I'm interested in 2-0-sixx's and heresy's responses to the following arguments I've compiled from other message boards. Point by point if you have time - some of these are actually coming from a high ranking CIA Official who I had the opportunity to chat with:
1) Hitler became Chancellor through a valid procedure perfectly in line with Germany's constitution: the President chose the leader of the largest party in Parliament to preside over a coalition government. Hitler was elected to that position, so even though no Chancellor's post was ever directly contested, it's still absolutely correct to say that he was democratically appointed (or even elected). [If the Iraqi people elect a Taliban-esque theocracy the United States should anul their elections and/or topple that government. It should not be allowed to stand. Hitler played the system, and it is quite possible another ruthless despot would rise in the same manner.]
2) We do want the Iraqis to live in a democracy. But we want them to live in a real democracy, tempered with the rule of law, protection for minorities, respect for human rights and civil liberties, an independent judiciary, and constitutional provisions for orderly transfers of power, based on truth, justice, and the American way. Not another blood-soaked Islamic mob rule. An Islamic government by definition does not incorporate freedom of religion, civil liberties, and human rights. That, as many administration officials have already said, is unacceptable. No matter how many people want it.
3) The Iraqi people should not be allowed to choose a shi'ite Islamic theocracy. If it takes power, it should not be allowed to stand. The Iraqi people might even vote the Ba'athist party back into power. What you fail to understand is that if they had elections TOMORROW, the current governments would win "open" elections easily. The people only KNOW what they've lived through and, as bad as it may be, they are COMFORTABLE with it. You can't give them total freedom before they are prepared for it. You DO NOT give people with no experience with self-rule total freedom. It's unfair to the people who would have no clue what to do.
4) Theocracies must be stopped. They rob people of their freedom to choose their own religion and beliefs. Most religions are based on faith and, therefore, should not be made into laws. My worst nightmare (besides nuclear war) is the United States turning into a theocracy. I swear, people in the Middle East live too much in the past. The only thing differant are the weapons.
We've already taken down Saddam, so we should make the best of it. They may not WANT a secular goverment, but they NEED one. People can -- and WILL --- vote for the worst possible choice. We OWE it to the Iraqis to make sure they fully grasp what they forfeit if they go that route.
5) The Japanese are very happy with their secular democratic state, but after WWII they would have elected another tyranical backwards theocracy. Until somebody is READY for democracy --- which Iraq is not --- you do not give them democracy.
1) Hitler became Chancellor through a valid procedure perfectly in line with Germany's constitution: the President chose the leader of the largest party in Parliament to preside over a coalition government. Hitler was elected to that position, so even though no Chancellor's post was ever directly contested, it's still absolutely correct to say that he was democratically appointed (or even elected). [If the Iraqi people elect a Taliban-esque theocracy the United States should anul their elections and/or topple that government. It should not be allowed to stand. Hitler played the system, and it is quite possible another ruthless despot would rise in the same manner.]
2) We do want the Iraqis to live in a democracy. But we want them to live in a real democracy, tempered with the rule of law, protection for minorities, respect for human rights and civil liberties, an independent judiciary, and constitutional provisions for orderly transfers of power, based on truth, justice, and the American way. Not another blood-soaked Islamic mob rule. An Islamic government by definition does not incorporate freedom of religion, civil liberties, and human rights. That, as many administration officials have already said, is unacceptable. No matter how many people want it.
3) The Iraqi people should not be allowed to choose a shi'ite Islamic theocracy. If it takes power, it should not be allowed to stand. The Iraqi people might even vote the Ba'athist party back into power. What you fail to understand is that if they had elections TOMORROW, the current governments would win "open" elections easily. The people only KNOW what they've lived through and, as bad as it may be, they are COMFORTABLE with it. You can't give them total freedom before they are prepared for it. You DO NOT give people with no experience with self-rule total freedom. It's unfair to the people who would have no clue what to do.
4) Theocracies must be stopped. They rob people of their freedom to choose their own religion and beliefs. Most religions are based on faith and, therefore, should not be made into laws. My worst nightmare (besides nuclear war) is the United States turning into a theocracy. I swear, people in the Middle East live too much in the past. The only thing differant are the weapons.
We've already taken down Saddam, so we should make the best of it. They may not WANT a secular goverment, but they NEED one. People can -- and WILL --- vote for the worst possible choice. We OWE it to the Iraqis to make sure they fully grasp what they forfeit if they go that route.
5) The Japanese are very happy with their secular democratic state, but after WWII they would have elected another tyranical backwards theocracy. Until somebody is READY for democracy --- which Iraq is not --- you do not give them democracy.
