Iraqi Constitution: Wes Clark warns of nuclear proliferation.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

How is that possible? Today, Wes Clark has outlined very serious consequences with Iraqs' new constitution. Its substance, or more accurately, its lack thereof, will mostly undermine regional stability and world security.

In the rush to push through a democratic "process" before the world stage, Clark warns of even greater regional conflicts. The Bush administration has instead compromised Iraqs ability to establish a unified self-governing 'democratic' country.

The constitution, Clark warns, may lay down the pretext for 3 self-governing states that could acually favor civil war. But even more ominous, in the absence of diplomacy and leadership, President Bushs' 'stay the course' policy is now leading the Middle East region and the world community towards nuclear proliferation.

___________________________________________________________

Iraq's geopolitical train wreck
by Wes Clark

Excerpt:

"...The United States was betting on the success of the democratic experiment in Iraq to defuse Iranian meddling. But Tehran's shadow keeps growing longer.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's jihadis are the only ones who have taken on Iran indirectly by declaring war on the Shiites. Neither Washington nor Arab capitals relish the idea of finding themselves aligned with al-Qaida's geopolitical objectives. Hence, the attraction of getting Iraq's Arab neighbors to take a more active role to prop up Baghdad. But long-time observers of the Iraqi scene seem to agree only a strongman can keep Iraq together. And that general is yet to emerge from the new Iraqi army. Such a figure would ensure that Iraq's three component parts stick together during a long transitory period.

As several countries have demonstrated over the past 50 years, there is no such thing as instant democratic capitalism.

"..The uncertainty of Iraq's future, and its destabilizing impact on the Middle East, has already gotten several regional players to think of a nuclear future for themselves. A British intelligence report says both Egypt and Syria have sought to obtain dual-use capabilities from Western countries to advance their nascent, drawing-board nuclear programs. The same intelligence sources say nuclear Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have frequently discussed a nuclear future for the Wahhabi kingdom; both nations have denied this at high levels. ..."

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/1849

___________________________________________________________

[LynnTheDem]

1. This "constitution" more likely to trigger civil war??! Who coulda known!

#1. bush will LIE AGAIN this week about his "PROGRESS" in Iraq;

MOST IRAQIS HAVE NOT EVEN SEEN THE CONSTITUTION THEY'RE TO VOTE ON.

Gee what "PROGRESS"!

It's expected to pass, because the VIOLENCE will keep Iraqis away from the voting booths.

Gee what "PROGRESS"!

Iraqis vote on 'invisible' constitution

Insurgency hampers distribution of crucial document as millions prepare to go to the polls this week...
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article318225.ece

#2. 2000 Americans dead...for an IRANIAN-STYLE ISLAMIC STATE of repressed women in IRAQ;

"Unmaking Iraq, the Constitutional Process Gone Awry,"

The Iraqi constitution as written will push that country toward full-scale civil war, a report from a nonprofit organization warns. Melissa Block talks with Robert Malley, director of the International Crisis Group's Middle East program.
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=1&id=3703

"It may well be more of a prelude to civil war than a step forward," Anthony H. Cordesman said in an analysis for the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The Bush administration endorsed Iraq's proposed new constitution yesterday, but analysts warned that some provisions can be interpreted to undermine everything from the distribution of political power to a secular judiciary, from women's rights to fair distribution of oil revenue.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/24/AR2005082402217_pf.html

There are, however, significant doubts about the religious nature of the new constitution...

"It is written by Islamists for Islamists"

Zainab and her friend Zahra, 37, are both deeply apprehensive about the effect the constitution will have on women's rights. Since "liberation" by US-led forces they have seen the growth in the power of Muslim clerics and the diminishing power of choice.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article318609.ece

The Iraqi constitution's downside for women
http://www.juancole.com/2005/09/iraqi-constitutions-downside-for-women.html

Iraqi Women May Lose Basic Rights Under New Constitution
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0723-06.htm

Iraq's Draft Constitution Is Said to Deepen Divide...will likely trigger civil war...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/26/AR2005092601442.html

UN issues warning over Iraq constitution

There are fears that Iraq's draft Constitution, due to go a referendum next week, could trigger the break up of the country and even spark a bloody civil war.
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2005/s1473209.htm
Americans Die for Sharia (ISLAMIC STATE) in Iraq

It's so Abdul the Iraqi can have six wives. It's so women can be forced to wear the abaya, alcohol can be banned, and sharia law – Muslim religious beliefs as interpreted by a council of mullahs and "grand ayatollahs" – can become the law of the land. As one of the Shi'ite clerics' representatives put it the other day:

"We don't want to see equality between men and women because according to Islamic law, men should have double of women. This is written in the Quran and according to God."
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=4774

#3. Iraq "constitution"...A Lose-Lose Referendum;

Five days before Saturday's referendum on Iraq's proposed constitution, the U.S. foreign policy elite appears both anxious and gloomy, increasingly worried that win or lose, the process will bring Iraq one step closer to civil war and, with it, the possible destabilisation of the wider region.

"We've looked for the constitution to be a national pact, and the perception now is that it's not," Gen. George Casey, the commander of U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, told lawmakers here last week. "Now this constitution has come out, and it didn't come out as a national compact that we thought it was going to be."

Makiya believes the combination of violence and the constitution threatens "the very idea and very possibility of an Iraq".

Barbara Bodine, a veteran diplomat and Middle East expert currently at Harvard University, whose appointment to a senior CPA post after the invasion was blocked by neo-conservatives in the Pentagon, echoed that view.

"The United States has 'Lebanonised' Iraq. It is ironic that a structure that worked so poorly for Lebanon is now the template for Iraq."
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1012-03.htm

#4. LUCKY Iraqi women! STONING FOR ADULTERY coming soon!

La Repubblica: "Putting it in a nutshell, there will be no more stoning of adulterous women, is that it?"

Al-Yasari, cleric al Sistani's spokesman:
"Well, it depends. In the case of married women whom eye witnesses can accuse of betraying their husbands, the punishment can only be that. But in any event there will be very few exemplary sentences, and they will always be issued after a fair trial."

Welcome to "liberated" Iraq – that’s what our troops are dying for, and that’s what you’re paying for. It’s medievalism with a "democratic" face.

http://www.iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/39110

STONING WOMEN! CIVIL WAR! VOTE for a "constitution" you've never read! That's PROGRESS if you're a bushbot idiot!

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

4. Glad you mentioned the ICG,.. Clark is a Board member

Glad you mentioned the ICG, since Wesley Clark is a http://anythingarkansas.com/arkapedia/pedia/Wesley_Clark/">Board member of the International Crisis Group, and likely contributed to the article.
_____________________________________________________________________

The Iraqi constitution as written will push that country toward full-scale civil war, a report from a nonprofit organization warns. Melissa Block talks with Robert Malley, director of the International Crisis Group's Middle East program.
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=1&id=3703">
_____________________________________________________________________[br />

[Tinksrival]

10. To be clear

You kinda posted this as Wes Clark's words but he posted an article from here:

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20051017-032524-4348r

He posted this article.....these are not his dirrect words.

[Texas_Kat]

13. You are exactly correct.

WKC posted the Arnaud de Borchgrave article "Commentary: Iraq's geopolitical train wreck" on his blog with the note:

"Here's a very thoughtful assessment of where we are in Iraq." and asked for comments.

Feel free to go to Securing America (http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/1849) and share your ideas.

[Tinksrival]

double post

dupe sorry

[Tinksrival]

11. wow a tripple

dupe sorry

[Mz Pip]

2. Absence of diplomacy and leadership

has been one of Clark's biggest concerns.

No one else seems to be able to talk about how dangerous this situation can become. Why? Because no one wants to confront the bad news. Repugs want to give the impression that BushCo is making the world safer.

Most of the Dems just seem to want to bury their heads in the sand and hope it all goes away.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

3. Dems are standing safely behind the sidelines, mostly mummed.

Only Clark has taken the leadership to confront the issues with a real solutions to address the debacle created by Bush and the PNACklehead neocons. Others have been free to attack, but duck behind the fascades of those who stand silent and supported the IWR.

[FrenchieCat]

5. That's because in this day and age....

the LESS you say, the better off you are politically. :eyes:

So what are those "leaders" Mark Warner, Hillary and Edwards saying about all of this? What do they think are the problems....and better yet, what do they think is the solution?

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

6. me thinks they be still tuning their strings,...

and be whistling to a different beat...



<[{[{{(((cricket))))) }}}>]]]}

................<[{[{{(((cricket)))))}}}>]]]}

they be out of tune, too

[rfkrfk]

7. did Clark endorse a 'no' vote on the Iraqi constitution? n/t

[Donna Zen]

8. Clark is part of the ICG

which criticized the process and result of this constitution. The feel the document/process was rushed because of bush's personal politics.

At this point, Clark is very worried about the "balance of regional power." Iran+S. Iraq with a bomb is really screwing the pooch. China and Russian nixed nuclear inspections.

I just wrote to Clark. I want to know what our "political" goals are. Ya can't find a solution unless you can identify the problem.

[rfkrfk]

9. did Clark have a better constitution to suggest? n/t

[FrenchieCat]

12. Don't understand that question of yours?

The Iraqi constitution...of which there was just one.... stinks...period. It is decisive, and it will make matters worse instead of better.

