Pickering Angels
Toronto Escorts

“It’s Our Duty”

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Interesting article from the streets I thought.

OTB

“It’s Our Duty”
Iraqis bravely vote.

By W. Thomas Smith Jr.

When most Americans think of U.S. Marines, they think of things like courage and unflappable resolve. But today, when Marines in Iraq consider similar values, the image of an elderly grandmother walking slowly to her designated polling station — braving the threat of death and dismemberment — comes to mind.

The Iraqi people did not just participate in national elections on Sunday. They humbled people the world over, and won for themselves both another step toward democracy and a newfound reputation as being among history's bravest of the brave.

"The Iraqis arrived at the polling sites dressed in their best clothes," Captain Carrie Batson, with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) near Najaf, tells NRO. "Everyone was ecstatic and all smiles, congratulating each other on the vote, and holding their purple index finger up in the air as prideful evidence that they had voted. There were Iraqis leading the blind and rolling old women on carts to polling sites, and entire families entering the sites so the children could watch the parents vote."

The day wasn't without bloodshed and fear. Suicide bombers and mortar attacks were launched against a few polling stations and other civilian targets. Voters standing in long lines prayed and encouraged the frightened as distant explosions shook the earth. But they stood fast as the lines inched forward to the ballot box.

Despite the risks and losses, "the excitement was contagious," says Master Sergeant Kelley S. Ramsey, a public-affairs chief for the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) near Fallujah. "You couldn't help but be emotionally moved when watching Iraqis smile, some even cry, on this historic day. It was like waking up on Christmas morning. Democracy was the best present of all. It was sitting under their tree, with the biggest bow on it."

Those in Iraq were far more confident of a high voter turnout than the hopefuls and pessimists elsewhere in the world.

On election eve — before highways were shut down — Captain Batson was in downtown Najaf. She tells NRO, "All the cafes and restaurants were brimming with people, and many Najafis had lined up chairs along the roads and markets and were having what looked like a block party on the streets.

"As our convoys drove around, the Iraqis would get up and stand on their chairs, waving at and cheering the Marines.

"Around the holy Imam Ali Shrine, election posters covered most walls and Iraqis passed out paraphernalia for their political parties to citizens passing by.

"I saw at least four different groups of cars decorated with flowers and political posters driving around the town, honking their horns and cheering. It initially looked like these were wedding parties, but upon closer look it became obvious that these Iraqis were campaigning and celebrating the upcoming elections."

Much of that ebullience stems from the growing confidence in the ability of their own soldiers and police officers to protect them.

"We expected a spike in attacks today [election day]," says Capt. David Nevers, spokesman for the 24th MEU. "Nobody doubted there would be violence and casualties. But I think it's safe to say that at the end of the day, the insurgents failed to make the impact they desired and promised."

cont....

OTB
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Cont....

Key to that success was Iraqi security.

"The Iraqis took their posts nearest the centers of gravity, the polling stations," says Nevers. "In the face of threats and violence, they stood fast, held their ground, and demonstrated once again that given time, training and equipment, they can be counted on to protect and defend their own country."

First Lieutenant Nathan J. Braden with the 1st Marine Division witnessed a respectable turnout at numerous voting stations within Al Anbar, a province encompassing much of the Sunni Triangle, including the cities of Ramadi and Fallujah, which many officials feared would have poor turnout.

"Not all of the polling centers were filled to the gills with voters, but we have seen pretty good voter turnout at a number of the centers," he says. "Every citizen made a choice today, either to participate in the elections or not to participate. That decision, in itself, is a demonstration of freedom and democracy."

Col Jenny Holbert, with the 1st MEF, adds that during the final hour of voting she received "reports from some areas within Al Anbar that exceeded many people's expectations. It's wonderful to see the Iraqis get out to vote, knowing any polling center could be a target. The Iraqis are taking their country back from terrorists who have no investment in this country's future. The enemy cannot win"

According to Batson, when Iraqis were asked — hours before polls opened — if they were going to vote, "they looked at you like you had three heads. 'Of course we're going to vote,' they responded, 'It's our duty.'"

