March 13, 2005

An interesting discussion over at

An interesting discussion over at Daily Kos about Iraq is occurring. Armando asks, " Is Iraq progressing? This weekend did not give strong indications that it is." Using a New York Times article to highlight what's going wrong in Iraq, he then asks," Is this pessimistic on my part? Or realistic?". I think Armando is being optimistic that the Iraqis will ultimately fail because then the Democrats can at least say they were right. And it is all about being right, right?


Just to let you know, he emphasizes these phrases from the article:
  • The deaths over the weekend came as the main Kurdish and Shiite political parties continued heated negotiations to form a coalition government, with the issue of the northern city of Kirkuk at the center of disagreements between the two sides . .
  • A senior official with the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, whose leader is the Kurdish nominee for president, said that the Kurds are fed up with putting off the issue of the future of Kirkuk. The winners of the Jan. 30 elections have come under criticism for stalling on the formation of a government. As talks drag on while the war continues, the confidence of the Iraqi people in their elected leaders is slowly ebbing. The first meeting of the national assembly is scheduled for Wednesday, but it is unclear whether the body will make any significant announcements about a new government. . . .
  • The discussions between the Shiites and Kurds have also underscored the powerlessness of the Sunni Arabs, who boycotted the elections or did not vote because of fear of retaliation by insurgents
Yes building a government is not easy. I am not denying any struggle or turbulence over in Iraq. For me the progress is the discourse being allowed between the Shittes and the Kurds who had no place other than to be exiled and reviled and killed by Sadaam's regime. The Sunni's, yes, are a minority; and yes they were underrepresented in the elections, but they ultimately chose to not have a part in the process. Their self appointed leaders were the ones who told the Sunni's to stay home.

So yes there are problems. But let me remind you, Democrat friends, that 2 years ago you said the Afghans could not be free; 3 months ago you said that Iraqi elections would be impossible; 2 months ago, freedom in Lebanon was incomprehensible. None of this is guaranteed to go well or even to succeed at all. But to give a man a taste of being part of the process and then removing that taste is harder than withholding it from a man who never dreamed that he could.

Martin Luther King, Jr.'s famous speech begins with the words, " I have a dream..." That revolution began with a dream. Our founding fathers also had a dream. A dream that not one man should reign because he was born in a certain family but that all men should be able to choose their leaders. It began with a dream. By Bush standing firm and allowing those in the Middle East to open their eyes to a possibility that for so many was not even imagined, he has given way for new dreams to be created. It began with a dream.

Did everything that MLK dream come true? Did our founding fathers idyllic hopes succeed? No, not completely. There is no utopian society made up of perfect men with perfect laws and perfect processes anywhere on this tiny planet. Death, war, riots, murder, are all results of men who took action to make their dreams reality. But for there to not been a dream at all, would we really want that? This is our history. The middle east will have theirs too. Maybe their history will include a great dream or two for Democracy.

Who knows? Is this optimistic on my part? Or realistic?


Posted by Jody at March 13, 2005 10:26 PM | TrackBack
Comments
Post a comment









Remember personal info?