So what exactly is wrong with an islamic Iraq?

[Zebo]

We know Osamas brand of lslam is extremly dangerous but I don't know if that's what they want?

Seems to me if say 80% of the poeple are islmaic in a country you should have laws reflecting the will of the people much like our Christian nation did/does with all it's patriachcal and puritain laws. Sure we changed and so will they like Iran is doing.

I just don't see how the majority will can be supressed without going back to another dictatorship. Which will not make iraq a very safe place. Democracy and liberation was Bushs main tenet latley for going in. Do you think we are reniging on our promise?

What are the pundants saying?

 

[Dari]

nothing. We just don't want ayatollahs hijacking the gov't of Iraq and turning the people there into virtual slaves (like in Iran). Two theocracies (Iran and The Vatican) are enough to make the world miserable. Three would be intolerable.

 

[Zebo]

So is Islam and democracy and the freedoms we value incompatable in any form?

I don't know. Like christainty there seems to be a thousand derivations.

 

[HappyGamer2]

yes there is a culture and somewhat a religion clash with Iraq being a true democracy

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
So is Islam and democracy and the freedoms we value incompatable in any form?

I don't know. Like christainty there seems to be a thousand derivations.

that's not what I said. Theocracies are a terrible idea because they are nations ruled by religious leaders who lead by written scripture (which can be interpreted to their satisfaction). While the Vatican is a theocracy, it is less than the size of a normal city and has a relatively few people there. Iran has well over 60 million people. Theocracies on that scale are bound to be disastrous.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
So is Islam and democracy and the freedoms we value incompatable in any form?

I don't know. Like christainty there seems to be a thousand derivations.

that's not what I said. Theocracies are a terrible idea because they are nations ruled by religious leaders who lead by written scripture (which can be interpreted to their satisfaction). While the Vatican is a theocracy, it is less than the size of a normal city and has a relatively few people there. Iran has well over 60 million people. Theocracies on that scale are bound to be disastrous.

If they are elected by thier people why do you care? And our govermnet relies on written scripture (the constitution) and is interprted by the supreme court. I don't know what kind of role they are asking for or even if the goverment will inlude such checks and balances as we have , I should hope so. But Should'nt a democracy have laws reflecting the will of the people? If not, it's not really a democracy is it? You need to get over you're hatred of Islam it's thier lives, no?

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
So is Islam and democracy and the freedoms we value incompatable in any form?

I don't know. Like christainty there seems to be a thousand derivations.

that's not what I said. Theocracies are a terrible idea because they are nations ruled by religious leaders who lead by written scripture (which can be interpreted to their satisfaction). While the Vatican is a theocracy, it is less than the size of a normal city and has a relatively few people there. Iran has well over 60 million people. Theocracies on that scale are bound to be disastrous.

If they are elected by thier people why do you care? And our govermnet relies on written scripture (the constitution) and is interprted by the supreme court. I don't know what kind of role they are asking for or even if the goverment will inlude such checks and balances as we have , I should hope so. But Should'nt a democracy have laws reflecting the will of the people? If not, it's not really a democracy is it? You need to get over you're hatred of Islam it's thier lives, no?

Put the word elected in quotations and you'll understand "democracy" in that part of the world (bar Israel). Even Turkey can't get it right (with generals being the unseen hand in all important affairs).

 

[heartsurgeon]

our Christian nation did/does with all it's patriachcal and puritain laws

what? patriachal and puritain laws....what a bizarre characterization....

just don't see how the majority will can be supressed

the design of the constitution, and the separation of powers guarantees rights to the "minority" in our society..
hence "freedom of speech", hence "separation of church and state", the constitution protects the rights of the
minority from the tyranny of the majority..it is a bizarre characterization to say that "suppression of the majority will = dictatorship"
the constitution is a set of rules...
to have the "majority" express their will
without rules is the definition of "mob rule"

i believe that Secretary Rumsfeld is stating is that their won't be "mob rule" in Iraq..
there's going to be a democratic multi-ethnic representative government..probably with
a constitution that we help craft. The religious "leaders" are not going to have direct political
power in Iraq..you can absolutely sure of that. In Iran, the elected representatives of the people
can pass any law they want, but a religious "Board of Directors" reviews everything the elected officials do, and can
crush any activities they deem inappropriate..that won't be happening either.

