Iraqi GOTV
January 22, 2005 12:34 AM   Subscribe

"Because We Have a Duty to Build Iraq, I Will Participate in the Elections." MEMRI translates Iraqi election videos (clips here.)
posted by Yelling At Nothing (28 comments total)
 
Painter: "In order to bring back Iraq's color, I will participate in the elections."

What do we think they are, fucking children?
posted by interrobang at 12:48 AM on January 22, 2005


I won't really believe they have a democracy until they start running attack ads, but this is a start. The solidarity angle is interesting, I'd love to be on the ground to see it all happening. Talk about a historic moment. Good link, thanks!
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:49 AM on January 22, 2005


How many candidates are there? Is there just one party, the Iraq party?
posted by 235w103 at 12:51 AM on January 22, 2005


interrobang - according to the links (I have no independent info), "Future Iraq Assembly is an independent, non-governmental organization." Maybe they get some funding from the US, but it seems to be produced there based on the production value.

So, they seem to think that they are children.

And who hasn't seen a cheesy US local political ad?
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:53 AM on January 22, 2005


235w103 - There seem to be over 100 parties...

"More than 100 parties, blocs and independents make up the 6000 candidates."

Source: Al Jazeera
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:54 AM on January 22, 2005


Maybe they get some funding from the US, but it seems to be produced there based on the production value.

*Maybe* they got some funding from the US? Are you kidding?
posted by interrobang at 12:55 AM on January 22, 2005


interrobang - Okay, no shit the money all flows from the US, the question is how many steps removed . But the production value really looks local. This is not Madison Ave at work.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:57 AM on January 22, 2005


You don't think that we tailor production values to look local when we're creating things like this?
posted by interrobang at 1:02 AM on January 22, 2005


>This is not Madison Ave at work.

I think most of the participants have been bombarded with that stuff already, so a bit of "edgy amateurish realism" is on the cards.
posted by gsb at 1:04 AM on January 22, 2005


wait, no one told me the flag had been changed back...
posted by trinarian at 1:23 AM on January 22, 2005


Well, could I run for President of Iraq? What are the requirements?
posted by AMWKE at 2:25 AM on January 22, 2005


A bulletproof vest perhaps?
posted by TwelveTwo at 2:49 AM on January 22, 2005


MEMRI translates Iraqi election videos

At first I read this as 'execution videos'...
posted by tapeguy at 3:04 AM on January 22, 2005


Aren't those videos airing on the Happy News Government Channel that is now a running joke in Iraq?
posted by fleener at 4:51 AM on January 22, 2005


I have to find this really sick in light of the fact that local candidates in certain regions aren't even identifying themselves for fear of violence.
posted by purtek at 7:06 AM on January 22, 2005


It's showing on Al-Arabiya, RTFA.
posted by rxrfrx at 7:07 AM on January 22, 2005


I am as cynical about the Bush administration as any person here, but I am in awe of the sheer courage of the Iraqis who have the courage to participate in the elections. Let's not devalue that.
posted by LarryC at 7:53 AM on January 22, 2005




Oh please, y'all. The candidates are in many if not most cases running anonymously, so they won't get blown up real good, or just shot or kidnapped. Can you imagine? And how many people will stay home given security fears, in how many parts of the country? How could these elections be considered even slightly legitimate by world standards?
posted by raysmj at 8:25 AM on January 22, 2005


The elections will be a joke for some (many? all?) but the sentiments behind these ads are not.

One thing we should all keep in mind is that if Bush and Co. had not royally fucked up the aftermath, there is a good chance that Iraqis really would be voting and really feeling the pride of doing so.

SO let's not mock the idea of voting (not that anyone really was) and let's hold Bush accountable for his freedom bullshit, and not let them get away with saying that an election=freedom or election=dempocracy.
posted by cell divide at 9:09 AM on January 22, 2005


I like how it's all become the aftermath, and not the invasion itself.
posted by raysmj at 9:17 AM on January 22, 2005



How many candidates are there? Is there just one party, the Iraq party?


From my geog class: Who's who in Iraqi politics:



(in case that doesnt work here's a link)
posted by reflection at 9:48 AM on January 22, 2005


reflection - you seem to need to login to get to the link. :(
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 10:21 AM on January 22, 2005


reflection - you seem to need to login to get to the link. :(

Really sorry 'bout that. Here you are then:



posted by reflection at 11:40 AM on January 22, 2005


Their courage is being thrown away on a joke of a process.

Look, I don't agree with the way that things have gone, but that view is way too cynical. The process isn't perfect. But, in a couple of weeks Iraq will have a freely elected government for the first time in a long time. 6000 candidates representing a wide variety of opinions (from secular to Islamist to Christian, conservative to liberal, Kurdish to Shia) will be judged by the public on the basis of their beliefs.

Sure, there are pockets of the country that won't vote. But whose fault is that? The finger of blame points pretty squarely at those who would rather destroy democracy than participate responsibly. The vast majority of the country will chose elected representatives.

I'm sure the vote won't go perfectly. But that doesn't make it a joke. It's growing pains for a newly minted democracy. We should work to solve these problems, but not deny the value of the process.
posted by thedevildancedlightly at 12:45 PM on January 22, 2005


Who are you? The vast majority? How do you know? They don't even know who these people are, in many cases. How's that legitimate?
posted by raysmj at 1:04 PM on January 22, 2005


Devil, as much as I applaud your optimism I don't see how forcing elections without an infrastructure in place to maintain order afterwards can be anything but, at best meaningless and at worst a bloody disaster. I find it remarkable that anyone can view this sham as anything close to a democratic process -- doesn't the simple facts that candidates are anonymous ring any alarm bells? Fuck, we can't guarantee the safety of Americans in the Green Zone, but we're claiming there can be meaningful elections.

This is a placebo. It's all about the spin and getting a check in the 'win' box so democracy and Dubya's Christian soldiers can march on to the next war against Muslims terrorists.

In practice this election is going to work about the same it would in the US -- you know, if New Jersey was electing the governor of Colorado with a heavily armed Alaska waiting in the wings to prepared to swoop down if it doesn't turn out the way the voters in New Mexico wanted. You can't have an election without a country and a collection of tribal/religous feifdoms with the only moderating influence an out-of-control foreign army does not a country make.
posted by cedar at 6:47 PM on January 22, 2005


Devil, I made a comment in support of the elections in general, but you're flat out wrong. The blame is squarely on the shoulders of those who brought the invasion, and their lack of planning for the post-war period. The US has the power and the responsibility in Iraq right now, as much as they try to spin things.
posted by cell divide at 8:56 PM on January 22, 2005


« Older Exeem, From Suprnova   |   Hubble in Trouble Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments