What Happens if Iraq Decides to Vote in an Islamic Theocracy

[Darth Wong]

You think the way they use religion that they would at least begin too think that, in their mind, that God is on the Ameriacn side and not on thier's. Though i think that God hasn't taken sides since the first Israel.

Actually, they're pretty sure that God was on their side. He sent the biggest sandstorm in a generation to stop them, remember? Too bad for them God has never had much luck fighting men who have chariots of iron.

[Axis Kast]

Iran was once progressive, yes, but not to the degree of Iraq. You're also ignoring the fact that students are protesting in the streets of Tehran against the Ayatollahs.

My "crystal ball?" What? You think most Iraqis actually find anything inherently attractive about Islamofacism outside the hateful messages of anti-Americanism and ultranationalism?

[Darth Wong]

Iran was once progressive, yes, but not to the degree of Iraq. You're also ignoring the fact that students are protesting in the streets of Tehran against the Ayatollahs.

Ah yes, it took only 20 years of oppression for anger to build. At this rate, Iraq will become hostile to Islamo-theocracy when my children are getting married.

My "crystal ball?" What? You think most Iraqis actually find anything inherently attractive about Islamofacism outside the hateful messages of anti-Americanism and ultranationalism?

You think most Iraqis need more than that? Find me an alternate platform with broad support within Iraq. Until then, you're claiming victory for a competitor which does not even exist, and yes, I'd say that requires a rather unusual crystal ball.

PS. If the American fundies were a bigger demographic, the world would be talking about Christianofascism instead of Islamofascism. And they're breeding faster than we are. Do not underestimate the power of stupid assholes and their religious beliefs.

[Axis Kast]

Ah yes, it took only 20 years of oppression for anger to build.

Amidst a secret police and society founded on ignorance since 1981? Sounds about right to me.

You think most Iraqis need more than that? Find me an alternate platform with broad support within Iraq. Until then, you're claiming victory for a competitor which does not even exist, and yes, I'd say that requires a rather unusual crystal ball.

That's my fucking point. Iraqis are attracted to conservative Islam because it serves as the only current voice against perceieved occupation. But that's still not escaping the crux of the argument: it's only temporary. The moment political factions begin to coalesce or other more moderate voices speak out - but with similar veins of anti-Americanism -, support for Islamofascism will collapse by ninety percent and more.

PS. If the American fundies were a bigger demographic, the world would be talking about Christianofascism instead of Islamofascism. And they're breeding faster than we are. Do not underestimate the power of stupid assholes and their religious beliefs.

Jesus Christ. You slap on the bullshit so heavily I can smell it from here.

[Darth Wong]

Ah yes, it took only 20 years of oppression for anger to build.

Amidst a secret police and society founded on ignorance since 1981? Sounds about right to me.

And this is vastly different from Iraq ... how? Particularly since most of the educated class says they want to leave because Iraq is going to be seriously unstable for quite a while during the rebuilding process?

You think most Iraqis need more than that? Find me an alternate platform with broad support within Iraq. Until then, you're claiming victory for a competitor which does not even exist, and yes, I'd say that requires a rather unusual crystal ball.

That's my fucking point. Iraqis are attracted to conservative Islam because it serves as the only current voice against perceieved occupation. But that's still not escaping the crux of the argument: it's only temporary. The moment political factions begin to coalesce or other more moderate voices speak out - but with similar veins of anti-Americanism -, support for Islamofascism will collapse by ninety percent and more.

Right. Just as it happened in Afghanistan once the Soviets were gone

PS. If the American fundies were a bigger demographic, the world would be talking about Christianofascism instead of Islamofascism. And they're breeding faster than we are. Do not underestimate the power of stupid assholes and their religious beliefs.

Jesus Christ. You slap on the bullshit so heavily I can smell it from here.

I like the way you insult me but fail to address the point. You dismiss the power of religious idiots without good reason.

