Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kazan on October 02, 2004, 01:58:27 pm
-
one of my fiance's political science classes was having an argument about whether Kerry could get togeather a coalition or not
Please Answer to poll question with the two following assumptions:
1) Assuming John Kerry was elected president
2) Assuming he had a good plan to resolve the iraqi situation soon and begin more serious rebuilding
---------
one of the votes under "Yes, financial aid to Iraqi rebuilding, and limited troops (protect election inspectors" is me... perhaps i'm just being optimistic :P (i also needed to make it so i don't ahve to click on the bloody "view results" every fscking time)
-
I doubt it. I think it'd be very difficult to win back international trust over Iraq now.... public opinion is such that most countries involved now want to back out, and those that aren't don't want to be involved.
I think the best chance would be turn over a vast deal of control to the UN and, once free and fair (independently verified) elections were completed to allow the Iraqi government to make their own appeals and rebuilding arrangements.
-
Yes, a bit of financial aid, no additional troops. In fact, what will most likely happen is a constant drip-drip of troops leaving, especially after the elections.
I think the financial aid will come mostly from south-east asia and eastern europe, but thats just my hunch.
-
well remember John Kerry != George Bush
the argument was whether it's possible _at_ _all_. Some people seem to think that foreign countries are somehow unable to grasp that President A != President B and that while you didn't get along with one you may get along with the other.
-
*cough* people who voted no post
-
It'll take a bloody miracle to pull the situation up from the cesspool it has fallen into. It won't be so much that Kerry will fail to convince more/better international support but that international support will shy away from the situation.
-
[color=66ff00]I know this might seem a bit harsh but I think that america and Britan should have no say whatsoever in what happens in Iraq.
I reckon aldo's pretty much nailed the best way forward.
The US's motivations for being in Iraq will always be under scrutiny due to the vast number of lies the current administration has conjured up for being there.
[/color]
-
Originally posted by Kazan
well remember John Kerry != George Bush
the argument was whether it's possible _at_ _all_. Some people seem to think that foreign countries are somehow unable to grasp that President A != President B and that while you didn't get along with one you may get along with the other.
My point is that Iraq is now a great bloody mess, and sending troops is virtually political suicide - regardless of who is in charge of the US force. Financially... simply because there's little real motivation for countries to do so that i can think of. Unless the tendering process for contracts,etc, is nullified and handed over to whatever government takes over in Iraq, of course.
-
Gah! Let's just give 'em some money, have independent verification in a presidential elections then p155 off out of there!
-
The reason why I don't think there will be additional troops is because no one is going to send troops who does not already have them in there, if they are not under UN control, and the US will not relinquish control, so....
I'm also looking forward to the "partial elections" that have been hinted at. You see, we can't actually hold elections everywhere, no no. Certain areas will likely not have elections, due to err...security concerncs. And apparently, this may very well include Baghdad, since its not particularly safe you see. Quite brilliant if I do say so myself.
-
Don't forget the U.N. doesn't really want control of the mess right now too. Thay'll be willing to take it if the situation settles down a bit (not that I blame them).
-
the only effective plan/good plan would be one that makes it _not_ a cesspool
and i know the elections are a shame.. or as bush has them planned they're a sham
hopefully kerry gets elected and we can do better than we have
-
Yes to financial aid...and no to troops. Pretty much what Canada's policy is right now.
What SHOULD have happened and what Kerry has been saying and Bush has been denying was a bad idea is that the UN peacekeeping force should have been in there right after major conflict was declared over. The first thing is that the Peackeeping force is made of different units than the traditional army...more sensitive to issues in the country and better equipped for getting people what they needed. They may not have prevented an insurgency but they'd have less people pissed off at the occupied force.
When your occupier is a multinational force from countries across the globe...it should look a little different than US flags and symbols everywhere. They are conditioned against that...
-
No financial aid, Troops only to protect British contractors and UN election observers.
No further conventional acts of war to be supported unless evidence is irrefutable.
-
im reading a dispropotionate number of "yes" responses than i see votes in the poll..
-
Because you haven't covered options like the one I posted.
-
good call.. i should have put a "yes, other" option
-
I said yeah 'cos he couldn't really do any worse. I can't really see America withdrawing troops either. Seems like more are needed.
-
tactically speaking more are needed before they can be pulled out
-
hey, ya left out nuke em'. i as an american want proof that our nuclear arsonal, with the billions of tax dollars that are used to maintain it, are still in good working order.
-
I'd say that give a bit of financial aid (lets face it...money keeps this goddarn world ticking) and keep a few (note: few) troops in till all the election people are out.
But once Iraq is set up and running well; leave it alone.
-
Pull the troops out and replace them with Oompa Loompas. Much more productive and benign.
-
I have to say, part #2 is a pretty big assumption there Kazan. It is Senator 'Flip-Flop' Kerry you're talking about here, after all. I'd have more respect for the man if he actually had a single concrete conviction...... hell, even a single concrete plan or idea for anything post election. But from what I gather his plank is basically that things will just be better once he's elected. Somehow.
-
Shrike: this thread isn't for partisan crap
the description of "flip-flop" is just crap
1st) he _HAS_ had one consistent position on Iraq, despite what out-of-context soundbytes may lead you to believe
2nd) The job of a politican is to make the best decision with the available information. If new information comse to light then they need to re-evaluate their position. If they fail/refuse to do so they are a disgrace and a danger to their country
3rd) When analizing voting record one must take into account
* Actual content of bill (not title)
* Riders attached to bill
* New Information come to their attention
* Specific information about _that_ particular request (like when he voted to cut a bunch of military spending in the early 90's: at the request of then sectary of defense Cheney's request)
Buying into the flip-flop crap is just being inattentive and failling pray to soundbyte politics
-
You wanted non-american opinions. You got mine.
Personally I think I'd be more worried about the fact that Kerry's a necro-robot sent from the future to destroy us all, but that's just me.
-
Al Gore's the necro-robot. Kerry is just Gore's mindslave ;)
-
Un-capitalized the word "he" in the poll question; initially I thought you were asking if God would be able to pull together a better international force. :p
-
Al Gore made only one error: trying to command the place before being elected...
-
Originally posted by Sandwich
Un-capitalized the word "he" in the poll question; initially I thought you were asking if God would be able to pull together a better international force. :p
Why does that seem so ironic to me? :)
-
Before the war Kerry might have succeeded in getting a broader coalition together.
But now? No one is going to get a broader coalition. Iraq is a mess that no one not already there wants to touch with a 10-feet pole.
-
Everyone, vote nay! :D