Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

U.S. Stages Elections in Iraq -- Results Pose

Name: Andrei 2006-01-04 18:03

U.S. Stages Elections in Iraq -- Results Pose New Problems and Dangers

Revolution #029, January 8, 2006, posted at http://revcom.us/

Elections took place in Iraq on December 15 literally under the gun.

The polling places were packed with U.S.-trained Iraqi police and soldiers -- who have earned themselves a reputation as corrupt death squads and torturers in many parts of the country. U.S. troops were typically stationed on surrounding roofs or gathered within striking distance. And the streets in many cities were criss-crossed with armed checkpoints.

Immediately, people in the U.S. were told that this election showed that they should all support this bloody and unjust occupation -- however long it took to reach victory. President Bush reached new heights of hype saying that this election was one of the most "amazing achievements in the history of liberty" and a "major milestone" toward U.S. victory over the insurgency. In fact, this election was none of these things -- and attacks on U.S. forces increased sharply in the days after the voting.

In Iraq itself, the U.S. intended to use the election to prove their control over the country, and to legitimize a new government of political forces that could help the U.S. stabilize its permanent domination.

A coalition of fundamentalist Shiite Islamic forces, the United Iraqi Alliance, won almost exactly half of the seats in the new Iraqi national assembly. The rise of Islamic theocratic forces, especially in the Shiite south, and the arrangements the U.S. occupiers have worked out with these forces and their militias has meant that in growing parts of Iraq, the people are now subject to the harsh theocratic rules of armed fundamentalists. This has meant intensified oppression of women. And it has mean the growth of merciless and deadly attacks on people who do not share their religion -- which are sometimes carried out through fundamentalist militia and sometimes by the U.S.-armed Iraqi army. And now that the U.S.-staged elections of December 15 have brought these theocratic forces even more prominence in the Iraqi puppet government there is a real danger that these kinds of reactionary and murderous attempts at repression and ethnic cleansing will accelerate.

The various Sunni and what are described as "secular Shiite" forces that the U.S. had been promoting suffered devastating defeats in the voting. For example, the coalition associated with former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi won only about 6.5% of the assembly seats.

On one level, no matter what the results of these elections were, it remains a basic fact of life that U.S. guns dominate Iraq. Nobody got to vote on whether or not they wanted that. Since its invasion in 2003, the U.S. has staged three elections and one "transfer of national sovereignty" -- but the truth is that power remains firmly in the hands of the U.S. government whose armed forces dominate Iraq. And, as a vivid example of what that means in practical politics, the notorious U.S. agent Ahmed Chalabi was (despite a humiliating defeat in the Dec. 15 election) suddenly elevated to the highly strategic post of Iraqi oil minister two weeks later, on Dec. 30.

And on another level, the U.S. imperialists have serious concerns about the domination of Shiite theocratic forces over the new central Iraqi government. One of those worries is that this will fuel the anti-U.S. insurgency among Sunni people and accelerate the disintegration of Iraq as a unified country--destabilizing the region in ways the current U.S. occupation force would find extremely difficult to contain.

The U.S. invasion in 2003 shattered the largely secular ruling Baathist party that cultivated support among Sunnis and kept Shiites especially oppressed. The U.S. imperialists have worked out arrangements with a number of theocratic Shiite forces -- including training their militia forces within the puppet ranks of so-called "Iraqi National Army." These forces have been documented carrying out brutal ethnic-cleaning and torture of Sunni people in the name of the Iraqi national government and in alliance with the U.S. occupation forces. The U.S. has allowed and sponsored all this as as a way of setting Iraqis against each other and suppressing elements of the resistance to the occupation. [See the article "Bush's Plan for Victory Part I: Ethnic Cleansing and Stone Age Bombing, Revolution 26 at revcom.us]

Now the election victory of these theocratic forces, and the prospect of their open domination of the central government, raises serious questions about whether the country as a whole can hold together.

