Iraq Cons ution

[MannyIsGod]

I wonder how this will play out.

Shiite official: Iraq to draft cons ution on time

Do ent reportedly will be presented to National Assembly



BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Just hours before the latest deadline, a draft cons ution will be presented Monday to the Iraqi National Assembly, said Baha Al-Arajia, a Shiite member of the committee drafting the do ent.

But the committee is still working out the details, officials said.

The development comes as Iraqi negotiators appeared to resolve their differences on at least one contentious issue -- the role of Islam in a new cons ution.

On Sunday, a senior Iraqi official said a second deadline extension may be needed to reach agreement on a second sticking point -- federalism.

The cons ution's original deadline was August 15, but stumbling blocks in the negotiations prompted the transitional National Assembly to extend it to Monday.

Officials close to the negotiations said Kurds and Shiites had reached agreement, but as the midnight (4 p.m. ET) deadline approached, questions remained about whether the minority Sunni Arabs would accept the draft.

Kurdish and Shiite negotiators reportedly were hard at work selling their agreement to their Sunni counterparts.

National Assembly Speaker Hachim al-Hasani said Sunday that negotiators had clarified the role of Islam in the cons ution. He said the compromise language called Islam "a main source of legislation."

Hard-liners had urged calling Islam's Shariah law -- which imposes a series of restrictions on women -- "the main source" of legislation.

Iraqi officials also said Sunday that negotiators were "close" to a deal or, in some cases, had reached one.

Federalism -- which would split the country into as many as three autonomous regions -- is the other stumbling block delaying a draft cons ution.

The issue hinges on control of Iraq's oil reserves, which are mostly in the Shiite-majority south and the Kurdish-majority north.

Sunni Arabs, who live mostly in the oil-devoid central region of the country, oppose a federalist system that would keep oil profits in the hands of regional governments.

Some officials said the negotiators are seeking a solution that would keep control of oil revenues in a central government.

While pushing for autonomy, Kurdish leaders are shying away from the idea of the right to self-determination, a term that implies independence.

Some Shiites, particularly the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, have come out for an autonomous region in the south.

Sunni Arabs and other Shiites, particularly those in the ruling government, oppose strong decentralization and want a unified Iraq.

A referendum on the cons ution has been set for no later than October 15.

Quite frankly, I'm impressed that the Kurds have given up as much as they have to this point. The Sunni aren't going to get what they want, though. I really can't see both the Kurds and Shiites giving into the minority that has ruled with an iron fist for so damn long.


I really do hope that the Shiites simply give in, but this has the potential to go ugly with words like civil war still be tossed around. The Kurds can't be afraid of a Civil War, and I'm not sure they wouldn't welcome it. They are well situated in the north and are already basically their own country.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I like the federalist idea, with 3 states making up Iraq. Seems like the big squabble over that is oil rights. I guess the simple solution side of me says have one agency handling all of Iraq's oil and split all profit three ways.

The Sunnis need to realize though that they don't have Saddam's iron fist around anymore to pound the square pegs into round holes and it's time to comprimise.

Of course, knowing what I know about the history of Islam, that's about akin to asking the Hattfields and McCoys to get along for the greater good.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, I don't see why the Kurds would give up oil money anymore than the Sunnis. It just doesn't make sense to me.

[exstatic]

Imagine that the US forefathers were embroiled in the slavery dispute when they were trying to write the cons ution. Now imagine that it had been going on for a thousand years, and throw in a third party that doesn't like either side, and wants their own country. That's what you have in Iraq. It takes a special kind of arrogance to think that can be fixed by outsiders.

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Imagine that the US forefathers were embroiled in the slavery dispute when they were trying to write the cons ution. Now imagine that it had been going on for a thousand years, and throw in a third party that doesn't like either side, and wants their own country. That's what you have in Iraq. It takes a special kind of arrogance to think that can be fixed by outsiders.

[Jelly]

Imagine that the US forefathers were embroiled in the slavery dispute when they were trying to write the cons ution. Now imagine that it had been going on for a thousand years, and throw in a third party that doesn't like either side, and wants their own country. That's what you have in Iraq. It takes a special kind of arrogance to think that can be fixed by outsiders.

For the record, our forefathers were involved in a slavery dispute when they were writing the cons ution.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

For the record, our forefathers were involved in a slavery dispute when they were writing the cons ution.

his argument hinged more upon the 3rd party entering the fray

cuz thats who we're waiting on for this so-called 'cons ution' to be ratified

[Ocotillo]

Imagine that the US forefathers were embroiled in the slavery dispute when they were trying to write the cons ution. Now imagine that it had been going on for a thousand years, and throw in a third party that doesn't like either side, and wants their own country. That's what you have in Iraq. It takes a special kind of arrogance to think that can be fixed by outsiders.

Add to the mix that the French (that helped us in the war) then occupied the country, set up the elections and exerted influence over writing the cons ution.

[whottt]

The result will be a moderate government...you put a bunch of extreme opposing views together and the result is moderate.

The key to success in Iraq is womens rights...that's it right there, something so simple...

There is a certain beauty in this political struggle...the Sunnis and Kurds are now attatching women's rights as a staple of their constiutional requirement in order to make their views seem the most fair and humane...The chances of women getting equal rights is growing....not lessening.

You guys gotta remember...this is an Arab country...these are the guys whose concept of heaven is 72 virgins...equal rights for women in this country will be the ultimate victory...even bigger than it was in Afghanistan.


Women having equal rights in the New Iraq trumps all other political objectives that the US may have regarding the UN cons ution...

Men are war like mofos, there is no doubt...the violence so prevalent in these mideast countries is directly proportionate to their opression of women...these Arabs are 2000 years overdue for a pussywhipping of biblical proportions...win this coup and a we strike a huge blow to oppression and violence in the middle east.


I am not sure what the Kurds goals are...they are Sunnis...Turkey hates them, the Shias hate them, Iran hates them, the Arab Iraqis hate them....they are going to need a lot of friends to start their own country...if it must happen the US still achieves a blow for freedom in the middle east...just on a smaller scale.


The US had divisive issues as bad or worse than these....it took us much longer to get a cons ution than it is taking the Iraqis...we definitely need to be patient with them....and we need to stay there until their government asks us to leave.

[Clandestino]

how many years ago did women get the right to vote in the united states?

[spurster]

To maintain US support, it has to have women's rights. Texts that I have seen have a conflicting mixture of "Iraqis have rights" and "Islam[ic clerics] will rule", which makes it unclear.

[whottt]

To maintain US support, it has to have women's rights. Texts that I have seen have a conflicting mixture of "Iraqis have rights" and "Islam[ic clerics] will rule", which makes it unclear.

This is my contention as well...and this is one issue where I would prefer the US to exert pressure on the provisional government...

Truthfully...I don't think the US is taking as strong of a stand on this issue as it should...and I am worried about this....Yes I have heard some good news on this front...But to me the US should be making it clear that this subject isn't even debateable.

My question is where are all the liberals on this issue? All I see them protesting about is getting out....

Why aren't they protesting that this should be an absolute in the new country?

Instead of Camp Casey claiming this was an illigetimate and unnoble war...why aren't they trying to make it mean something, to insure something good comes out of it, regardless of the Bush admin's legitimacy in starting it?

It is possible.


They'd have my support.

This is why I say it seems like the left is more worried making sure Bush fails than America suceeds. It's a perfect chance to move more to the middle in a positive way...while still separating themselves from the Republicans...instead it's just more Bush bashing without much positive alternative.

[SWC Bonfire]

You guys gotta remember...this is an Arab country...these are the guys whose concept of heaven is 72 virgins...

Funny, I always assumed that Iraq had a great deal of Persians, not Arabs.

[Jelly]

Add to the mix that the French (that helped us in the war) then occupied the country, set up the elections and exerted influence over writing the cons ution.

The French did not exert any influence over our cons ution whatsoever. Quite the opposite. Our cons ution is 100% home grown and has, in fact, been the template and inspiration for cons utions all over the world including France, which borrowed many ideas for their cons ution from our Declaration of Independance and our Cons ution.

[whottt]

No...Iraq is an Arab country.

The Iranians were the Persians...and not only are the Persians not a majority in Iraq...Ethnic Persians are on the decline in Iran as well.

[Nbadan]

Am understanding correctly what I've been hearing about women's rights being or still being limited by this new cons ution.

How the White House Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Islamic Law

"The advance of women's rights and the advance of liberty are ultimately inseparable." – President Bush, 3/14/04

"President Bush has made the advance of women's human rights a global policy priority. … We all have an obligation to speak for women who are denied their rights to learn, to vote or to live in freedom." – First Lady Laura Bush, 3/8/05

"The commitment of this administration to women's rights in Iraq is unshakable." – Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, 3/9/04

"There can be no compromise on the principle that Iraqis can each have an equal role in the building of their country's future without regard to their ethnic or religious background or gender." – U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad, 8/8/05

VERSUS

According to Kurdish and Sunni negotiators, the US ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, proposed that Islam be named "a primary source" and supported a wording which would give clerics authority in civil matters such as divorce, marriage and inheritance.

If approved, critics say that the proposals would erode women's rights and other freedoms enshrined under existing laws. ... Dozens of women gathered in central Baghdad yesterday to protest against what the organiser, Yanar Mohammad, feared would be a "fascist, nationalist and Islamist" cons ution. "We are fighting to avoid becoming second class citizens," she said.

Think Progress

Not exactly the direction the U.S. wanted Iraq to go considering that Iraq was a secular nation under Saddam. Women could vote, go to school and even enter politics. Why are we fighting in Iraq again? To set up a Islamo- fascist nation? This is kinda like Nixon setting up a communist government in Vietnam and calling it a victory.

[Jelly]

The French did not exert any influence over our cons ution whatsoever. Quite the opposite. Our cons ution is 100% home grown and has, in fact, been the template and inspiration for cons utions all over the world including France, which borrowed many ideas for their cons ution from our Declaration of Independance and our Cons ution.

also, Ocitillo, the French did not occupy the U.S. after helping us in the war. In fact, I think they were pretty much out of here shortly after Yorktown. And they didn't set up our elections either. I don't think they even had their own elections at the time. In fact, they couldn't have since they still had a king. The only part you got right was the part about them helping us win the war. Where did you get the rest of that stuff?

[whottt]

How the White House Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Islamic Law



Think Progress

Women could vote.

these would be the same elections where Saddam would routinely get 100% of the vote right?

At worst...this regime will be an even trade for Saddam...

At best it can be something much better...

But that statement that things were better under Saddam has no credibility.

Look there is a legimate concern about women's rights in the new cons ution...why don't your kind help out and make this your political statement instead of just whining about how we should pull out....believe in something for a change.

[Ocotillo]

also, Ocitillo, the French did not occupy the U.S. after helping us in the war. In fact, I think they were pretty much out of here shortly after Yorktown. And they didn't set up our elections either. I don't think they even had their own elections at the time. In fact, they couldn't have since they still had a king. The only part you got right was the part about them helping us win the war. Where did you get the rest of that stuff?

Actually, I am aware that the French didn't do those things. The point trying to be made is comparing us to the French back then. How would the U.S. have looked if the French had taken the heavy handed approach we have in Iraq?

[Ocotillo]

But while we are comparing Iraq to the American Revolution.......

link

Cheney: Our Military Is Ragtag and Unorganized:
Whenever the viscous-goo-that-slouches-like-a-man known as Vice President Cheney slimes up to a podium to speak, flowers lose their petals, butterflies drop from the sky, and a pall of doom and darkness is cast throughout the land so that toddlers sense it in their chilled bones and begin to cry, in unison, uncontrollably. Cheney is our misanthropic government's master of dark arts, his purpose to offer visions of a world on fire the likes of which would make Satan himself scratch his balls' black van and mutter, "Those're goddamn fine flames, goddamn fine flames," itching for the end of the miracles of technology that keep Cheney alive so that the Vice President may finally die and rightfully join the devil by his side to assist in rule over the damned.

So it was that Cheney belched and spat puss at the gathered veterans at the National Convention of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. Amid his usual recitation of the myriad horrors that have afflicted the world since, well, he and Bush took office, Cheney offered this heartwarming anecdote about Iraq: "In Iraq, terrorists have slaughtered innocent people in marketplaces, in restaurants, in private homes, at police recruiting stations, in a hospital, and outside a mosque. They have beheaded bound men in front of cameras, and killed UN employees and international aid workers. Earlier this summer, as American soldiers were giving candy to children, a suicide bomber drove into the crowd, killing 18 boys and girls and an American soldier." Yes, Iraqis are serious about teaching their children not to take candy from strangers.

But beyond lessons in childhood safety, Cheney offered a truly bizarre take on the U.S. forces in Iraq. See, despite being the "best-trained, best-equipped" military in the world, the Americans in Iraq are really just the same scruffy lot that fought the American Revolution. Farted Cheney, "The victories in 1776 were few, and the condition of the Army was dreadful. By Christmastime our men were cold, hungry, and exhausted, and many of them didn't even have boots to wear. The volunteers were near the end of their rope, and thousands of enlistments were set to expire on New Year's Day. These men were bound and determined to leave, so the Continental Army was about to evaporate."

See? You get it? It's not that the administration's a bunch of stumble s who couldn't wipe their asses with a diagram and feces-finding tissue. It's that the lack of body armor and, oh, say, a plan is exactly what's needed so the troops really suffer for their country. It's a morale builder, not a soul wrecker.

It took a great leader, said Cheney, George Washington himself, to rally the bedraggled soldiers and rouse them to fight another day: "'My brave fellows,' he said, 'you have done all I asked you to do and more than could be reasonably expected; you have worn yourself out with fatigues and hardships; but we know not how to spare you. The present is emphatically the crisis, which is to decide our destiny.' One by one the men stepped forward. They could not let their country or their fellow soldiers down. Inspired by leadership and renewed in their strength, they stayed in the fight -- and America won the war." Get it? Bush is like Washington, right? And the Americans are just fighting the British all over ag...oh, , wait a second.

Ahh, see the little problem here is that, back in the day, the British army was the best-equipped, best-trained military in the Western world. And, you know, the American revolutionaries? , let's just let the Army tell the story: "A force of farmers and townsmen, fresh from their fields and shops, with hardly a semblance of orthodox military organization, had met and fought on equal terms with a professional British Army. On the British this astonishing feat had a sobering effect, for it taught them that American resistance was not to be easily overcome."

And if we're gonna go with this "holy , we're the Redcoats in Iraq" scenario, let's go whole hog. Here's how the Revolutionary War was viewed, at least partly, in England: To fight the war, "Britain had first to raise the necessary forces, then transport and sustain them over 3000 miles of ocean, and finally use them effectively to regain control of a vast and sparsely populated territory. Recruiting men for an eighteenth century army was most difficult. The British Government had no power to compel service except in the militia in defense of the homeland, and service in the British Army overseas was immensely unpopular." How did the British make up for the lack of recruits? By outsourcing to the Hessians. Mercenaries, they were called then. Today, they're "security companies" or "Halliburton."

If Cheney is breathing he's lying. Or he's insulting the United States Military once again by comparing them with a bunch of untrained, weakly-armed, barely cohesive bands of citizen-terrorists who were cobbled together to fight against an occupying power. Or he's the most ironic mother er in history.

Satan is licking his lips, waiting for Cheney's arrival. For such unmitigated, unapologetic evil is rare. Cheney will make a good viceroy and an even better chew toy for the Devil's hounds to tear into pieces, be healed again, and get ripped to shreds over and over for eternity.

[Jelly]

Actually, I am aware that the French didn't do those things. The point trying to be made is comparing us to the French back then. How would the U.S. have looked if the French had taken the heavy handed approach we have in Iraq?

I see. Didn't realize you were being facetious.

[Nbadan]

(AP) - The complete text of the draft Iraqi Cons ution, as translated from the Arabic by The Associated Press, part 1 of 12:

PREAMBLE

We the sons of Mesopotamia, land of the prophets, resting place of the holy imams, the leaders of civilization and the creators of the alphabet, the cradle of arithmetic: on our land, the first law put in place by mankind was written; in our nation, the most noble era of justice in the politics of nations was laid down; on our soil, the followers of the prophet and the saints prayed, the philosophers and the scientists theorized and the writers and poets created.

http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=557477

Check it out. It's even scarier than the short version.

Part 2: http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=557479

Part 3: http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=557484

Part 4: http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=557493

Part 5: http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=557513

Part 6: http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=105&sid=557529

[boutons]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch ...

shrub has failed miserably to provide water, gasoline, electricty, security. Whipping out a piece of paper is easy. Getting it ratified is harder. Enforcing it and adjudicating, by whom?, will be all but impossible.

But re-building Iraq that shrub's bogus war destroyed, that's very hard and very expensive. Shrub won't do it and he won't pay for it.
"Your cons ution's done. you, Iraq. I have to get on with my life."

