"We've made real progress"

jimnyc

...
Aug 28, 2003
20,369
273
83
New York
Ahmad Chalabi is a member of the Iraqi Governing Council.

It is difficult for non-Iraqis to understand the significance of the day in July when the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) was established. For Iraqis, who have suffered 35 years of totalitarian dictatorship, this was a momentous occasion. For the first time in memory, the people saw an Iraqi governing body that did not consist of a dictator and his clones. They saw a diverse group of men and women reflecting all parts of Iraqi society, united by a firm desire to bring democracy, human rights and the rule of law to Iraq.

The significance of this event was not lost on Saddam Hussein, who immediately started making threats against the IGC and succeeded two months later in assassinating council member Akila al-Hashimi.

In the short time since then, the IGC has compiled a strong record of achievement.

We have appointed ministers to take charge of the day-to-day administration of Iraq. We have debated and approved budgets for 2003 and 2004. We have reclaimed Iraq's place in the international community by attending the United Nations General Assembly and the Islamic Conference.

IGC members went to the Madrid donors conference, where they were instrumental in convincing the world to pledge assistance to the Iraqi people. IGC representatives went to Congress to support President Bush's economic package for Iraq.

The IGC has approved laws that will make Iraq's economy the freest in the region and speed the rebuilding of the country.

We supervised the reopening of Iraq's schools and universities in very difficult conditions. We are overseeing the restoration of Iraq's oil sector, where production capacity already has overtaken pre-war levels. We have restored the nationality of millions of Iraqis who had their citizenships stripped by Saddam. We have established a de-Baathification commission that will end the control of Saddam's Baath Party over all aspects of society. We also have started to track down and return the billions of dollars that he and his cronies hid abroad.

The best way to defeat the forces of terrorism in Iraq is to restore Iraqi sovereignty and empower the people to win back our country. Their desire to have a role in their governance must be respected by holding elections for a commission to write a new democratic constitution. The IGC should be expanded and developed into a provisional government so that Iraqis can share the burden of security and govern their own country while the constitution is drafted.

Iraqis are grateful to the people of the United States for the sacrifices you have made for our freedom. Too many brave citizens of both our countries already have made the ultimate sacrifice. The best way to return security to Iraq now is to return sovereignty to Iraqis quickly.
 
cite your source.

p.s. I bet the 10% of Iraqis that were put out of work when Bush dissolved the Army are grateful for the U.S. coloniziation :)
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Ahmad Chalabi is a member of the Iraqi Governing Council.
I think that the sentiment it expresses is probably quite well represented in the Iraqi population. The said, the author is the same gomer that told us Hussein was six months from a nuclear weapon. He's wanted in Jordan for bank fraud, his faction represents the members of the Iraqi ruling council who don't turn up at the meetings ('cause they live in europe). There are much better sources than this guy.
 
You have to resort to quoting the views of a convicted fraudster (who probably helped to fool us about WMDs to get us into Iraq) to paint a rosey picture?
 
Originally posted by SLClemens
You have to resort to quoting the views of a convicted fraudster (who probably helped to fool us about WMDs to get us into Iraq) to paint a rosey picture?

Does being convicted of bank fraud in absentia preclude him from having a view on the current conditions in Iraq?

How about disputing the words rather than the man. Are the things he stated is happening somehow now false because of his prior banking faults?

Can you show that the majority of Iraqi's don't care about his views as well?

What matters here are the words and whether or not they are true, and they are.
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Does being convicted of bank fraud in absentia preclude him from having a view on the current conditions in Iraq?

How about disputing the words rather than the man. Are the things he stated is happening somehow now false because of his prior banking faults?

Can you show that the majority of Iraqi's don't care about his views as well?

What matters here are the words and whether or not they are true, and they are.

Generally people with serious banking faults aren't very good with government budgets, either. More disturbing about the above is what Chalabi does not say, such as IGC members who don't show up for meetings, cannot get around to drafting a constitution, and are powerless to do much about Bagdhad's murder rate.

He is very right, I believe, that "Too many brave citizens of both our countries already have made the ultimate sacrifice. The best way to return security to Iraq now is to return sovereignty to Iraqis quickly." I think he'll be a bit disappointed should Iraq want full sovereignty over their oil, however. I wonder what we could do to convince Iraqis that we don't want to manage their oil as we see fit, so that they'll stop attacking us on this premise - or is there no point in hiding the obvious?
 
The only thing obvious I see here is your failure to acknowledge the contents of the article as fact.

You can shuck and jive all you like, but the statements are fact, and they do paint a picture of progress in government activity.
 