[Admiral Johnason]

You think the way they use religion that they would at least begin too think that, in their mind, that God is on the Ameriacn side and not on thier's. Though i think that God hasn't taken sides since the first Israel.

Actually, they're pretty sure that God was on their side. He sent the biggest sandstorm in a generation to stop them, remember? Too bad for them God has never had much luck fighting men who have chariots of iron.

By that time he was kinda mad at his kids and decided to give them a spanking they wouldn't soon forget.

[Axis Kast]

And this is vastly different from Iraq ... how? Particularly since most of the educated class says they want to leave because Iraq is going to be seriously unstable for quite a while during the rebuilding process?

Different – not vastly - from Iraq because people have enjoyed more relative freedoms than in Iran. The crux of the argument remains: most Iraqis won’t favor any kind of Islamofascist government once alternatives appear.

The “educated” class is also inherently different from the population as a whole – which is still inherently better educated on average than most residents of the Persian Gulf region anyway.

Right. Just as it happened in Afghanistan once the Soviets were gone.

The example of Afghanistan is bullshit in this case. Afghani society is nowhere near as complex or modern as Iraq’s.

I like the way you insult me but fail to address the point. You dismiss the power of religious idiots without good reason.

So George Bush is a human being who likes to appeal to morality from time to time. Fantastic. Does that mean he’s one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse? Not at all.

You’re attempting to argue that a fringe group – with no actual voice in government outside a soft echo – could potentially turn the American nation into a theocracy. Think about that for a moment.

[TrailerParkJawa]

This is a good question. The US will not allow a theocracy to exist, The problem is how will the US handle it if the Iraqi's go for a Theocracy.

Iraq has some real problems ahead, if many of the educated class wants to leave, and the more fundamentalist types gain power.

I think the US is going to make sure people friendly to the US are elected and it will remain in Iraq for a long time. It would not look so good if 3 years after we leave the country is plunged into turmoil like Iran was.

[Darth Wong]

Different – not vastly - from Iraq because people have enjoyed more relative freedoms than in Iran. The crux of the argument remains: most Iraqis won’t favor any kind of Islamofascist government once alternatives appear.

Since we have nothing but third-hand testimony and western reporters' ideas of prevalent Iraqi attitudes to go by, I reserve the right to be more skeptical of your certainty than you are.

So George Bush is a human being who likes to appeal to morality from time to time. Fantastic. Does that mean he’s one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse? Not at all.

How does appealing to religion mean that you're appealing to morality?

You’re attempting to argue that a fringe group – with no actual voice in government outside a soft echo – could potentially turn the American nation into a theocracy. Think about that for a moment.

If you're so fucking stupid that this is what you think I argued, then go right ahead and pat yourself on the back for winning.

Of course, if you learned to read, you might observe that I was saying that IF there were more of them, America would be a theocracy, and that they're actually growing as a demographic. Perhaps reading comprehension was a weak spot in your education.

PS. America already has quite a few theocratic laws in place. The notion is hardly as absurd as you make it out to be.

[Axis Kast]

Since we have nothing but third-hand testimony and western reporters' ideas of prevalent Iraqi attitudes to go by, I reserve the right to be more skeptical of your certainty than you are.

How about Yemeni Muslims now living in the United States with extensive knowledge of the region – by virtue of personal habitation and a series of visits to Baghdad?

It’s clear for the objective analyst to see: Iraqis have enjoyed a series of secular freedoms both before and since Hussein’s coup. The Iraqi population is far more acclimated to Western lifestyles and cultural influences than others in the Middle East. Women hold or have held positions of prominence they would not soon renounce. So you’re still going to sit here and feed me this claptrap about their preference for Islamofascism?

How does appealing to religion mean that you're appealing to morality?

Bush views religion as a moral affair.

Of course, if you learned to read, you might observe that I was saying that IF there were more of them, America would be a theocracy, and that they're actually growing as a demographic. Perhaps reading comprehension was a weak spot in your education.