is Islam and democracy and the freedoms we value incompatable in any form?

what? Turkey is a democracy with strict separation of "church" and state. Turkey is 98% Moslem.
how do you come up with these statements?

finally - you've got to understand we live in a republic..authority is granted the government by the people,
the government must operate within a framework of laws, with separation of executive, judiciary and legislative powers, and
laws exist to protect the individual...democracy is an incomplete description of what will govern iraq..

 

[Moonbeam]

Seems like that democracy is best that's home grown. I think bumping off Saddam is like cutting a tug of war rope in half. It's made a mess and not an easy one to fix. We may have to kill a lot more of them to save them, no? The only trick part is never for a moment doubting we have that right.

 

[Zebo]

HS those are called questions which you did little to answer.

If we were to translate our constitution directly into Arabic and let them use it won't it effectivly become a muslim county eventually or not? Seems to me it would. The electorate (if overwhelmingly Islamic) would nominate and elect those with similar beliefs (islamic) and would institute laws based on Islam consitution or not, as we do (i.e.income tax with a nice little amendment to the consitution). If we prevent this from happening by placing our values of what is just and unjust instead of thiers, it also seems to me, we are subverting the will of the people.

 

[0roo0roo]

its fine and dandy if you have no minorities or women

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
HS those are called questions which you did little to answer.

If we were to translate our constitution directly into Arabic and let them use it won't it effectivly become a muslim county eventually or not? Seems to me it would. The electorate (if overwhelmingly Islamic) would nominate and elect those with similar beliefs (islamic) and would institute laws based on Islam consitution or not, as we do (i.e.income tax with a nice little amendment to the consitution). If we prevent this from happening by placing our values of what is just and unjust instead of thiers, it also seems to me, we are subverting the will of the people.

Did we subvert the will of Germany when Hitler was removed and a new democracy was imposed?

Did we subvert the will of Japan when the militaristic regime was removed and a democracy was imposed?

Is Islam a religion such that only the extreme Islamic group can rise to the top and take over a country?

 

[KenGr]

I think maybe we're missing the point here. No one expects that Iraq will not be an "Islamic country". It is and it will be. What the US will not allow at this point is to allow it to become an Islamic theocracy. Since Iraq has three major religious groups (Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurd) allowing the government to be established based on religion will be inviting disaster. The concept of a middle east democracy that respects religious differences isn't impossible. While they are not fully functional democracies, several middle eastern countries have governmental systems which do not make one religious groups supreme. Lebanon, Jordon and Egypt would be examples. Most people don't realize that Egypt has a very large number of Christians and they are not seriously oppressed.

 

[MajorCaliber]

We have defeated Iraq in War. We make the rules, we can draft a constitution just like we did for Japan. It's the right thing to do.

 

[Piano Man]

It doesn't matter whether its christianity or islam. Once the head chief of government is God or Allah, then there are no checks and balances because doing so would be blasphomy. Its kind of like Bush saying that God was the reason he became president. If this country were christian controlled, that statement makes him close to God and therefore, untouchable. Then he can do anything he wants in the name of God. Fortunately for Bush, he can still do anything he wants and get away with it because money is God in this country.

 

[syzygy]

I think maybe we're missing the point here. No one expects that Iraq will not be an "Islamic country". It is and it will be. What the US will not allow at this point is to allow it to become an Islamic theocracy.

an 'islamic country' and an 'islamic theocracy' is the same. iraq has always been a muslim country. the iranian agitators
crawling about the shiite south would like to see iraq revert to medieval form, but even in iran the orthodox mullahs are
in the minority, with vast popular support falling behind the reformist president khatami.

what i don't know is if khatami supports the intrigue being sown by iranian revolutionary guards and the support
they are showing for certain iraqi ayatollahs. i know the grand ayatollah ali al-sestani would prefer shiite clerics not
become involved in politics. al-sestani is the pre-eminent shiite cleric in all iraq, but he faces competition from iranian
backed radicals who loathe him.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl
We know Osamas brand of lslam is extremly dangerous but I don't know if that's what they want?

