It's amazing that many Americans don't understand own history and therefore can't understand/fully appreciate the present. I'm reminded of U.S. history when there were vehement debates concerning federalism/anti-federalism. It's not unlike the discussions occurring in/about Iraq now regarding decision dealing w/ provincial & central governments...
your thoughts...
2007-09-27 08:33:25 · 7 answers · asked by AILENE 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
One problem is that in its push to make Iraq a "beacon of democracy" for the Middle East, the Bush administration pushed for elections that, while providing a government, revealed a divided society with little experience in democratic governance.
The failures of Iraqi democratization as advocated by the Bush administration should not be blamed primarily on the Iraqis. Nor should they be used to reinforce racist notions that Arabs or Muslims are somehow incapable of building democratic institutions and living in a democratic society. Rather, democracy from the outset has been more of a self-serving rationalization for American strategic and economic interests in the region than a genuine concern for the right of the Iraq people to democratic self-governance.
Many Iraqis might have dreamed about democracy. What they got instead was occupation.
The U.S. government, despite much rhetoric about democracy, imposed its own political structures on Iraq, agreed to more representative procedures and institutions only when pushed to do so by the Iraqi people, presided over the breakdown of civil order, and violated the human rights of tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens. In short, Washington acted as an occupation force. By associating its actions with democracy promotion, it ended up giving democracy a bad name.
2007-09-27 09:10:33 · answer #1 · answered by Easy B Me II 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
True but one step further, did you know the Senate voted yesterday to partition Iraq into separate provinces. I use the word province because I caught the end of that debate and the vote only. I'm waiting for CSPAN to post it before I can examine the exact wording.
What I find odd is that Iraq already has provinces... such as the Anbar Province that is 1/3 in area of Iraq.
Anyways, the pt is that the entire debate evolved around dividing the powers between these new provinces versus Iraq's federal govt. which falls under your question. It's not surprising this discussion is happening since the USA is the one dictating what structure Iraq's government will have.
I am wondering how my country, the USA, can monitor rebuilding Iraq then after Iraqis have elected their own officials, now for some reason, we still have the right to restructure their govt??? This makes no sense to me.
2007-09-27 08:40:48 · answer #2 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Good point, it's not like we won the revolutionary war and knew exactly where to go. It took years, and their were very passionate debates. To our credit, we didn't believe in an honor killing system, and all of us were oppressed by England, which we just won a war against, so we had some reasons to unite together. America engaged in a crazy experiment in government during its creation, and to think the process wasn't turbulent is ignorant.
2007-09-27 08:54:34 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Iraq! Hell we can't establish a functional government in Washington D.C.!
Instead of utilizing the vacuum of skills possesed by GW Bush why don't we ask the president of Bolivia to go fix it?
Within 8 months of being elected he completely changed their political structure, got a new Constitution drafted and brought national oil profits to the people.
2007-09-27 15:22:54 · answer #4 · answered by Atrum Animus AM 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It took the US eleven years to get from the Declaration of Independence to the first draft of the Constitution. We survived it.
The left wing liberal loonies are using the war in Iraq to bash George Bush. If they took lie detector tests it would show no one believes things are taking too long. It is not taking too long.
2007-09-27 08:38:17 · answer #5 · answered by regerugged 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
they gonna make 3 different regions according the their ethinc background and beleives
first for sunni and 2nd for shiaa &third for kurds
with the common fedral gov in Baghdad to divides the shares of the petroleum income
they turn iraq into company for pertroleum with stock holder
this gonna lead to more terror and choas
2007-09-27 08:46:36 · answer #6 · answered by egyank 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
it also amazes me that people forget that we had armed insurrections before and after our constitution became law, and it took longer for our constitution to come into fruition than Iraq's......and ours still allowed slavery and other social evils.
2007-09-27 08:38:51 · answer #7 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