PS. America already has quite a few theocratic laws in place. The notion is hardly as absurd as you make it out to be.

You’re contending it’s a possibility. Be careful. The religious right might have gained more exposure as a result of George Bush’s election. That does not mean they are actually a growing force in our society. Bush and even Ashcroft are far from the religious nutcases you make them out to be.

America might have certain theocratic laws, but that does not mean we enforce each to the letter. We don’t have any of the major predicates for militant theocracy either.

[Darth Wong]

Since we have nothing but third-hand testimony and western reporters' ideas of prevalent Iraqi attitudes to go by, I reserve the right to be more skeptical of your certainty than you are.

How about Yemeni Muslims now living in the United States with extensive knowledge of the region – by virtue of personal habitation and a series of visits to Baghdad?

Expatriates are not indicative of the general population for the simple reason that they were able to leave.

It’s clear for the objective analyst to see: Iraqis have enjoyed a series of secular freedoms both before and since Hussein’s coup. The Iraqi population is far more acclimated to Western lifestyles and cultural influences than others in the Middle East. Women hold or have held positions of prominence they would not soon renounce. So you’re still going to sit here and feed me this claptrap about their preference for Islamofascism?

I was not aware that it was "claptrap" to note that the islamofascists CURRENTLY wield considerable public support there, so the burden of proof is on YOU to show that it WILL evapourate.

How does appealing to religion mean that you're appealing to morality?

Bush views religion as a moral affair.

Bush is an idiot.

Of course, if you learned to read, you might observe that I was saying that IF there were more of them, America would be a theocracy, and that they're actually growing as a demographic. Perhaps reading comprehension was a weak spot in your education.

PS. America already has quite a few theocratic laws in place. The notion is hardly as absurd as you make it out to be.

You’re contending it’s a possibility. Be careful. The religious right might have gained more exposure as a result of George Bush’s election. That does not mean they are actually a growing force in our society.

The demographic trends are factual, and DO mean that they are a growing force in our society.

Bush and even Ashcroft are far from the religious nutcases you make them out to be.

Evidence? Bush is a born-again, and Ashcroft thinks it's his mission in life to piss all over the separation of church and state.

America might have certain theocratic laws, but that does not mean we enforce each to the letter. We don’t have any of the major predicates for militant theocracy either.

No, but you have a growing demographic which would eventually push it through if the trend continued.

[Axis Kast]

Expatriates are not indicative of the general population for the simple reason that they were able to leave.

In this case, they deliver more competent and learned analysis than yourself – especially regarding the level of education and predisposition toward conservative Islam.

I was not aware that it was "claptrap" to note that the islamofascists CURRENTLY wield considerable public support there, so the burden of proof is on YOU to show that it WILL evapourate.

The argument is whether or not it will remain over the long term. The answer is obviously not if given the appropriate – and more moderate – forums on which to express their opinions.

Bush is an idiot.

And yet he became President of the United States of America.

The demographic trends are factual, and DO mean that they are a growing force in our society.

Link?

Evidence? Bush is a born-again, and Ashcroft thinks it's his mission in life to piss all over the separation of church and state.

Bush does not practice evangelism on an international level. He does not wish to establish a theocracy in the United States of America. And your argument about Ashcroft is an opinion.

No, but you have a growing demographic which would eventually push it through if the trend continued.

Link?

[Gil Hamilton]

Axis Kast: Keep in mind that before the Soviet invasion and then subsequent rule by the Taliban, Afghanistan was a pretty cosmopolitan state as well, with a large amount of educated women in power too, particularly in the medical and educational fields. When the Taliban took power, they lost everything. Just because they wouldn't soon renounce power doesn't mean that it cannot be taken from them.

[Ted]

On the news last night, the aide for the American supported Iraqi said that in any election, his man would win by a landslide.
Proof that it would be completely rigged.

