Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KENT4.8IS
That is our problem. After "completing" the military phase we went light speed to give them a chance for "democratic" election. It is like asking a toddler participate in elections. Not every society can make that switch that fast. Great multitude of political processes inside the coutry(without foreign influence) has to take place over many, many, many years and quite possibly generations for it to have an open mind towards democracy, monarchy, dictatorship.
|
I've heard this over and over and it's simply BS. Iraq was a parlamentary dictatorship under Saddam. What it means is that there were elections and people voted for members of the parlament and Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds all held many positions in the parlament. So the people of Iraq know exactly what democracy is. The only difference now is that instead of Saddam as "president for life", the prime minister was chosen by the Parlament. The voting process for the people was the same, except perhaps with more choices than in the past.
This whole idea is probably the fault of our own media. Those pictures of the people with the purple paint on their fingers would make you think these people had never seen a ballot box before in their lives.
The issue here is that this country should not be a country and it never should have been. It should be 2 or 3 different countries. The British drew the borders this way to "divide and conquer" -- to keep infighting going on amongst the Iraqi people so as not to allow them to unify and kick the British out.