Vote they did: Between eight and ten million Iraqis (56 to 72 percent of 14.27 eligible voters) cast ballots, Sunday. It was a higher percentage than what we witnessed in our own general elections, last November. And no one was tossing grenades at us.
 

Coach

Member
Jul 9, 2002
673
0
16
Up Here,ON
I hope all those people in this country who are too apathetic to vote take note of the excitement and passion of the Iraqi people. The right to vote is sacred, and one we should not take lightly.
 

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,353
4,776
113
Coach said:
I hope all those people in this country who are too apathetic to vote take note of the excitement and passion of the Iraqi people. The right to vote is sacred, and one we should not take lightly.
I won't argue that with you. But it is worth noting that many votes are wasted in canadian elections because of the lack of proportional representation. That is not sacred.
 

BiggieE

Guest
Jan 29, 2004
609
0
0
Rochester, NY, USA
There is no such thing as a wasted vote. I think the Citizens of Iraq sent a powerful message to the rest of the world on sunday. That they are a FREE nation, and are willing to do the things it takes to keep it that way. Freedom is a human beings natural state. It takes another to enslave it. Let's hope the Iraqi people understand this, and stand fast with us, as free nations, against tyranny the world over......
 
Y

yychobbyist

BiggieE said:
There is no such thing as a wasted vote. I think the Citizens of Iraq sent a powerful message to the rest of the world on sunday. That they are a FREE nation, and are willing to do the things it takes to keep it that way. Freedom is a human beings natural state. It takes another to enslave it. Let's hope the Iraqi people understand this, and stand fast with us, as free nations, against tyranny the world over......
The Iraqis are free? With American troops and tanks throughout their country they are free? With no set laws they are free?
 

BiggieE

Guest
Jan 29, 2004
609
0
0
Rochester, NY, USA
Yup.....they came out and voted...They got to choose...they have'nt had that abilty for many years.....and they were able to vote BECAUSE of our troops....
 

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
DonQuixote said:
It is a joke. This whole election = victory argument is rationalizing of
the first order. If GWB had gone to the US Senate asking for their
approval for the use of the military and the expenditures that have
followed to give the Iraqis the right to vote does anyone out there
think he would have gotten the support of the Senate? I don't think so.
You know as well as i do.

1) The POTUS can declare war on anybody, but has to get house and senate approval within 30 days.
2) Most senators and congressmen had the same "evidence"to look at as the POTUS.
3) If the senate and the house disagrees, they have the power to stop funding the war.

You are right as the POTUS the "buck stops with you". (Or as Clinton said "the buck never got here")
Let's don't forget that the ones that cry the loudest have their names under the declaration of war.(including TED)
 

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
There has been no formal declaration of war by the US since WWII. US presidents long ago figured out that it was unnecessary, and that it was far easier to commit troops without it. Near the end of Vietnam, congress finally became fed up and passed the War Powers Act, which required the president to ask their approval for military action within 90 days after it was initiated. Since than the act has been watered down and largely ignored by every president after, claiming that Article II, Sec. 2 of the constitution gave them all the authority needed. The resolutions passed from Tonkin Gulf on have been little more than rubber stamps. The only real recourse congress has is to cut off funds, but if troops are committed the chances are remote unless the situation has completely deteriorated. Presidents historically have pretty much had a free hand in engaging in war.
 
Last edited:

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
langeweile said:
2) Most senators and congressmen had the same "evidence"to look at as the POTUS.
Gosh, and who do you suppose was the primary keeper and disseminator of that "evidence"?
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
DonQuixote said:
It is a joke. This whole election = victory argument is rationalizing of
the first order. If GWB had gone to the US Senate asking for their
approval for the use of the military and the expenditures that have
followed to give the Iraqis the right to vote does anyone out there
think he would have gotten the support of the Senate? I don't think so.
DQ,

So, is it a good thing or bad that Iraqi's voted?

OTB
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,017
5,950
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net

Asterix

Sr. Member
Aug 6, 2002
10,025
0
0
langeweile said:
The CIA...your point is?
No, the CIA is an intelligence gatherer, and their role even in that may be diminishing. They report directly to the White House with the President's Daily Briefing, and have been so guarded about releasing information that there are still briefings from the Johnson administration being fought over for release. Congress is kept informed with occasional filtered down briefings to a select few on the intelligence committees and party leadership, but to suggest they have all the information available to the president simply isn't true. The White House is the keeper of the "evidence" by and large, and mainly through the State Department will disseminate what it chooses. Bush recently decided to effectively give many of the operations formerly done by the CIA to the Pentagon, and now claims that there is no requirement to report their intelligence or covert actions to congress at all. That was my point.
 
Last edited:

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
Asterix said:
No, the CIA is an intelligence gatherer, and their role even in that may be diminishing. They report directly to the White House with the President's Daily Briefing, and have been so guarded about releasing information that there are still briefings from the Johnson administration being fought over for release. Congress is kept informed with occasional filtered down briefings to a select few on the intelligence committees and party leadership, but to suggest they have all the information available to the president simply isn't true. The White House is the keeper of the "evidence" by and large, and mainly through the State Department will disseminate what it chooses. Bush recently decided to effectively give many of the operations formerly done by the CIA to the Pentagon, and now claims that there is no requirement to report their intelligence or covert actions to congress at all. That was my point.
I am not sure I believe you. In a system that is so full of checks and balances, you mean to tell me, that no one has access to those reports?
I just don't believe it. It makes no sense.
 

langeweile

Banned
Sep 21, 2004
5,086
0
0
In a van down by the river
DonQuixote said:
There are three reports, langeweile. The first is for the eyes of POTUS only.
The second is for the Select Intelligence Committees of the Senate and House.
It contains less than the first but more than the third.
The third is for the Intelligence Committees of the Senate and House.
It contains the least amount of intelligence information.

The Select Committees are made up of members of the Committees
but are rotated on a prearranged schedule with limited tenure.

The system is structured to reduce transparency. Why? Because it's
the most sensitive intelligence the CIA can produce.

I hope that clears up this issue of 'transparency'.

At your assistance at any time. Don, former insider.
Thanks for the info
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
47,017
5,950
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
bbking said:
This post proves what? Actually it's people like you on the far left that are the so-called *Nation-builders* Remember all the critics getting bent out of shape when Bush announced that the US was not in the business of nation building - I believe this statement was pre-9/11 and in reference to Palistine.

This is typical of people like yourself Wood - if my enemy likes it, I hate it. So much for the vaunted principles of the far left.


bbl
Actually that was not the point of my post at all. I meant to compare the way the neocon GOP critics screamed bloody murder about how the US should NOT be *Nation-builders* during that Serbian war during Clinton's term in office, remember???? .....and now we have Dubya and his neocon Cromwellian Roundheads playing *Nation-builders* in Iraq, and doing a pretty lame job at it so far. It goes it little bit earlier than the Palistine thingy you reference.

As far as those vaunted principles of the far left, again just compare the way Clinton handled his Serbian war with Dubya's present Iraqi debacle. Clinton went into Serbia with UN & NATO backing and removed his Boogyman, Slobodan Milosevic, in 11 WEEKS AND NOT 1 US SOLDIER WAS KILLED! Compare that record with what Dubya has wrought so far; 1400 US troops killed and counting after how many years???...not to mention the masssive money being spent in Iraq with NO END IN SIGHT.

When you compare these two recent campaigns those vaunted principles of the far left seem a bit better than whatever the hell is being offered up by Dubya & his Neocon Cromwellian Roundheads. Clinton as Commander-in-Chief handled things far superior over in Serbia, to what Dubya has done to date in Iraq.

Looking at it in this light you have to wonder how anyone could admit to admiring what Dubya has done so far such as, trampling on the USA Constitution, the damage done to US honor and prestige, disregard to International Law. It's no wonder most countries in the world view Dubya with such contempt....the cartoon posted,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,7371,1403140,00.html

was quite fitting in this light!
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts