take place on schedule. They were wrong again. Then Bush won re-relection—another big stake driven into the hearts of the liberal gasbags and global Bush-haters. Next they said lack of security would make it impossible to hold elections in Iraq by Jan. 30. They were wrong on THAT count too—they've been wrong on all counts!

Today, Iraqis at home and abroad are celebrating a huge victory against the terrorists. And this is only the beginning. A million or more Iraqi expatriates have returned home to Iraq.

Today, freedom is on the offensive, democracy is on the march.

But I'm all too certain that the naysayers will continue …


(More on this to come.)

What I saw from the images today was, SMILES. Smiles from the older Iraqi's, virtually everyone had this big grin on their face. Some Iraqi's had to walk 13 miles just to cast their vote. One person who demanded to get the opportunity to vote had to be carried to the poll. Younger Iraqi's were seen dancing in the street. One Iraqi soldier walked up to a vehicle and was almost dancing a jig. Iraqi's held up their stained fingers that they dipped into the ink to signify that they voted like a badge of honor. Some saying that they refuse to wash the ink off. Thousands were lined up to vote in Falujah. A line of close to 1000 women Iraqi's were lined up and a southern city. In some Shi'ite cities they estimate over 90% turnout. Better than 80% Kurdish turnout. Sunni estimates were around 20% or 30%.

The vote was for representation by party. Each party would have representation by percentage of votes received. If one party receive 40% of the vote they would have 40% representation.

The new congress would be about 275 people. Out of the 275 the partys would vote on 1 President 2 Vice Presidents and 1 Prime Minister. Any 3 provences can vote to nullify the outcome of the election in which case it would have to go to another vote.

…victory for Iraqis, victory for Americans, victory for all the world save for the terrorist cockroaches, on this very day, unbelievably, John F. Kerry threw out a statement to the media basically pooh-poohing the whole election as really unimportant in the context of what happens in the following weeks, with a "well, we'll see" attitude. Likewise, looking at some of the other threads, the ink on the fingers of the Iraqi voters has not yet faded and the crybaby malcontent winnies, oneofpeace, sowhatsthetruth, Dekka and JY_Frenchie are quickly back to their tired ol' song of defeatism, negativity and simple outright jealousy.

Ahhhh, but such desperate futility is to be expected—in the manner that the terrorist's actions have wrought nothing but disgust and futility. Nothing brings the collapse of terrorism within a nation more quickly than public disdain of the carnage the terrorists offer.

The Iraqis have tired of the terrorist's offerings.

The Iraqis have today made their choice.

Thank God for Iraqi courage.
Thank God for American soldiers' courage.
Thank God for George W. Bush's courage.

Before the naysayers get a chance I have one post to say in this topic:

"But we didn't find any WMDs!"

You're just pissing and moaning because the administration kicked out the weapons inspectors before they could "do their job". (As if they did their job the first dozen times). I'm not saying the weapons inspectors didn't TRY to do their jobs, I'm just saying that Saddam never actually gave them the opportunity. Nevermind the fact that Saddam DID use WMDs, and it was proven that he violated every resolution by trying to GET them, and that everyone in the world knows what he would do WITH them.

"Bush said he'd give them to Osama!"

He said he could sell them to terrorists. Would you trust him not to? That's what I thought.

"Iraq is a disaster!"

Just shut up.

As Jay Leno would say: "Shudduuup!"