The other concern the U.S. has is that the dominant parties in the new government are closely aligned with the theocratic government of neighboring Iran. The election victory of this Shiite religious coalition might increase the influence of the Iranian government in southern Iraq, and its power throughout the whole strategic Gulf region. After Iraq's election, Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, who heads the Iranian government's powerful Guardian Council, said: "We are happy with all that has happened in Iraq, including the elections and the victory of the encompassing and Islamist alliance. Considering this trend, we can determine that a stable Islamic rule is being established in this country."

The ruling regime in Iran is a major impediment to the agenda of U.S. imperialism in Middle East, and in particular to the neo-con vision of radically reshuffling the whole region. Iran is involved in negotiating its own deals with other imperialist powers like Russia and France, and its own attempts to strengthen its position in the region. And so the rise of Iran's allies to power in Iraq puts Iran in the position of deepening the quagmire for the U.S. And it raises the danger that Bush will feel all the more compelled to escalate aggression against Iran. [See Seymour Hersh, Where is the Iraq war headed next?, New Yorker, Dec. 12, 2005]

This raises extremely acute concerns that Bush may be about to launch a major new military aggression against Iran itself -- drawing even more countries into a widening war within the Middle East. Der Spiegel and other German press are reporting that the U.S. government has plans in place for an air strike against Iranian nuclear and military facilities quite possibly now in early 2006. Their preparations reportedly included a heavy series of high level U.S. consultations with its allies -- including Turkey, the European Nato powers and regional allies like Pakistan, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. It is also alleged that the U.S. has given a green light to Turkey's military to cross its eastern borders into Iran during such a U.S. attack, supposedly in order to destroy Kurdish nationalist encampments there.

Already over 100,000 Iraqi people have died since the U.S. launched its 2003 invasion. U.S. forces constantly rage through the country, punishing whole towns and neighborhoods with ground assaults and intense air bombardments. In the buildup to the December 15 elections, U.S. marine warplanes bombed the town of Husaybah killing 97 civilians, during the brutal two-week U.S. offensive in Anbar province. U.S. forces and their allies have rounded up captives, often literally at random, with over 15,000 now brutalized and tortured in prison camps like Abu Ghraib that are so notorious around the world.

While the election didn't offer the Iraqi people any option for ending all this, for true self-determination, and was staged to legitimize the U.S. occupation of the country, the results created complex problems for the U.S.

While Bush may claim the election legitimizes the war, the results deepen the real quagmire Bush has plunged into in Iraq, and also present real dangers that the U.S. will "up the ante" and attack Iran. All of which increases the necessity of the people to struggle to end this unjust war and occupation, right now.

This article is posted in English and Spanish on Revolution Online
http://revcom.us/
Write: Box 3486, Merchandise Mart, Chicago, IL 60654
Phone: 773-227-4066 Fax: 773-227-4497

Name: John 2006-01-04 18:11


...

You are full of absolute and complete bullshit. I'm not even going to bother.

Stop writing al-Zarqawi's speeches for him, buddy.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-04 19:40

>>1
truth got told

Name: anti-chan 2006-01-05 1:00

>>2

Stop blithely accusing criticism as fraternization with the percieved enemy.

Fuckwit.

Name: John 2006-01-05 9:27

>>4
I was being SARRRCAAASTIIIIIIIIC. =B
Except for the "full of absolute and complete bullshit" part.

Name: anti-chan 2006-01-05 11:34

That's the part I was responding to, fuckhead.

Name: Andrei 2006-01-05 16:37

Anti-chan actually points out a very important point: how the Right-wing media and how Republican politicians paint any dissent or criticism of their policy as "treason" and "dangerous".

A very dangerous precedent, and a very foreboding sign of the direction the U.S. is headed in...

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-05 16:58

>>7
"This article is posted in English and Spanish on Revolution Online"
Somehow I don't think a communist revolution is the solution. Considerring how Castro is more of a vicious tyrant than Bush ever will be.