Seems to me if say 80% of the poeple are islmaic in a country you should have laws reflecting the will of the people much like our Christian nation did/does with all it's patriachcal and puritain laws. Sure we changed and so will they like Iran is doing.

I just don't see how the majority will can be supressed without going back to another dictatorship. Which will not make iraq a very safe place. Democracy and liberation was Bushs main tenet latley for going in. Do you think we are reniging on our promise?

What are the pundants saying?

The US invaded Iraq to put an US friendly goverment there. Islamic goverments have not often been US butt buddies.

 

[Moonbeam]

I just hope whatever government we put in, it's well oiled and runs smoothly from the ground to my gas tank.

 

[Alistar7]

Democracy can work in Iraq, it has in the northern area for 12 years. Free elections, secular democratic rule, probably the best way for a diverse group of people to assure an even balance of power.

The main driving force are clerics from Iran pushing for this anyway, and they really don't have much local support. They tried to organize a HUGE anti-US/pro Islamic state rally after the pilgrimage, less than 3,000 stayed out of the million plus that were there. Some carried American flags along the way, many were praising us along the way out of gratitude that they were able to participate in the most holy tradition of their religion, aspects of which were completely forbidden until we liberated them.

Don't forget they also have an Islamic republic right next door. Iraq's population is roughly 60% under the age of 26, Iran's, over half under 25. The ones in Iran want out of this type of rule, they would prefer a secular democracy themselves. Maybe this is why Iran's attempts to influence Iraqi opinion has been so futile.

 

[LunarRay]

I wonder what will be said in the years to come when the Iraqi Congress gives Dictatorial powers to their new President, The Cleric Chief of Islam who proclaims America to be evil and suggests restricting oil flow to the West unless the West pays reparations to the Iraqi people for their losses. And then he invades Poland... I mean Kuwait all democratically like and aligns itself with Iran and the others to invade Saudi Arabia and Israel... all democratic like..

 

[konichiwa]

Originally posted by: MajorCaliber
We have defeated Iraq in War. We make the rules, we can draft a constitution just like we did for Japan. It's the right thing to do.

Obviously you know nothing about geopolitics or international relations. That belligerent and uncompromising attitude leads us in exactly the WRONG direction.

 

[MajorCaliber]

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: MajorCaliber
We have defeated Iraq in War. We make the rules, we can draft a constitution just like we did for Japan. It's the right thing to do.

Obviously you know nothing about geopolitics or international relations. That belligerent and uncompromising attitude leads us in exactly the WRONG direction.

No, you are wrong! That is the attitude we had after WW2, and it works. We don't have to kiss up to any country, or the UN. We can and should make the rules, might makes right. We don't need the World to like us, only fear and obey!

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

An Islamic Iraq is unamerican

 

[Moonbeam]

HDJ1: And then he invades Poland... I mean Kuwait all democratically like and aligns itself with Iran and the others to invade Saudi Arabia and Israel... all democratic like..
----------------------
All democratic like? You must mean preemptively, right?


I still think the easiest way out of all this is to make them the 51st state. Just change the name to Texiraqkansaw.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: KenGr
I think maybe we're missing the point here. No one expects that Iraq will not be an "Islamic country". It is and it will be. What the US will not allow at this point is to allow it to become an Islamic theocracy. Since Iraq has three major religious groups (Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurd) allowing the government to be established based on religion will be inviting disaster. The concept of a middle east democracy that respects religious differences isn't impossible. While they are not fully functional democracies, several middle eastern countries have governmental systems which do not make one religious groups supreme. Lebanon, Jordon and Egypt would be examples. Most people don't realize that Egypt has a very large number of Christians and they are not seriously oppressed.

It just to early to tell then. And as I imagined before the war began, the three month estimate, was yet another deception played out on the American People to quell resistance. Good Post BTW and thanks for not answering a question with a question as some feel the need to do


Hey Hay.