====================================

August 24, 2005


A Cons ution? Iraqis Are Thinking About Their Lives First

By KIRK SEMPLE

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Aug. 24 - Ali Sami's hands were flying around his photocopy machine like a short order cook's. With customers waiting in his small Baghdad copy shop he was not about to pause for anything, especially not a question about Iraq's new draft cons ution.

"What cons ution are you talking about?" Mr. Sami, a Shiite, said sardonically. "We are fed up with this thing! We would prefer to solve our problems first, such as electricity, water and security. How come they gathered to approve the cons ution while Iraqis are slaughtered?"

As Iraq's political leaders met this week in the fortified Green Zone to try to resolve the remaining disputes over the draft, ordinary Iraqis everywhere were of various minds about what it all meant. The drafters turned in an incomplete do ent to the National Assembly on Monday and have given themselves until the end of Thursday to finish it.

At the more hopeful end of the spectrum of opinion, some Iraqis say they view the latest developments as a step toward creating a full and thriving democracy. But for others, caught in a struggle for survival amid war and doubtful public services, all the wrangling over abstract concepts could just as well be happening on Mars.

"What can I do with a cons ution if I have no water, gasoline and electricity?" asked Hanan Sahib, 29, a Shiite database operator at a telecommunications company in Baghdad, echoing Mr. Sami. The main problem, she added, was security, particularly for women.

Iraqi leaders and the Bush administration hope that a cons ution with widespread public support will help to legitimize democratic rule and undermine the Sunni-backed insurgency that is trying to topple the government and drive out the American forces.

In spite of the obvious sectarian divides among the country's political parties, and a sectarian tinge to some of the country's violence, a random sampling of ordinary Iraqis here and in several other cities this week revealed that sentiment about the cons ution often does not hew to any such divisions. In fact, many Iraqis say, sectarian allegiances rarely intrude on everyday life: Shiites marry Sunnis, Muslims shop alongside Christians, everyone waits in the same lines to get gasoline and suffers the same power and water shortages.

Some people, when asked about the cons ution, expressed particular concern about the very issues that are bedeviling negotiators, including the role of Islam in the cons ution and federalism. But most seemed to view the process as an abstraction beyond their control and of less immediate importance than the challenge of making it through the day.

"The cons ution is good because it represents a new birth and a new life that we have been waiting for," said Mohammad Jasim Kazem, 35, a Shiite building contractor in Baghdad. But amid more pressing concerns, he admitted, he had not had time to follow the process. "Frankly, I have been very busy with the problems of electricity and water because these things are very necessary for living," he said.

Patience with the current government, led by Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, has worn thin around the country as violence has worsened and public services have failed to improve significantly. Many people, in fact, say the performance of the central and provincial governments has done little to encourage faith in public leadership among a populace that is still reeling from the hardships of Saddam Hussein's iron rule.

"They are interested in their personal interests only and not in the public interest of Iraq and its people," said Haydar al-Saad, 34, a painter and a Shiite, while eating a snack in a sandwich shop in the southern city of Basra.

"I am not very convinced about what is going on behind the curtains," Shawkat Falih, 40, a Sunni street vendor in Baghdad said darkly. "The process should be visible and audible to the Iraqi people."

Early Tuesday morning, after the draft was delivered to the National Assembly, some Shiite communities in the south were apparently under the impression that the Iraqi parliament had agreed on a final draft. Television stations broadcast images of people dancing in the streets of the holy city of Najaf, a reaction that confounded others more attuned to the developments.

"I still don't understand why the people celebrated," said Imen Abdul Jalel, 38, a Shiite engineer in Najaf. "The negotiation is still running and they still have no deal."

But some, like Muhammad al-Azawi, 45, the Sunni owner of a busy electrical appliance shop in central Baghdad, saw the confusion as a sign that the democracy was under way, however haltingly.

"As long as the process is ongoing, it is a success to honest Iraqis," he said. "The compass is in the right direction."

Mohammad Hassan, 57, who read the text of the draft in a local newspaper, said it looked like it provided "enough guarantees to protect human rights," though he acknowledged that some people might fear what he called "the religious spirit" of the do ent.

"Maybe in the future, and after practicing freedom, people can change things," said Mr. Hassan, a Shiite chemical engineer. "We should not be afraid."

Reporting for this article was contributed by Ali Adeeb, Khalid al-Ansary, Thaier Aldaami and Omar Osama in Baghdad, Fakher Haider in Basra and Iraqi employees of The New York Times in Kirkuk, Mosul and Najaf