[NecronLord]

Incorrect.

Most Iraqis today subscribe to the messages of fundamental Islam because they preach the popular anti-American message.

Wrong. It's popular because the people are indoctirnated from a very young age to believe in Islam and submission (the translation of the word islam) and obidience to religious authority. (a basic tenet of Isalm)

That does not however mean that Iraq isn't the most fertile territory in the Middle East (outside Israel or Turkey)

Israel is questionably selcular at best, after all it is the "Jewish State."

for secular government on the Western model.

Humm, somewhat like Bush and his 'prayer meetings' and declaring himself neutral (IE he believes in it but doesn't want his credibility hit) on Creationism. This is who you trust to install a secular state?

Don't forget that women still represent a substantially empowered group in modern Iraq

The people empowered in Iraq at the moment are those who are armed. There has been a 'regime change' remember? Please don't try and fall back on Saddam's good points in order to argue your point. Remember he did have to enforce them at gunpoint.

or that Hussein's regimé was widely considred the most progressive yet in terms of (domestic) policy-making in that region.

Aren't you ignoring the Shi'ite majority who rose up against this and were put down by Saddam, twice? Majority rule, will impose Islamofascism.

The average Iraqi is well aware of the impositions put forth by fanatical Islamofacism.

And the avarage (Shi'ite majority) Iraqi supports it.

While they might chose mildly theocratic government, they will never swing toward the kind of dictatorship exercised in Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Based on what? I can garuntee you that without radical interventionism, they'll be in power in the next decade. If they aren't, then I will eat my hat, and photograph it and post it here.

Please enlighten me, how the hell do you know what the avarage Iraqi thinks? Are you one?

Suffice to say, that Saddam's regime forced the Islamic Fundametalists out of Iraq into neighboring Iran (Why do you think the neighbours hated him? They're fundies. Or prehaps you missed that war with Ayatolla Khomeni?). They (Fundie Islamic Clerics) have huge popular support, and have had it since the founding of Islam, and will continue to enjoy it until that religion either has a reformation or fails.

[Axis Kast]

Axis Kast: Keep in mind that before the Soviet invasion and then subsequent rule by the Taliban, Afghanistan was a pretty cosmopolitan state as well, with a large amount of educated women in power too, particularly in the medical and educational fields. When the Taliban took power, they lost everything. Just because they wouldn't soon renounce power doesn't mean that it cannot be taken from them.

Link? I’ve never encountered the argument that Afghani infrastructure – and thus society – was comparable to that of Iraq at any point in time.

Wrong. It's popular because the people are indoctirnated from a very young age to believe in Islam and submission (the translation of the word islam) and obidience to religious authority. (a basic tenet of Isalm)

Iraq was a secular state. Most institutions of fundamental Islam were conscientiously retarded by the government for purposes of national security.

Israel is questionably selcular at best, after all it is the "Jewish State."

Hence the qualified “in the Middle East.” I’m sure you’d consider Israel more democratic than say Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Humm, somewhat like Bush and his 'prayer meetings' and declaring himself neutral (IE he believes in it but doesn't want his credibility hit) on Creationism. This is who you trust to install a secular state?

Absolutely. The man’s personal connected to God, while at times used as justification for his aggressive foreign policy, can hardly be considered so great that it endangers the secular flavor of the nation.

The people empowered in Iraq at the moment are those who are armed. There has been a 'regime change' remember? Please don't try and fall back on Saddam's good points in order to argue your point. Remember he did have to enforce them at gunpoint.

Women aren’t going to relinquish positions of power willingly.

Aren't you ignoring the Shi'ite majority who rose up against this and were put down by Saddam, twice? Majority rule, will impose Islamofascism.

Not necessarily. A government founded on the principles of Islam? Most likely. A government of Islamofascists á la the Taliban? Unlikely at best. Especially given American intervention.

And the avarage (Shi'ite majority) Iraqi supports it.

