Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Countrydave55

New Constitution

Recommended Posts

There are reports out of Iraq that Sunnis will not agree to the constitution as written. Of course this may be a bargaining tactic to get pressure on the Sunnis to adopt the constitution.

 

But a lot of the conservative talking heads are saying that this was a doomed task. They say that it took the US 12 years, how could we impose a deadline that is only 10% as long and expect a favorable outcome.

 

I am not sure that is a reasonable comparison. When the US constitution was written there were no democratic governments that had existed for more than 1500 years. I would think starting from nothing and doing something that had not been done in 1500 plus years would take longer than writing a document for which there are now dozens of examples. Wasn't an obstacle to the US constitution that the delegates were working with quill and ink to write letters that took weeks to be received? Isn't it easier and faster now with cell phones and e-mail?

 

My question really is; is it unreasonable to expect a working constitution from a government in the time frame that was proposed by the Bush administration?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

their problem is that they are trying to please everyone...it is simply not possible to please everyone in a democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just some random thoughts--I could argue either side.

 

But, the spinmasters' comparison to the Americans efforts in the 18th century is invalid if for no other reason than it didn't take the Americans 12 years to write their constitution.

 

But, is it reasonable to expect the Iraqis to have produced a constitution by now? Maybe not. Not all the Iraqi factions even want a federal government--the Kurds would prefer autonomy. Other factors are religious rigidity, not spiritual but factional, and the long history of oppression of the minority by the dominant faction.

 

One key to the successful ratification of the US Constitution was the authors' willingness to compromise and/or avoid taking a stand on those issues which would have prevented the document from being ratified. Hence, the document legalized slavery, but the anti-slavery northern states signed on anyway.

 

Gen. MacArther's staff wrote the Japanese constitution and the US imposed it upon the Japanese people. If only the Iraqis' situation could be handled so easily, but that won't work in Iraq--at least not now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Jaafari said that 151 of 153 articles of the constitution had been agreed. He insisted the issue of federalism had been settled.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4176610.stm

 

Anyone know which two they can't agree on ?

 

Edit;

 

Ah.

federalism, and the way to form [federal] regions

 

the terminology used in eradicating the influence of the former Baath regime - whether to use the term Baath party or Saddam's Baath

 

structuring of authority between the presidency, parliament and the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My question really is; is it unreasonable to expect a working constitution from a government in the time frame that was proposed by the Bush administration?

Although it is a lot of pressure, I don't think there is any other choice in the matter. They simply need to do it. I actually think they are in a much better position to do so than our Continental Congress was.

 

They have so far demonstrated that it is a very realistic expectation. They very nearly have it nailed down as it is.

 

I believe the Sunni issues will be settled democratically and although there may be some unrest over the final result I believe that will be addressed and settle as the new government moves forward.

 

There will yet be compromises before the document is final I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the Sunni issues will be settled democratically

Damn right or we will bomb them again. Gotta love democracy. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn right or we will bomb them again. Gotta love democracy. ;)

I don't know why we don't give them ours,, We are not using it!!!!!! :roller:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

 

The trick is to make us think we are. Should work over there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a power issue and not a money issue. If this is a money issue the entire country should be sending us flowers. The US is spending more money in & on Iraq than it is on the people paying the taxes that are going to Iraq. Surely they don't want a raise.

 

When you go from controlling a country and abusing the majority of the population to a point where you have no power and limited control then you exert control where you can. In this case they can exert more power than their numerical strength dictates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody likes to say it out loud but the fact is that the American invasion of Iraq has fomented a civil war that has been brewing for decades.

 

Iraq is and always has been an illusury quantity invented by the British, and then only when they decided to abandon the region.

 

I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a power issue and not a money issue. If this is a money issue the entire country should be sending us flowers. The US is spending more money in & on Iraq than it is on the people paying the taxes that are going to Iraq. Surely they don't want a raise.

 

When you go from controlling a country and abusing the majority of the population to a point where you have no power and limited control then you exert control where you can. In this case they can exert more power than their numerical strength dictates.

I was thinking the same thing. It is about power/authority. But in fact as so often is the case power means money. It is an easy translation, often even synonymous.

 

 

I am much more content to cite the fact that the vast majority oftheir Constitution has already been hammered out. These fine but important points that remain are not a blockade I think. In fact I think it is admirable that it has come down to this. They have come a very long way very fast and should be given credit for that. They seem to have a reasonable plan for capping this off and moving on. The Constitution will go to a referendum in October.

 

 

Although it is impossible to remove these events from the bigger picture of the conflict and the occupation, I have to say that I find their momentum inspiring in spite of that. In fact, the complications of the conflict and occupation only serve to increase my admiration for their efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody likes to say it out loud but the fact is that the American invasion of Iraq has fomented a civil war that has been brewing for decades.

 

Iraq is and always has been an illusury quantity invented by the British, and then only when they decided to abandon the region.

 

I

I think it's been said loudly on occasion. I know we went over the history here pretty thoroughly.

 

Frankly, I prefer it to be repeated out loud as often as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a power issue and not a money issue.

same thing, but its a money issue because the sunnis have realized they are not going to get the power they once had back. The only thing they can try and assure is that their majority regions (largely lacking oil) get enough money from the north and south to stay prosperous. A federal system of government does not gurantee this, profits could stay where they are produced depending on how they write the constitution. In my opinion this is going ot be the main sticking point. If each province is guranteed and equal cut based on population or something of that nature then I think they would give the constitution more support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the US wasn't holding the shotgun, you have to wonder whether this marriage of Shia, Sunni, and Kurds would ever happen. Perhaps it would be better if we spawned three countries, but the middle of the country lacks oil and would therefore not like that idea unless they somehow got subsidies from the other two. Plus, if the Kurds got their own area the Kurdish Turks would start clamoring to join them and Turkey is our ally so we won't have that. Sheesh, this nation building stuff is complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was confusion today over the status of Iraq's draft constitution after rival sides gave opposite accounts of the document's readiness to be put to the country in a referendum in October

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1556425,00.html

 

Seems like they're getting the hang of this democracy thing. :lol:

 

 

Edit; Whatever the Kurds say or do now, dave, it's just a step towards their eventual autonomy. They've had a taste of independence and they're not likely to let anybody take it away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply find it amusing that there are still Sunnis who consider that the return of Saddam is a possibility.

I wouldn't want such people anywhere near the founding of my new Constitution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...