Tight Iraq election security includes weapons ban

[PsychoSword]

I saw nothing in your post to indicate an attack from a Lazy-boy recliner, but so be it.

What are you talking about Shemp??????

It is apparently a fair question for you to ask, so I will ask you-what have you done? And what is your basis in your forecast for the elections being rigged/fouled?

You should read threads before you reply.

 

[IZinterrogator]

PsychoSword,

So then what have you sacrificed to aid us in this war against the "enemies who have sworn to harm and destroy us by any means available", since you believe in it so?

Let's see, I lost a year with friends and family, and a friend to an IED. Now that I have established my credentials...

Can anyone on this board (without scouring the internet) post who is up for election in Iraq?

Yes, but the list is too long for inclusion here. You don't seem to understand that this election will pick the constitutional convention, though, not a permanent leader.

Free elections do not happen with a large miltary presence in a country OR a large insurgent presence in a country.

How do you know? Ever been in a country where those conditions took place during an election?

And for godsake - we're not "disarming Iraqis." Iraqis (who are not caught trying to kill Coalition forces) are allowed to have firearms for personal protection. The regs governing personal possesion of firearms allow more freedom to a law abiding citizen of Mosul than a law abiding citizen of Fresno, CA, enjoys.

See, Abby knows what is going on. The public can't carry an AK with them in the booth. But they will still have them in their homes, just as they have done since the regime fell. And if the law-abiding citizens aren't carrying guns, it makes it much easier to identify and take out the disruptors.

When most people are afraid to go to the voting centers (Iraq), that is not a free election.

Are you running a Gallup poll out here? I thought not. Most Iraqis are looking forward to voting, despite the threat of violence. Even the Sunnis are realizing the error of their ways and are scrambling to make their presence felt.

The candidates are not of the Iraqi people's choosing and the whole thing is a scam and a joke.

Once again, pure conjecture from the ill-informed.

Only thing I was pointing out is how easy it is to be gungho from a Lazyboy recliner.

Yes, very easy. But my Lazyboy is in storage back home while you make false and ill-informed claims from yours. I've read a post from you on another thread where you claimed to have done three tours in Vietnam. Too bad that you are younger than me, according to your profile. And I am very young for a staff sergeant. Some people demanded an apology from you on that thread for claiming a title that you hadn't earned (combat veteran of the United States Armed Forces), but I still have not seen it. So forgive me if I dismiss your observations about the elections since they are not observations, but parroting of someone else's party line.

 

[DAVID NANCARROW]

you claimed to have done three tours in Vietnam.

Kind of hard to do when your personals state a birthdate of 1979-or were you in the Fetal corps?

 

[gburner]

Psychosword...

Since when must one have miliary experience to have an intellegent opinion on warfare. I have walked the earth a fair bit, known some folks, studied, read and mostly listened to, learned from and appreciated the experience of others...something that seems to be an alien concept in your world.

In your world, must a person be struck by lightning in order to be a meteorologist? I don't know how to make a clock, but I can tell you what time it is.



BTW...if you did say that you served three tours in Viet Nam and your birthdate is 1979, you got some 'splainin' to do.

 

[PsychoSword]

Yes, but the list is too long for inclusion here. You don't seem to understand that this election will pick the constitutional convention, though, not a permanent leader.

The thugs who will be running the country in proxy have already been picked.

How do you know? Ever been in a country where those conditions took place during an election?

I guess the founding fathers were wrong then. A civil war with multiple armed camps is perfectly conducive with free selections er elections.

See, Abby knows what is going on. The public can't carry an AK with them in the booth. But they will still have them in their homes, just as they have done since the regime fell. And if the law-abiding citizens aren't carrying guns, it makes it much easier to identify and take out the disruptors.

All your post manages to say is that; yes we've lost alot of rights and that it's ok in Iraq because their gun laws are only slightly worse in many ways than those in MA. Yea, they have full auto AK's. But they're only allowed one and they can't carry it around anyways. And they had to be registered. Just you watch, I'll bet the Iraqi's will have no gun rights left in a couple of years.

