[lit-ideas] Re: The winner has already been selected?

  • From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:07:53 -0500

Andreas Ramos wrote:

"You really think Bush would accept whomever wins.  It's not plausible
that Bush will allow that."

If Andreas thinks that bin Laden might be that winner, I have trouble
seeing why plausibility comes into play.  I agree with the Bush
administration that it matters less who wins and more that the
democratic system gets up and running.  Of course one prefers leaders
who share 'our' values and having a democratic process to determine the
leaders of Iraq goes a long way in that direction.  I don't see why a
Shiite cleric in power is necessarily a problem and I don't think the
Bush administration is in principle opposed to such an outcome.


Andreas:

"And what's the plan after the election?  Several months ago, a neocon
columnist wrote that the plan for Iraq was to abandon it in the spring.
Hold the elections (regardless of the chaos), declare a winner, declare
that the USA won, and get the hell out. The three major factions (Kurd,
Shiite, Sunni) will break into open war over the control of Iraq."

Apart from the prediction of a civil war, I think the plan is a good
one.  I would just add that it is virtually unthinkable that the US
would not maintain some military presence in Iraq.  So, I would agree
that the US should get the majority of its soldiers out of Iraq as
quickly as possible.  If the Iraqi people want civil war, what business
is it of the US?  And if things move towards civil war, surely the most
logical intervention would be from the UN.  With the US out of Iraq I am
sure we can count on the French and Germans to lead the way.


Sincerely,

Phil Enns
Toronto, ON

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: