Attacks mar Iraqi vote build-up

[Be Brave]

There has been another day of violence across Iraq, as the country prepares for Sunday's election.

Bombs and gun battles mainly in Sunni Muslim areas killed at least a dozen Iraqis and a US marine, while a clutch of polling stations were also hit.

Rebels have urged voters to boycott the poll, threatening more attacks.

<snip>

Militant groups called on Iraqis to boycott the polls, a day after US President George Bush urged voters to "defy the terrorists".

The militant Army of Ansar al-Sunna said in a statement that Iraqis who vote "will have only themselves to blame" as it threatened further attacks.

Another insurgent group, led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, released a video showing the execution of a man it said worked as a senior aide to interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.

<snip>

The violence has led to many candidates campaigning in secret, without revealing their names.

The BBC's Paul Wood, who accompanied two candidates campaigning in Baghdad, says people are taking seriously the threats by Sunni militants to wash the streets with candidates' blood.

"I will not vote in these elections. Why should I? No-one did anything for us," computer engineer Ali Jasem, who lives in Baghdad's Sadr City slum, a Shia Muslim area, told Reuters.

"The streets are horrible. There is no electricity, no water. No human can live in our conditions and yet they expect us to vote."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4213709.stm

[cliss]

1. There's the statement of the year:

"No human can live in our conditions and yet they expect us to vote". Mr. Jasem is right.

But what does Bush care? This election is for American consumption anyway. It's not meant for the Iraqis. If the Americans can be convinced that "Democracy" is on the way, that "liberation" is right around the corner, that "freedom" is just about here, then Bush gets the green light to continue.

Even if it's a complete sham, which it is, if they use Diebold voting machines, and the candidates are all US puppets, and they totally rig the election, what difference does it make?

None at all, if the viewers in TV land sorta get the idea that something "American" is being exported, they're happy.

[ultraist]

2. Oh, but you are wrong, Bush is "spreading freedom."

"I will not vote in these elections. Why should I? No-one did anything for us," computer engineer Ali Jasem, who lives in Baghdad's Sadr City slum, a Shia Muslim area, told Reuters.

"The streets are horrible. There is no electricity, no water. No human can live in our conditions and yet they expect us to vote."

Show election
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A show election is an election that is held purely for show, that is, without any significant political purpose. Show elections are a common event in dictatorial regimes that still feel the need to establish some element of public legitimacy.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_election"

[NYC]

3. Attacks mar the election?

Is this meant to imply that without violence, the election would be fine? 7,000 candidates on a ballot revealed 3 days before the election. Parties listed in possibly unidentifiable ways. No real campaigns.

So it would have been a perfect, fair, open election without the attacks?

[ultraist]

4. It's not just the violence

Democratic process?

Improper ballots
Voter Suppression and intimidation (the polls are too dangerous to go to, people cannot get to the polls)
Voter Suppression
No campaigning
Secret candidates