When I voted, I was armed. Strangly enough I didn't try and coerce anyone into voting libertarian.

Are you running a Gallup poll out here? I thought not. Most Iraqis are looking forward to voting, despite the threat of violence. Even the Sunnis are realizing the error of their ways and are scrambling to make their presence felt.

What the heck have you been reading?? NewsMax??? Yea, some are realizing that they don't have a choice in the matter.

Tell you what, if more than 40% of Iraqi's show up and vote, I'll give you that one.

I've read a post from you on another thread where you claimed to have done three tours in Vietnam.

That was a joke, I didn't think the guy would be desperate enough to try and use it as ammo against me. I didn't think he was losing the arguement THAT badly.

Kind of hard to do when your personals state a birthdate of 1979-or were you in the Fetal corps?

Shemp, do you have anything interesting or original to say?

Psychosword...

Since when must one have miliary experience to have an intellegent opinion on warfare. I have walked the earth a fair bit, known some folks, studied, read and mostly listened to, learned from and appreciated the experience of others...something that seems to be an alien concept in your world.

In your world, must a person be struck by lightning in order to be a meteorologist? I don't know how to make a clock, but I can tell you what time it is.

'...its good to know which horse's mouth the commentary is coming from...' or the other end in your case.

Opinion on warfare has nothing to do with it. You're a militant chickenhawk and there's no getting around that. Nobody said your opinion wasn't intelligent, but I know it's not coming from somebody who is out there risking their neck for a living.

 

[IZinterrogator]

The thugs who will be running the country in proxy have already been picked.

Name them. Name the reason they were picked. Tell me how they came to be in the spotlight so they could be picked. Tell me why they are thugs. Tell me what they have done to deserve that title.

How do you know? Ever been in a country where those conditions took place during an election?

I guess the founding fathers were wrong then. A civil war with multiple armed camps is perfectly conducive with free selections er elections.

You have not answered my question.

See, Abby knows what is going on. The public can't carry an AK with them in the booth. But they will still have them in their homes, just as they have done since the regime fell. And if the law-abiding citizens aren't carrying guns, it makes it much easier to identify and take out the disruptors.

All your post manages to say is that; yes we've lost alot of rights and that it's ok in Iraq because their gun laws are only slightly worse in many ways than those in MA. Yea, they have full auto AK's. But they're only allowed one and they can't carry it around anyways. And they had to be registered. Just you watch, I'll bet the Iraqi's will have no gun rights left in a couple of years.

My post says the things that are in bold; nothing more, nothing less. If the Iraqis lose their gun rights in the near future, it will be the decision of a democratically-elected council, not a dictator. But for right now, they have more gun rights than they did under Saddam.

What the heck have you been reading?? NewsMax??? Yea, some are realizing that they don't have a choice in the matter.

I haven't been reading, I've been asking, there's a difference. It helps that I speak the language. Makes people want to open up. When a terrorist executes an election worker in the street and the media shows up afterward, you aren't going to get a straight answer. Would you want to declare your intention to vote despite the threats when your face and name are going to be on TV? That's just asking for trouble.

I've read a post from you on another thread where you claimed to have done three tours in Vietnam.

That was a joke, I didn't think the guy would be desperate enough to try and use it as ammo against me. I didn't think he was losing the arguement THAT badly.

So when you are losing an argument, you blatantly lie? That is definitely not the response of a Libertarian. A Libertarian would admit their mistakes and apologize.

You can slap all of the s you want on your post, but you can't deny that your information is at least secondhand. And just like the children's game Telephone, the more layers between you and the truth, the more distorted the message gets.

 

[PsychoSword]

Name them. Name the reason they were picked. Tell me how they came to be in the spotlight so they could be picked. Tell me why they are thugs. Tell me what they have done to deserve that title.

The whole Shiite Iraqi National Congress fraudulant evidence and the dissident Baathists in it. Chalabi the bankster thug. Allawi the former Baath party member and MI6/CIA minion.

Do you know how many of the candidates are too afraid to be named? Nobody is even aware of the types of people who are running. Seriously man, wake up.

Here's an interesting article. Notice the date.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/2002/0922unveiled.htm

You have not answered my question.