Liberal elites were lamenting the same tired ol' crap at the end of WWII:
http://www.inreview.com/showthread....=371#post532902

John Kerry is officially detached from reality—regarding his own political standing and the situation on the ground in Iraq. On Sunday, he warned the Bush Administration against "overhyping" the election in Iraq. Is he out of his Cambridge-Sun Valley-Georgetown mind? A massive turnout in Iraq happened despite the violence, and despite the threats of terrorists. That is a amazing victory for democracy and the human spirit. Kerry's naysaying attitude is one of the main reasons he lost in November. Two words, John: It's Over.

http://www.inreview.com/showthread....=371#post532902

http://www.pigstye.net/iraq/images/topics/flag1.gif

Yesterday was that turning point, the first hurdle in getting a democratic government in Iraq but it is now about the next hurdles that must be overcome in sustaining that will for deomcracy that we saw over the weekend. 10 days from now we will know who has won the election the important part will be for all groups to accept that result this is the rfirst test for all Iraqis, the second test is seeing what happens to the insurgents and how they are dealt with because we know that they are not going away if anything this election will drive them on and make them more bloodthirsty we all saw what they did to the RAF plane yesterday. Third test is what happens when the coalition leaves Iraq and the Iraqi government has to go it alone with no support from the outside world, that has to happen at some time and how it fares in the wake of a recession, massive job losses etc etc is the real test of geovernment. finnally the fourth test if the US decides that it can spare the lives Bush might decide to take on Iran if that happens it will be intresting to see what Iraq does as war wages on nextdoor.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — By Feb. 1, it will have happened twice in less than four months, though it is more rare than an eclipse of the sun, a shooting star or a volcano eruption. It ought to be celebrated as a magnificent, historic event, but no: the Jan. 30 Iraqi election, like the October election in Afghanistan signifying the birth of a new democracy, and the first vote of a long-oppressed people, is being presented by the media as a dangerous event to be avoided at all costs.

For months, the so-called mainstream media has struggled to depict the Iraqi elections as a fools' errand foisted on the people of Iraq by George Bush. When I was in London earlier this week, the BBC and many European newspapers were predicting an "invalid outcome" because "the Sunni population is boycotting the vote." On Tuesday, Senate opponents of the president's Iraq policy lined up behind former Ku Klux Klansman Robert Byrd and Teddy "the swimmer" Kennedy to pillory Dr. Condoleezza Rice — and declare Iraq to be "a quagmire... a total failure."

But despite a pre-election poll of 33,000 Iraqis by the Arabic paper Asharq Al-Awsat, in which 72.4 percent said they intend to vote — including 33 percent of the population in the heavily Sunni central provinces — the U.S. media continue to denigrate the process. "Is a 50 or 60 percent turnout enough?" reporters have skeptically been asking the White House, State Department and every U.S. and Iraqi official they can find in Baghdad. But when 60 percent of American voters went to the polls in November, it was considered a "historic" turnout.

All of this misses the point. Though the final tally won't be known for days, Sunday's election is already a success — a "grand moment in Iraqi history," as the president predicted in his news conference on Wednesday. It is a remarkable accomplishment — first because the terrorists tried so hard to stop it and failed; second, because more than 17,000 candidates are willing to put their lives on the line, vying for 270 seats in the first freely elected National Assembly in the long history of Mesopotamia; and finally, because so many Iraqi women have braved bombs, bullets, threats and intimidation to go to the polls.

Last October, whole Afghani families walked miles, skirting minefields and defying threats from Taliban thugs, just to vote. Little noted by my "media colleagues" with cameras at the ready to capture the carnage was the amazing moment when Moqadasa Sidiqi, a 19-year-old woman, cast the first ballot in Afghanistan's history. A woman cast the first ballot!

And though you wouldn't know it from the criticism and commentary in the media, it is the feminine factor in the Iraqi elections that is far more important than whether the voter is a Sunni or a Shiite. By law, one third of the new National Assembly must be women. Women are about to transform Iraq, just as they are transforming Afghanistan.

Last summer, when I interviewed the elected governor of Iraq's largest province, Al Anbar, in the heart of the Sunni triangle, he told me: "Women voting will change everything. No woman who carries a child for nine months wants that child to grow up to be a suicide terrorist. They want the politicians to give their children something to live for, not die for — and we will have to do it."