GEORGE BUSH IS A STUPID FUCKTARD!!! WOO HOO!!

I will not be executed for this, therefore Bush is not a despot and you are just saying this to whip stupid people into a frenzy, possibly stupid people who fled Communist Cuba to get away fr omthe terrible conditions there who think they are somehow worse off despite the welfare check that arrives each week in their mail box which is higher than Cuba's GDP per capita.

Name: Andrei 2006-01-05 17:44

Castro is a revisionist (phony-communist), whose revolution never fully implemented socialism but rather a state-capitalist apparatus that only continued to oppress the people.

To understand the REAL history of Communism and what it's all about, check out: http://rwor.org/strs/index.htm

Also check out the works of Chairman Bob Avakian, who is "re-envisioning" socialism and breaking new ground in Communist theory as well as exposing the truth about Communism: http://www.bobavakian.net/

Name: John 2006-01-05 17:59

>>7
"Right-wing" media... xD
*Rolls on the ground laughing*

>>9
Communism sucks...
That's all. It sucks. It sucks to live under if you have any ambitions in life... Period.
I would honestly die before letting myself live under a fucking communist society.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-05 22:42

>>9
Well if this is so you are free engage in rational debate in a democratic free speech environment about the merits of communist policies. Beware though, you must be 100% scientific and do not use communist dogma or references whatsoever otherwise people will mistake you for the typical Stalinist-Maoist-communist and not pay any attention. I'm sorry people are ignorant to whatever you value in communism, but with so many screaming fucktards yammerring on about how people deserve to starve to death for being "uneconomical" and all that you can't blame people for not taking communism seriously.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-06 4:07

>>11
I don't get it. What do right-wing Rand-tards have to do with people not taking communism seriously? Have you perhaps made the common mistake of equating socialism with totalitarianism? US society is massively capitalist and increasingly totalitarian. You are given the illusion of freedom because you can talk freely (though you may end up dead if you threaten the power structure) and because you can choose between different kinds of consumer goods.

Name: Andrei 2006-01-06 4:10

>>11
I agree that we must be scientific about this whole thing, but I also think that concealing our views and aims (not telling people we are Communist) is dishonest and wrong... besides, if we call ourselves any other name, we will still be attacked and persecuted. Indeed, the vast majority of people have been taught that Communism is full of wicked tyrants and that it is a failure, but that's just one of the many reasons that we Communists need to constantly be out amongst the masses educating people what it's REALLY about. That's why the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA is currently in a "Set The Record Straight" campaign ( http://rwor.org/strs/index.htm ) and the "This Is Communism" speaking tour ( http://www.thisiscommunism.org/ ) which are working to tell the masses the truth about the historical experience of the proletariat, and how we can take it much farther.

Look: we are living in some serious times right now. Bush and his cabal are trying to reshape the world on THEIR terms, and if we don't stop them, we could end up livin' in some deep shit. It's time for us to reshape the world on OUR terms- humanity's terms. Which future do you want?

Check us out: http://revcom.us/

Name: John 2006-01-06 10:19

>>13
*I* want a future where I can live in comfortable retirement by the beach. If I have no way to profit from the efforts of my labor under communism, then how the hell will communism let me do that?

Why in the hell should I devote my individual life to the so-called "common good"? If eeeeeverybody does that, who really profits from it? So everybody's fed and value themselves no more than an ant in an ant-pile does. Wow. Some life. There is not one soul to control the masses... The "masses" are made of individuals.

So I'm selfish. Give me one god damn reason why I shouldn't be, morally, logically, philosophically, whatever. Just one good reason.

And yeah, I read the whole of every one of those websites...

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-06 14:01

15 GET.

"Commies!" they all shouted at the dog in chorus. "Commies, commies, commies!!!"
The dog went berserk with barking, prancing up and down, yapping  its little heart out, beside itself in transports of ecstatic rage.  They  all laughed and cheered it on, then gradually dispersed to their various  cars and disappeared into the night.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-06 18:07

>>14
Selfishness leads to crime etc..

