Yep. It's all a sham orchestrated by an occupying power that blocked true democracy by determining who was allowed to run. The threat of military action is also a factor that would prompt people to participate.
If you don't vote you would be branded an "insurgent" or a "terrorist" even if you never picked up a Molotov cocktail. The Iraqi people voted Saddam Hussein into office for decades. Why do you think they wouldn't vote the same way in these elections?
Yikes, Nadir. On what basis do you believe that people there are voting out of fear of retailiation, rather than voting *despite* retaliation? The leftists first said that the voting would be sparse for the first election due to rejection of democracy and fear of the various terrorists. Now that voting has proven to be popular, we hear this?
Sounds like the "low petro prices" as the justification for war morphing into "record petro profits" after facts disproved the first leftist expectation.
2 comments:
Yep. It's all a sham orchestrated by an occupying power that blocked true democracy by determining who was allowed to run. The threat of military action is also a factor that would prompt people to participate.
If you don't vote you would be branded an "insurgent" or a "terrorist" even if you never picked up a Molotov cocktail. The Iraqi people voted Saddam Hussein into office for decades. Why do you think they wouldn't vote the same way in these elections?
Imperialist bullshit. That's what I say.
Yikes, Nadir. On what basis do you believe that people there are voting out of fear of retailiation, rather than voting *despite* retaliation? The leftists first said that the voting would be sparse for the first election due to rejection of democracy and fear of the various terrorists. Now that voting has proven to be popular, we hear this?
Sounds like the "low petro prices" as the justification for war morphing into "record petro profits" after facts disproved the first leftist expectation.
Post a Comment