I disagree. The average Iraqi wishes to associate with any platform chiding the Americans for continued occupation. Once more moderate voices establish themselves, the situation will calm.

Based on what? I can garuntee you that without radical interventionism, they'll be in power in the next decade. If they aren't, then I will eat my hat, and photograph it and post it here.

Please enlighten me, how the hell do you know what the avarage Iraqi thinks? Are you one?

Suffice to say, that Saddam's regime forced the Islamic Fundametalists out of Iraq into neighboring Iran (Why do you think the neighbours hated him? They're fundies. Or prehaps you missed that war with Ayatolla Khomeni?). They (Fundie Islamic Clerics) have huge popular support, and have had it since the founding of Islam, and will continue to enjoy it until that religion either has a reformation or fails.

Somebody get the salt and pepper.

How do I know what the average Iraqi thinks? I don’t. I profess to be able to extrapolate on the same grounds as yourself.

Clerics enjoy inordinate support, yes. Why? At this point in time, theirs are the only arguments being heard – or made in public – at all.

[NecronLord]

Iraq was a secular state. Most institutions of fundamental Islam were conscientiously retarded by the government for purposes of national security.

And this disproves my point... WHY?

Hence the qualified “in the Middle East.” I’m sure you’d consider Israel more democratic than say Iran or Saudi Arabia.

And? Iraq under Saddam was more secular than Israel.

Absolutely. The man’s personal connected to God, while at times used as justification for his aggressive foreign policy, can hardly be considered so great that it endangers the secular flavor of the nation.

He's the tip of the christian fundie iceburg.

Women aren’t going to relinquish positions of power willingly.

Aside from the fact that everyone in a position of power has either been killed, rounded up or has fled, I think you'll find they will when the alternative is to be killed by the 'Islamic Revoloution'

Not necessarily. A government founded on the principles of Islam? Most likely. A government of Islamofascists á la the Taliban? Unlikely at best. Especially given American intervention.

More likely closer to Iran than the taliban, more regimented than the taliban, better consolidated. American intervention will not occur as long as the oil flows, america doesn't care as long as they keep to themselves and don't stir the pot.

I disagree. The average Iraqi wishes to associate with any platform chiding the Americans for continued occupation. Once more moderate voices establish themselves, the situation will calm.

They largely supported Iran during the war. They rose against saddam with the express intent of setting up an Islamic Fundie State.

How do I know what the average Iraqi thinks? I don’t. I profess to be able to extrapolate on the same grounds as yourself.

You've given absoloute declarations that every single Iraqi will do as you say. I've given a statement that the group most powerful in Iraq now and in the near to intermediate future is the Islamofacists. See the difference?

Clerics enjoy inordinate support, yes. Why? At this point in time, theirs are the only arguments being heard – or made in public – at all.

And they always did enjoy that support. Take Iran, where are the alternate viewpoints there? Do you think the Islamofacists would allow an alternate Secular power structure to be established?

[Axis Kast]

And this disproves my point... WHY

It’s yet more evidence of a secular slant.

And? Iraq under Saddam was more secular than Israel.

Your point?

He's the tip of the christian fundie iceburg.

I could say the same of Carter or Reagan, on differing levels.

Aside from the fact that everyone in a position of power has either been killed, rounded up or has fled, I think you'll find they will when the alternative is to be killed by the 'Islamic Revoloution'

Which wouldn’t come to pass without American approval anyway – and over the dead bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqis used to modern freedoms.

More likely closer to Iran than the taliban, more regimented than the taliban, better consolidated. American intervention will not occur as long as the oil flows, america doesn't care as long as they keep to themselves and don't stir the pot.

Which fundamental Islam does automatically. I guarantee you that America will care. Hence the drive to limit religious leaders’ influence by dint of focusing on the secular election process.

They largely supported Iran during the war. They rose against saddam with the express intent of setting up an Islamic Fundie State.