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-06 20:12

>>14
C-O-O-P-E-R-A-T-I-O-N

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-06 20:29

>>16
Stupidity leads to liberalism etc..

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-07 4:14

>>14
You have to work hard enough that EVERYONE will be able to retire on the beach.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-07 5:07

Iraq has an illegitimate puppet government, installed to rubber-stamp policies favourable to US corporations. It's a mirror image of the US government.

Name: Andrei 2006-01-07 11:13

>>20

Amen to that. Some good articles about Iraq's oppressive new government can be found here:

http://rwor.org/a/011/iraqs-new-constitution.htm
http://rwor.org/a/1275/Iraq-empire-new-government.htm

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-07 12:34

This government doesn't care how many bodies must be blown apart and plowed under to get what it wants. Hell, even the former prime minister--the hand picked US puppet Allawi--said that torture in the "new" iraq was worse than it had been under Saddam.

People are seeing through this crap now to a certain extent. The truth needs to be shown to people. Great article.

Name: John 2006-01-07 18:23

>>16
No, it leads to self-sufficiency.

>>17
I never said "don't cooperate"...

>>19
But nobody has private property under communism.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-07 21:57

But nobody has private property under communism.

Uh, no. The means of production are collectively controlled. You still have private property.

Name: John 2006-01-07 22:23

>>24
I, uh .. beg to differ.

http://www.webster.com/dictionary/communism
"1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property"

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-07 23:14

Under communism, you can still have your house on the beach. No one's gonna come along and say, "hey, that's mine."

Name: Andrei 2006-01-08 13:19

Property is allowed under socialism as long as you are not using it to exploit others or extract surplus value from them. Personal possessions and such are fine and in the hands of the individual.

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-08 13:42

What if you don't want to share a sandwich you bought with a beggar on the street? There will still be beggars under socialism you know, as indicated by failures such as Cuba and North Korea.

Name: John 2006-01-08 13:54

>>27
That's funny, the dictionary seems to think otherwise.

Okay then, what if somebody wants something like a fancy car, will everybody (still) bitch that that person has more than they do? Oh, wait, that would be greedy, wouldn't it, to get something for yourself for your own pleasure by the profit from your own ass-busting labor?
Say America becomes communist, what's gonna happen to Bill Gates' collection of Corvettes, will they be distributed to people that "neeeeeeed" them? Where are the billions that he honestly earned by creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and providing the freaking globe with his company's software going to go? What about people like him?
If I want to be innovative and prosper from the efforts of my labor, then why should society have the rights to that profit, as communist doctrine says?

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-08 14:01

>>29
Your boss owns the efforts of your labor under capitalism.

Name: John 2006-01-08 15:12

>>30
Is that why people get pay-checks every week? -_-;
ばか の ろば。。。

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-08 15:56

Do paychecks mean you own the effort of your labor? Or are you simply a wage slave?

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-08 15:59

>>30
Then go on strike, you won't be executed like you will in North KOrea. The USA isn't an imperialist despotism you know. They just tell you that so you think there is no such thing as liberty and believe the only way to get ahead in life is to stamp on other people's faces by joining them.

Name: John 2006-01-08 16:07

>>32
If you feel like a slave earning wages, then get a different job. Or go to college and actually get a job you like. Or start your own business. What a concept, huh?
If you're just a menial office bitch or some pizza-face flippin' burgers, that's what the effort of your labor gets you: a pay-check. Do whatever gives you satisfaction, and you won't be a "wage slave"...

Name: Anonymous 2006-01-08 17:31

>>29
You've never lived in a "communist" system.

I have (Yugoslavia). Of course there's personal property. Life was a lot like the US, just lazier and poorer. People also avoided the police like the plague.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List