Support NeoGAF

[SD-Ness]

from http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/

"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the
size of turnout in UN-NAMED COUNTRY's presidential election despite the
________ terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

According to reports from CAPITOL CITY of UNNAMED COUNTRY, 83 per
cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday.
Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the INSURGENTS.

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the INSURGENT
GROUP to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a
preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete
returns reaching here.

Fill in the appropriate names and it would be a report from Iraq.

But it isn't http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/31/2335/87390. Except
for the fill ins, it is a direct lift from the New York Times, September 4,
1967 about Vietnam."

 

[bob_arctor]

from http://rising-hegemon.blogspot.com/

"United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the
size of turnout in UN-NAMED COUNTRY's presidential election despite the
________ terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

According to reports from CAPITOL CITY of UNNAMED COUNTRY, 83 per
cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday.
Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the INSURGENTS.

The size of the popular vote and the inability of the INSURGENT
GROUP to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a
preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete
returns reaching here.

Fill in the appropriate names and it would be a report from Iraq.

But it isn't http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/31/2335/87390. Except
for the fill ins, it is a direct lift from the New York Times, September 4,
1967 about Vietnam."

Oh, I'm sure we can also find almost carbon copy coverage of the sham elections in El Salvador and Honduras in the 80's as well. On the other side of the coin, we could find articles completely illegitimazing the Nicaraguan elections in the 80's for the sole fact that they were not U.S. sponsored or endorsed when the reality was that they were easily the most legitimate elections, relatively speaking, of the entire region.

Essentially, had the Iraqi people ever overthrown Saddam on their own and then attempted to install their own "democracy" giving power to the people (with majority focus on social institutions, education, helping the poor etc.), thus excluding the U.S. from any stake at all (read: access to the oil), the media and administration would be blasting those elections on Sunday. They would have the "loony left" stance all of a sudden.

Notice though, how Bush basically attempted to incite Iran into a revolt in his State Of The Union:

And to the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you.

This allows the U.S. to take the high moral ground if it indeed does happen and thus allow us only to "assist" militarily rather then outright invade.

 

[Groder Mullet]

Essentially, had the Iraqi people ever overthrown Saddam on their own and then attempted to install their own "democracy" giving power to the people (with majority focus on social institutions, education, helping the poor etc.), thus excluding the U.S. from any stake at all (read: access to the oil), the media and administration would be blasting those elections on Sunday. They would have the "loony left" stance all of a sudden.

Yeah, the US would have HATED to have had a coup in Iraq. Where would we find a way to spend $300 billion and lose 1400+ soldiers?

And what "stake" does the US have in Iraqs oil? We certainly aren't getting it for free and whatever deals are cut to US firms, will NEVER approach the money spent to get rid of Saddam.

 

[bob_arctor]

Yeah, the US would have HATED to have had a coup in Iraq. Where would we find a way to spend $300 billion and lose 1400+ soldiers?

And what "stake" does the US have in Iraqs oil? We certainly aren't getting it for free and whatever deals are cut to US firms, will NEVER approach the money spent to get rid of Saddam.

Well, they hated the prospect of a coup in the 90's, that's for sure. And those economic sanctions that basically debilitated the people we're so graciously now liberating, ensuring they would actually be entirely dependent on the only "support" available to them (Saddam), gutting any shot at a genuine uprising, well, that definitely didn't help.

 

[AssMan]

We couldn't establish a government in Vietnam. How is that irony?

 

[Che]

nd what "stake" does the US have in Iraqs oil? We certainly aren't getting it for free and whatever deals are cut to US firms, will NEVER approach the money spent to get rid of Saddam.

Haha, what you don't understand is that your goverment doesn't care how much the taxpayer will lose, they only care how much the corporations will gain. Afterall the corporations are the ones giving them the big fat checks, not you the average joe. I love capitalism.

 

[Groder Mullet]

Haha, what you don't understand is that your goverment doesn't care how much the taxpayer will lose, they only care how much the corporations will gain. Afterall the corporations are the ones giving them the big fat checks, not you the average joe. I love capitalism.

The government doesn't care about racking up deficits? Surely you gest. Government officials care about getting re-elected. Period. Risking the economy with large deficits sure isn't a good way to go about this.

 

[Groder Mullet]

Well, they hated the prospect of a coup in the 90's, that's for sure. And those economic sanctions that basically debilitated the people we're so graciously now liberating, ensuring they would actually be entirely dependent on the only "support" available to them (Saddam), gutting any shot at a genuine uprising, well, that definitely didn't help.

We didn't support the Shiite uprising after the first Gulf War? Bush 41 encouraged the revolt and it nearly succeeded. We couldn't militarily support it because we would have lost the coalition.

 

[videogamer]

We couldn't establish a government in Vietnam. How is that irony?

The irony is how the elections were reported to be going great despite Viet Cong efforts. Of course, later on South Vietnam didn't turn out to be such a great place to live after all. Now, just replace Viet Cong with Iraqi freedom fighters.



http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/vietnam.asp

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

The government doesn't care about racking up deficits? Surely you gest. Government officials care about getting re-elected. Period. Risking the economy with large deficits sure isn't a good way to go about this.