That judgment is echoed by most secular and religious leaders in Iraq. The National Assembly elected on Jan. 30 will not only name a president, two deputy presidents, a prime minister and a cabinet, it must also start drafting a new constitution due by Aug. 15. That constitution will then be submitted to a popular referendum — a second free election by mid-October. This new Iraqi constitution will become the law of the land if affirmed by a majority of the voters nationwide. Approval of the constitution will yield yet a third free election on Dec. 15, 2005, to elect a new government.

All of this seems to have escaped the attention of the president's critics in our media — as have the television ads produced by pro-democracy organizations to encourage Iraqi voting. In one, an elderly man is confronted on the street by a group of masked, armed thugs. The man is soon joined by a handful of his neighbors, then more, until the mass of people greatly outnumber the terrorists, who set off running from the crowd of ordinary, unarmed but courageous Iraqis.

The voiceover says: "On Jan. 30, we meet our destiny and our duty. We are not alone, and we are not afraid. Our strength is in our unity; together we will work, and together prevail." No ad like this could possibly run under Saddam's rule.

Terrorist-in-chief in Iraq, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, in a statement showing just how desperate the insurgents are to prevent democracy from taking root, condemned these elections. "We have declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy and those who follow this wrong ideology." He went on to brand anyone who took part as an "infidel."

President Bush, in his Inaugural Address, said, "By our efforts, we have lit a fire as well — a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world."

That fire is blazing in Iraq. And it may soon spread to some of those other dark corners of the Middle East.

Oliver North is a nationally syndicated columnist, host of the Fox News Channel's War Stories and founder and honorary chairman of Freedom Alliance.

—Oliver North


http://www.pigstye.net/iraq/images/topics/flag1.gif

By our efforts, we have lit a fire — a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world.
—President George W. Bush


http://www.hannity.com/img/purple_finger_iraq.jpg

It is admirable that they have such a strong turnout in the face of adversity especially, as someone already pointed out, with no such adversity yet such an abysmal turnout here in the states. But that may be because so much is at stake for the Iraqis versus so much is taken for granted here. And I'm not inclined to believe that anything would change this about Americans in general because so many of us are so cushy no matter who's in office and instinctual complacency derived from a sense of helplessness and hopelessness on major issues... well you get the point: nothing will change here.

I must say, however, that generally the remarks from both of SOME PEOPLE towards those who disagree with your views are uncalled for. You prance around on these topics like a couple fifth graders who just beat the high score on a video game instead of giving the topics due consideration.

I saw a bumper sticker the other day that made me laugh (in agreement) which read:

I THINK FOR MYSELF
THEREFORE I AM A LIBERAL


I know, how cliche can you get, right? But honestly the feeling I get from most ultra-conservatives around here is that they hear someone else make a comment and then hoot and hollar about "yeah, what he said!" without ever demonstrating the capacity for structured rationalization of the topic for themselves, e.g. the "bandwagon" approach. I have demonstrated time and again that I am no conservative, but though I am not a liberal either, I do insist on thinking for myself. You should too. Trust nothing, question everything.

That's my 2 cents. I hope the newly elected Iraqi president survives his station for more than a month.

Indeed.. this whole process is culminating into filling that appointment which terrorists have already vowed to assassinate. I don't think he will have a very long life expectancy after taking office, unfortunately. That's not to spread doom and gloom, it's only to say you don't start planting a rose garden in the middle of a battle front and expect pretty flowers to be growing there still by the next morning.

Ahhh, they'll have our soldier's protection for many years to come.
Rummy's on the ball don't cha know?

http://www.inreview.com/showthread....=371#post532902


Indeed. The whining is not new. In 1946, the New York Times was writing of how another country freed from tyranny "hated" its liberator. And LIFE magazine wrote of how the United States was "losing the peace" in post-war Germany.


http://www.pigstye.net/iraq/images/topics/flag1.gif

http://www.lonestartimes.com/content/images/howard.jpg

"Mr. Soros has not released any statements about the elections in Iraq."
—Michael Vachon, Soros spokesman.