No, I haven't been to a country like Iraq.

But for right now, they have more gun rights than they did under Saddam.

Uhhhhhhhhh, no. Jesus man, did you think about it before you wrote that? Where do you think all those firearms came from anyways? It's been long known that Iraq is one of the countries of the world that still has guns in the hands of the people. Aren't you over in Iraq right now???? How could you possibly not know that?

You might wanna read this just for fun as well. http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north165.html

I've read a post from you on another thread where you claimed to have done three tours in Vietnam.

That was a joke, I didn't think the guy would be desperate enough to try and use it as ammo against me. I didn't think he was losing the arguement THAT badly.

So when you are losing an argument, you blatantly lie? That is definitely not the response of a Libertarian. A Libertarian would admit their mistakes and apologize.

Uh, it was a joke and I'm really getting tired of certain people pretending like they don't know it. Do you really think I'd say I served in Vietnam and leave my birthdate in my profile??? Like there weren't already 50 other people here who didn't know how old I am.... Get over it.

 

[trapshooter]

Psychosword,

I'm going to try and stay focussed on the issue here. I'm going to cut to the chase and paraphrase some of the things you have said and skip the direct quotes. Anyone here can read everything in this thread in fairly short order so I don't think it's necessary for me to be redundant in that sense at this point.

You imply that gburner is an armchair commando, and so his viewpoint is somehow unworthy. This, in my opinion, is like the pot/kettle thing, if you don't mind my saying so.

Then you dismiss IZinterrogator's experience in country and use quotes from someone with no more personal groundtruth than yourself as the basis for your position (Lew Rockwell). Do you mind me suggesting that this is not a strong argument? Probably you do. Sorry about that.

Then you call gburner and, presumably, many more like him with similar views and experience 'militant chickenhawks'. This is a phrase that, in other forms, I've heard before, all the way back to the Viet Nam era, and used before that, to belittle people who haven't been in the poop personally. I'll just point out that many people who post here, and who , statistically, represent some percentage of the population, may not have been to Iraq or Afghanistan, but they have been someplace, doing something, to put some meat behind thier opinions, at some time in the past.

Speaking of opinions, you know the old saw about them, right? The only thing that IZ interrogator has that many others here don't is personal experience on which to base his remarks, in the situation under discussion. He knows some 'ground truth', IOW, that makes his comments relevant, and may give them a bit more weight than mine, for example. It helps that his experience is current, and growing on a daily basis. He may be misleading us, but I don't think so.

You can disagree with someone philosophically, but resorting to branding anyone, who you know very little about, with a label like 'militant chickenhawk' on a public board is , well, weak, and doesn't help your argument. An argument, BTW, that sounds pretty much like it came straight from the DNC or DU, but that's neither here nor there, I'm just highlighting some similarities.

I can't list the folks who are up for election in Iraq. Actually, few could, even if they were Iraqi and in Iraq, anymore than someone in Texas could name the slate in New Hampshire in our last election, and for many of the same reasons. Iraq is a big place, without the benefit of the technology that we have here that might enable them to know these things, were they so inclined.

And rather than discuss the fact that Iraqis have to leave thier AK's at home (which, as has been pointed out, at least helps keeps them from getting shot by MNF troops), it might be better to ask why there is nothing in the new Iraqi Constitution similar, in any way, to our Constitution's Second Amendment. Another point I'll make in this area. This prohibition against indiscriminate carry of AK's has been in effect there for quite a while, and actually began long before the transition of power in June. They, (the Iraqi's), were/are also prohibited from having handguns, generally. The reason for this should be obvious, but maybe not.

I'll bow out now. I just hope that I have given you a couple of things to think about, without treading too heavily. I respect the fact that you, like all of us, have a right to an opinion. And in a general sense, I can understand why anyone might be upset at any percieved lack of progress in Iraq. Admittedly, what's being done there is not perfect, but what is, in life? We do the best we can. Your argument seems to be more weighty when it is an argument of philosophy, rather than an itemized list of 'what we screwed up', or 'you haven't BTDT, so you don't know/can't speak definitively on the situation'.