Who? The Iraqi people? There’s an institutional hatred for Iran.

An Islamic state, not necessarily Islamofascist.

You've given absoloute declarations that every single Iraqi will do as you say. I've given a statement that the group most powerful in Iraq now and in the near to intermediate future is the Islamofacists. See the difference?

No. I’ve given an opinion that the majority of Iraqis will favor more secular leadership over Islamofascism. With Islamic flavors? Always. But not with all the “baggage” conservatism entails.

And they always did enjoy that support. Take Iran, where are the alternate viewpoints there? Do you think the Islamofacists would allow an alternate Secular power structure to be established?

Saddam did it. We’re already doing it.

[NecronLord]

It’s yet more evidence of a secular slant.

They did it at gunpoint. Don't you understand that?

And? Iraq under Saddam was more secular than Israel.

Your point?

You claimed it was not. Concession Accepted.

He's the tip of the christian fundie iceburg.

I could say the same of Carter or Reagan, on differing levels.

Yes, they're getting progressively worse.

Which wouldn’t come to pass without American approval anyway

Based on what?

– and over the dead bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqis used to modern freedoms.

You overestimate people

Which fundamental Islam does automatically. I guarantee you that America will care. Hence the drive to limit religious leaders’ influence by dint of focusing on the secular election process.

Which I have already dealt with. The point is, it won't work.

Who? The Iraqi people? There’s an institutional hatred for Iran.

From the Sunni, not the Shi'ite

Saddam did it. We’re already doing it.

No, you aren't. You're dicking about and sending generals as viceroys. That will not last long. Already the Islamofascists control much of the country.

[Axis Kast]

They did it at gunpoint. Don't you understand that?

At first, yes. Later? No. See, Iran. By this time, most Iraqis desire religious influence but a secular way of life.

You claimed it was not. Concession Accepted.

First of all, check your quotes. I termed Israel “more democratic,” not necessarily more secular. But that’s semantics. It’s up in the air. Israel is clearly secular despite religious overtones; the same is true of Iraq.

Yes, they're getting progressively worse.

Bullshit. This is like the fear of Masons on government during the early 1800s. It’s bullshit. Check the news. The Supreme Court just disallowed Kentucky from displaying the Ten Commandments on a state monument. Today.

Based on what?

Men with guns. Marines.

You overestimate people.

And you underestimate them? Is that what you want me to say? I don’t think it’s a stretch of the imagination at all to say that Iraqis want limited religious influence on their new state.

Which I have already dealt with. The point is, it won't work.

So Islamofascism is in your opinion an inevitability? You don’t believe the United States will be able to sustain any sort of secular movement whatsoever?

From the Sunni, not the Shi'ite.

Many Shiites still resent Iran. Many fought during the Iran-Iraq war. There’s an approval for its institutions but not necessarily its influence in the post-Saddam world. Many will become increasingly uncomfortable with that influence over time, just as China was with the Soviets.

No, you aren't. You're dicking about and sending generals as viceroys. That will not last long. Already the Islamofascists control much of the country.

Bullshit. Our troops or those of Great Britain are in every major city.

Dicking around? Try prompting discussion on secular leadership.

Islamofascism is in vogue for the moment - but it's hardly the kind that al-Qaeda preaches. It's mostly about the Americans getting out, not being erradicated.

[NecronLord]

At first, yes. Later? No. See, Iran. By this time, most Iraqis desire religious influence but a secular way of life.

And your point is? The question, will the Islamofundies get in power is not affected by whatever the masses want, once they are in they're in until removed.

Bullshit. This is like the fear of Masons on government during the early 1800s. It’s bullshit. Check the news. The Supreme Court just disallowed Kentucky from displaying the Ten Commandments on a state monument. Today.

The fact that there was even an argument says something doesn't it?

Based on what?

Men with guns. Marines.