I think it would be prudent to take the man's words with a ton of salt. The fact that he said (wrote) the words is the only fact present. The letter was written specifically to try to persuade the US to allow broader powers for the interim government: it's intended audience was the US government; he wants something, so it behoves him to be diplomatic with his portrayal of the situation; he is one of the people who stands to gain most from turning over more powers to the interim government.

It is stunning that this is the man who was chosen to head the interim government in the first place. It may be that we decide to start turning over more powers, though I don't think it should be done untill elections of some sort take place, and I certainly don't think it should be done based on the testimony of this guy. Perhaps an election to chose representatives with powers to draft a Constitution?

Maybe the sentiments expressed in the letter (regardless of their source) are widespread among the Iraqi people. But this letter cannot serve as evidence for or against such a proposition.

Interesting post, thanks for putting it up.
 
Originally posted by Bry
I think it would be prudent to take the man's words with a ton of salt. The fact that he said (wrote) the words is the only fact present. The letter was written specifically to try to persuade the US to allow broader powers for the interim government: it's intended audience was the US government; he wants something, so it behoves him to be diplomatic with his portrayal of the situation; he is one of the people who stands to gain most from turning over more powers to the interim government.

It is stunning that this is the man who was chosen to head the interim government in the first place. It may be that we decide to start turning over more powers, though I don't think it should be done untill elections of some sort take place, and I certainly don't think it should be done based on the testimony of this guy. Perhaps an election to chose representatives with powers to draft a Constitution?

Maybe the sentiments expressed in the letter (regardless of their source) are widespread among the Iraqi people. But this letter cannot serve as evidence for or against such a proposition.

Interesting post, thanks for putting it up.

Do you dispute the facts that he has outlined in his article? And if so, can you show proof of his "lies"?
 
The fact that he said (wrote) the words is the only fact present.

Right, after a reread, I'll retract this statement.

The IGC's "strong" record of achievement? I don't dispute any of those things, though I think attributing all those things solely to the influence of the IGC is an extreme and self-aggrondizing exaggeration.

Better? :D

i agree with him especially when he says

Their desire to have a role in their governance must be respected by holding elections for a commission to write a new democratic constitution.
though I think this step must be taken prior to granting further autonomy to the IGC, much less restoring sovereignty.
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Do you dispute the facts that he has outlined in his article? And if so, can you show proof of his "lies"?

He writes "Iraqis are grateful to the people of the United States for the sacrifices you have made for our freedom."

Conclusions of a recent Gallup Poll of Baghdad suggest that this isn't a very honest assumption. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27979-2003Nov11.html )

"Only 5 percent of those polled said they believed the United States invaded Iraq "to assist the Iraqi people," and only 1 percent believed it was to establish democracy there."
 
Originally posted by SLClemens
He writes "Iraqis are grateful to the people of the United States for the sacrifices you have made for our freedom."

Conclusions of a recent Gallup Poll of Baghdad suggest that this isn't a very honest assumption. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A27979-2003Nov11.html )

"Only 5 percent of those polled said they believed the United States invaded Iraq "to assist the Iraqi people," and only 1 percent believed it was to establish democracy there."

Why they think we invaded has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they are grateful. His comments ARE an honest assumption.

"Hussein Khalili, an engineer at Mayo Clinic here who has many family members still in Iraq, says all of them agree that "it's ten thousand times better in Iraq today than before the war. Nearly everyone in Iraq is very grateful to America for getting rid of Saddam Hussein. For the first time, people have the freedom to do what they want to do."

"A Gallup Poll conducted last month showed that two-thirds of Baghdad residents believe Saddam Hussein's ouster has been worth the hardships suffered as a result. In addition, nearly 70 percent of Iraqis say they believe their lives will be better in five years as a result of the invasion."

" The very act of the poll, in which Iraqis were openly interviewed on the streets and in homes, was a stark illustration of the new freedom in Iraq."

"When I told a half dozen people Monday that I planned to write an article collecting these positive appraisals of Iraq, the response was unanimous: "That sure isn't what I'm hearing in the press these days."

http://www.mcgillreport.org/iraq_now.htm
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Why they think we invaded has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they are grateful.
If they are still grateful in 5 years then we'll have accomplished something. Hussein was a pig so, yeah they are happy to be rid of him.

"When I told a half dozen people Monday that I planned to write an article collecting these positive appraisals of Iraq,

You know that italicised section is almost the definition of yellow (partisan) journalism...isn't it?
the response was unanimous: "That sure isn't what I'm hearing in the press these days."
I thought they could get Fox news in Baghdad?
 

Forum List

Back
Top