Thanks for your time. And IZinterrogator, stay safe.

Gren. A former 3161.

 

[snacktrack]

This election is a joke

Tell me, would you go outside to vote when leaflets are poured out into the streets saying this (taken form the NY Times today):


"The leaflets, like many turning up on sidewalks and doorsteps across the capital, were chilling in their detail: they warned Iraqis to stay at least 500 yards away from voting booths, for each would be the potential target of a rocket, mortar shell or car bomb. The leaflet suggested that Iraqis stay away from their windows, too, in case of blasts.

"To those of you who think you can vote and then run away," the leaflet warned, "we will shadow you and catch you, and we will cut off your heads and the heads of your children."

If we cant even have legitimate elections in our own country, how can you have one where this is happening?

 

[70-101]

How can America force a muslim country into peace when it is the enemy [for many reasons] of tens of thousands of Iraqis and millions of muslims from surrounding countrys? How can America invade a sovern nation under false pretenses and then call the people who have lived there all there lives the terrorists because they are oppossing the invasion? How can America go to war and not have a plan or time table for ending the war?

 

[Destructo6]

How can America force a muslim country into peace when it is the enemy [for many reasons] of tens of thousands of Iraqis and millions of muslims from surrounding countrys?

Show me the reasons and tell me about the history. Are you saying it's not possible? Most of those "muslim countries" have been occupied, by one group or another for most of the past 2000 years. Occupation is the norm, democtratic values are what's new.

How can America invade a sovern nation under false pretenses and then call the people who have lived there all there lives the terrorists because they are oppossing the invasion?

Pulling out that tired red herring again, eh? Hostilities were righly resumed after failure to meet the conditions of the 1991 cease fire agreement. That's too simple, isn't it? A great many of your "not terrorists" have not lived in Iraq all their lives.

How can America go to war and not have a plan or time table for ending the war?

The war ends when the enemy gives up. Any other timetable is idiotic.

 

[IZinterrogator]

With regards to the availability of weapons before the fall of the former regime, weapons were legally limited to the ruling class, i.e. Ba'athists and Sunnis. The Shiites and Kurds (70-80% of the population, depending on whose numbers you use) were only allowed weapons with permission of the government. Usually, the only way to get permission was to have knowledge or experience that Saddam needed. If you had land or any other kind of property, Saddam would just take it and barely reimburse the owner, if at all. Now, everybody has weapons that they acquired through looting, the weapons markets that have sprung up, or taking their weapons home from the army.

With regards to RKBA in the Iraqi constitution, I am conflicted. I believe every person has the intrinsic human right of self defense. But I also believe that the RKBA is a matter of personal responsibility. I was raised to believe that guns are tools with many uses. One of those uses is to take a life in defense of your own. Because of this, to me a firearm is the ultimate expression of personal responsibility, since it can be used to take a human life. The Iraqi Muslims believe that everything happens because Allah wills it. Personal responsibility is not as important to them as it is to us. If I make an appointment somewhere, I will be at that appointment. An Iraqi will make an appointment, but if he doesn't go, it is because Allah willed him not to go, not because there were other things he would rather be doing. A very good example of this is celebratory fire. Iraqis will fire AKs randomly in full auto into the air to celebrate events, such as weddings or the victory of the national soccer team. If a bullet comes down on someone and kills them, well, Allah willed that. I don't believe that Allah would will someone to die because he willed me to do something stupid and dangerous. You may think this is racist or stereotypical, but it happens too often to be an anomaly. You may recall the footage of people firing into the air when Saddam was captured. I talked to one guy that took a belt-fed PK machine gun to a wedding for celebratory fire once. These aren't isolated incidents, it is a regular occurence over here. Not my idea of personal responsibility. Hopefully, they will learn someday.