Who are going to be there forever in great strength

And you underestimate them? Is that what you want me to say? I don’t think it’s a stretch of the imagination at all to say that Iraqis want limited religious influence on their new state.

You overestimate their ability to prevent it.

So Islamofascism is in your opinion an inevitability? You don’t believe the United States will be able to sustain any sort of secular movement whatsoever?

Based on your record of consistently fucking up everything you've touched in the last 40 years, no, I don't. If I were in charge of the world, I wouldn't let that bunch of incompetants run a bloody hotel, never mind a country.

Many Shiites still resent Iran. Many fought during the Iran-Iraq war. There’s an approval for its institutions but not necessarily its influence in the post-Saddam world. Many will become increasingly uncomfortable with that influence over time, just as China was with the Soviets.

And just as china is still communist, Iraq will still be super-islamist.

Bullshit. Our troops or those of Great Britain are in every major city.

And?

Dicking around? Try prompting discussion on secular leadership.

If sending the good and noble Viceroy Mr Jay Garner Esq is 'prompting discussion' then I'd hate to see what a full blown debate would be, were the Nazis in Poland 'Causing healthy debate?' You have occupied the country and imposed a Govenor. That doesn't look like discussion from where I am sitting. I doubt it looks like discussion from where the average Iraqi sits either.

Islamofascism is in vogue for the moment - but it's hardly the kind that al-Qaeda preaches. It's mostly about the Americans getting out, not being erradicated.

That is what Al Quaeda preaches. They don't want to destroy America (or at least not initially) they wanted withdrawl from the M. East and discontinuing of support for Israel.

[Axis Kast]

And your point is? The question, will the Islamofundies get in power is not affected by whatever the masses want, once they are in they're in until removed.

So you’re predicting that they plan to launch a coup with only majority support against an entrenched military power that can for all intends and purposes be considered to have occupied the nation?

The fact that there was even an argument says something doesn't it?

It’s what our system is predicated on - discussion. And it shoots your concern of a rising tide of neoconservative religious fanaticism right out of the water.

Who are going to be there forever in great strength.

Forever no? For a decade or more? Most likely.

You overestimate their ability to prevent it.

How, exactly, will a minority of Islamofascists seize control of a government that does not exist – and which they must thus promulgate – against the combined power of the majority of their own people and the armed forces of Great Britain and the United States of America?

Based on your record of consistently fucking up everything you've touched in the last 40 years, no, I don't. If I were in charge of the world, I wouldn't let that bunch of incompetants run a bloody hotel, never mind a country.

We’ve never actually installed a government via occupation since 1945.

And just as china is still communist, Iraq will still be super-islamist.

That’s not the question. It’s whether sympathies will run toward anything but lose ideological ties. The answer is no.

And?

You’re telling me Islamofascists will establish a working theocracy with minority support. That speaks for all of Iraq.

If sending the good and noble Viceroy Mr Jay Garner Esq is 'prompting discussion' then I'd hate to see what a full blown debate would be, were the Nazis in Poland 'Causing healthy debate?' You have occupied the country and imposed a Govenor. That doesn't look like discussion from where I am sitting. I doubt it looks like discussion from where the average Iraqi sits either.

Hence the temporary preference for right-wing Islamists.

That is what Al Quaeda preaches. They don't want to destroy America (or at least not initially) they wanted withdrawl from the M. East and discontinuing of support for Israel.

We’re talking about al-Qaeda at this point in time. That organization now advocates global destruction of not merely American interests but technically the Western model of life. As I’ve been arguing since the beginning, the preference for Islamists is only temporary. We’ll see some strains of religion in the new Iraqi leadership and government, but not the kind prevalent in Iran or Afghanistan.

[NecronLord]

The wall of ignorance is truly painful.

[Axis Kast]

Concession accepted.

[NecronLord]

Moron. That wasn't a concession. It was a declaration that you are talking shit and your 'points' boil down to: "Wahhh I'm right about everything despite having absoloutely no evidence"