I think we could be doing things better over here. Disbanding the army was a bad idea, IMO. Now we have unemployed Iraqis running around with AKs looking for a way to make money the only way they know how. I think the Sunni population has been pushed too far to the side, which is what causes most of the problems. I think that the senior Sunni religious figure should be afforded the same national stature as Sistani. That would encourage the Sunnis to reintegrate themselves in the rebuilding of Iraq. Bringing the senior Sunni cleric into the fold could lead the Sunnis to declare a fatwa making it illegal for Sunni Iraqis to continue the resistance. Most Sunnis, except for diehard Ba'athists and foreign fighters, would feel compelled to stop supporting the insurgency. It would also make any imam or sheik that called for violence a pariah in the eyes of the Society of Islamic Scholars, which would lead to their removal.

I can only report the facts that I hear to my superiors, along with the mood of the people. I do the best I can in that respect. Sometimes they take my advice, sometimes they don't, but I always try to do the right thing. I really want this country to succeed in rebuilding itself as a free nation. I have spent a year in Kuwait and a year in Iraq, and I really like the Arab people. They have a tradition of generosity and are very quick to befriend strangers. Back when I was in Kuwait, I would drive out to the desert on weekends at night and just drive up to the diwaniya tents looking for people to hang out with. I was always welcomed with open arms. We would sit around smoking the hookah pipe, drinking tea, and sharing stories. They would always invite me to take part in dinner, which consists of pulling meat off of a grilled lamb on a platter of rice with your bare hands. It was a lot of fun, and I will always remember their stories, especially the time I talked to a man who had been imprisoned by Saddam during Desert Shield/ Desert Storm. I will spare you the details, but I know that we were right to come here and free the Iraqis from the tyranny of Saddam. I've met a lot of people here who were imprisoned by the former regime, and the physical scars they carry alone are reason enough to do what we are doing, never mind the emotional scars. Many people back home don't want us over here because of the cost in American lives, but I believe that Thomas Jefferson was right, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Another one that comes to mind is Edward Burke, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." So if you disagree with what we are doing, it's your right. But I know in my heart that what we are doing is right, and that is good enough for me.

 

[rangermonroe]

Well said!

 

[IZinterrogator]

Exit strategies, timetables, and endstates

One thing I forgot to mention in my last post was plans to leave. Most Iraqis want us here for awhile in order to stem the threat of civil war. Those who want civil war wouldn't mind seeing us go, but the average Iraqi, who only wants to live in peace, wants us to stay a little longer. Those who want civil war are the same ones who are conducting attacks now. If they are Sunni, they want to either carve out their own country or somehow (and this is a long shot) overcome 2-1 odds and take the country back. Shias who want civil war just want to roll over the Sunnis and have a purely Shia state, probably backed by Iran. Thankfully, these types of people are in the minority.

Back to the average Iraqi. Most Iraqis want us to stay at least five years. Sunni leaders and Shia leaders would both like to see a timetable for the exit of U.S. forces from Iraq. It would be a show of good faith that we are not here as an occupying force that will stay indefinitely. The Sunnis would also see it as a political victory if they are the ones who make the agreement, helping to bring them into the fold. So since they don't have a problem with how long the timetable calls for the presence of U.S. forces, I say make a ten-year timetable. The Iraqis will be happier, we can still withdraw our forces as we see fit once we achieve our desired endstate, leaving only a battalion or two for training like we do in Kuwait until the ten years is up.

 

[70-101]

This election is already over Allawi will win,easly. He's already handing out $100 bills to members of the american press corps. Gee, I wonder where he got the money. Free elections indeed.

 

[trapshooter]

IZinterrogator,

I'll second what rangermonroe said. It's unfortunate that people will take errornet comments of people with no ground experience over yours, but I suppose people have a right to believe what they choose. Of course, believing only the stuff that fits a personal agenda as opposed to stuff that doesn't might have a bit to do with it.

Media reporting from Iraq follows the principle of 'If it bleeds, it leads'. It would get pretty boring for the teevee if they actually interviewed average Iraqi's that just want to move on with thier lives, like the rest of us. And they would run out of batteries for the vidcams pretty fast.

The Iraqi's I know fit a reasonable cross-section of views on our presence, but the majority are exactly as you describe. Some like it, some don't, but the majority are glad we got rid of Saddam, and would like to look forward to a time when our presence isn't required.

 

[IZinterrogator]

Gren,
I find it rather sad that those who were on the attack earlier in this thread have not replied to my last two posts. I guess throwing vague accusations and insults doesn't stand up to experience and proposed solutions. I would love to hear PsychoSword's opinion about what I have written, but I doubt that will happen. It is much easier to start several other threads criticizing a government that one does not like than to stand up for ill-informed opinions, I guess.

BTW, who has received money from Allawi, when did it happen, where did it occur, what does Allawi hope to gain from the American media, why does he think this will help him win, and how has he been passing the money to them?

Being an interrogator means asking good, direct questions in order to separate the BS from the truth.

 

[PsychoSword]

Being an interrogator means asking good, direct questions in order to separate the BS from the truth.

I think it means being intellectually lazy because you want everyone to bring everything to you, rather than going to find out for yourself.

Gren,
I find it rather sad that those who were on the attack earlier in this thread have not replied to my last two posts. I guess throwing vague accusations and insults doesn't stand up to experience and proposed solutions. I would love to hear PsychoSword's opinion about what I have written, but I doubt that will happen. It is much easier to start several other threads criticizing a government that one does not like than to stand up for ill-informed opinions, I guess.

We need to get the hell out of that sandpit. It's draining this already drained country. This has nothing to do with giving Iraqi's freedom, or "terrorism". How anybody could be so blind to that fact, I'll never understand. Why aren't we in 100 other countries across the world then also? Well, to be honest there are alot of countries on the hit list, but that's for another time. The IMF is simply implementing their plan of tearing out a country and loaning the people their own money back in order to make them debt slaves.

Now, everybody has weapons that they acquired through looting, the weapons markets that have sprung up, or taking their weapons home from the army.

Yea, everybody just aquired five AK-47's a piece during the months after the invasion. That's a ripe one.

With regards to RKBA in the Iraqi constitution, I am conflicted. I believe every person has the intrinsic human right of self defense. But I also believe that the RKBA is a matter of personal responsibility. I was raised to believe that guns are tools with many uses. One of those uses is to take a life in defense of your own. Because of this, to me a firearm is the ultimate expression of personal responsibility, since it can be used to take a human life.

I butter knife can be used to take a human life. I fail to see your point.

 

[IZinterrogator]

Being an interrogator means asking good, direct questions in order to separate the BS from the truth.

I think it means being intellectually lazy because you want everyone to bring everything to you, rather than going to find out for yourself.

You have missed the point. Whoever wrote something like that should be able to provide specific details about the incident in question. If they can't, they are probably lying. I've read the article on the BBC website. It talks about Arab journalists, not American ones. It does not mention a motive for handing out the money, except for Arab hospitality. No one was quoted as saying that the money was a bribe to report unfavorably on certain candidates. So, what was the money intended to buy?

Yea, everybody just aquired five AK-47's a piece during the months after the invasion. That's a ripe one.

The rule is one per adult. Households with ten adults are not uncommon, so ten AKs in a house are not uncommon.

A butter knife can be used to take a human life. I fail to see your point.

They aren't throwing butter knives through the air to celebrate a wedding. Like I said earlier, in one case, a belt-worth of 7.62x54R was fired in the air. If we did that in the States on a regular basis, the Congress would try to repeal the 2nd Amendment, and public outrage would probably make it successful, especially if they hauled out pictures of a three-year-old girl who took a bullet to the head during the debate. That's why we handle firearms responsibly.

 

[PsychoSword]

You have missed the point. Whoever wrote something like that should be able to provide specific details about the incident in question. If they can't, they are probably lying. I've read the article on the BBC website. It talks about Arab journalists, not American ones. It does not mention a motive for handing out the money, except for Arab hospitality. No one was quoted as saying that the money was a bribe to report unfavorably on certain candidates. So, what was the money intended to buy?

I have no idea what you're talking about. I was simply commenting on your comment. Handing out money? I have not heard of this, but it would not surprise me. Why are you directing this towards me? Shouldn't you be taking this up with 70-101? Trying to follow along here....

*edit* Oh, you're talking about the Allawi story, I had missed that in the article. Wow, you're right, it's probably just arab propaganda.