I don't think in this case one has to write up an entire constitution in order to criticize what this one will do....does one? :shrug:

How long did the American constitution take to ratify?

Certainly this constitution wasn't even written by truly democratically elected officials. The whole thing is nothing but a joke.......problem is the joke is not funny and will cost many more lives than it needed to.

[rfkrfk]

15. Clark has a tricky arguement to make

Clark's position seems to be:

the constitution is no good,
but I don't have an alternative,
I have {or had} no recomendation on how to vote,
the process was fraudulant, and/or, the timing is wrong

IMO, the 'timing is wrong', as a position,
always seems lame.

My recommendation to WC is:

change your stated position,
FROM, {the stuff discussed above}
TO, 'President Bush is a piece of shit'.


some dates

US Declaration of Independence, 1776
revolutionary war formaly ends, 1783
atricles of confederation, 17??-17??
constitutional convention, 1787
ratified, 1788
first Congress meets, 1789

[Donna Zen]

17. Putting words in General Clark's mouth

makes for much sound without substance.

Google on the other hand works:

At the outset of the drafting process in June-July 2005, Sunni Arab inclusion was the litmus test of Iraqi and U.S. ability to defeat the insurgency through a political strategy. When U.S. brokering brought fifteen Sunni Arab political leaders onto the Constitutional Committee, hopes were raised that an all-encompassing compact between the communities might be reached as a starting point for stabilizing the country. Regrettably, the Bush administration chose to sacrifice inclusiveness for the sake of an arbitrary deadline, apparently in hopes of preparing the ground for a significant military draw-down in 2006. As a result, the constitution-making process became a new stake in the political battle rather than an instrument to resolve it.

Rushing the constitution produced two casualties. The first was consensus. Sunni Arabs felt increasingly marginalized from negotiations beginning in early August when these were moved from the Constitutional Committee to an informal forum of Shiite and Kurdish leaders, and have refused to sign on to the various drafts they were shown since that time. The text that has now been accepted by the Transitional National Assembly, in their view, threatens their existential interests by implicitly facilitating the country's dissolution, which would leave them landlocked and bereft of resources.

The second casualty was the text itself. Key passages, such as those dealing with decentralization and with the responsibility for the power of taxation, are both vague and ambiguous and so carry the seeds of future discord. Many vital areas are left for future legislation that will have less standing than the constitution, be more vulnerable to amendment and bear the sectarian imprint of the Shiite community given its likely dominance of future legislatures.

ICG



Assuredly the ICG has produced a critical document not a constitution itself, but why should anyone or any organization outside of Iraq write Iraq's constitution?

How about this: where's the Iraqi constitution that you wrote? Will it include a more balanced and less incendiary set of positions for guiding a country? Or maybe you're into oppression of women and ethnic violence. Until we see a post of substance rather than bashing of Clark for his lack of public scatological language, we'll never know; now will we?

[rfkrfk]

18. since I am not contending that the current Iraq constitution is flawed

I feel no need to offer a substitute.

about the political infomercial you pasted,
I just don't see the Sunnis as some 'special status group'.
I am aware that they may argue differently.


I am getting tired of:

the '???' is inappropriate and ill timed,
and in responce I offer no substitute.
I additionally non-respond by not
suggesting as to what the concerned parties should do,
except for more delay and consulation with the uninvolved.

as a political stance.

[karynnj]

20. Pretty strange recommendation

change your stated position,
FROM, {the stuff discussed above}
TO, 'President Bush is a piece of shit'.

Clark is trying to articulate what the problems are - Solutions, when you have no ability to implement them are very hard to craft. The idea that the Democrats need detailed alternative plans is BOGUS - especially when no one is asking for the administrations plan.

People like Clark, Kerry and Feingold are offering possible Democratic positions. They are correctly avoiding anything as abysmal as recommending the Iraqis vote against the constitution - which I have problems with, but Americans should not be involved on either side.

[rfkrfk]

21. consider the US when the constitution was adopted

states had militias running around
women had no special stated rights
toothless/provisional gov't being replaced
slavery
no guarantee of religious freedom

Except for the slavery and religion part, does that sound kinda familiar?
You have to start somewhere.

I just don't like...

I predict the actions of 'insert name here'
will cause problems, vote for me.

as a political stance.

[Dread Pirate KR Read]

14. It's not for the US to write, nor anyone else other than Iraqis

But it's clear that Bu$hCo had a major influence in rushing the construct of the Iraqi Constitution, which in the end will doom any hope towards the establishment for a legitimate government in Iraq. Without dialogue between the regional countries, like Iran and Syria, they will continue to compromise progress towards a stable unified country for all Iraqis.

[Selatius]

16. Off-topic: I find the term "democratic capitalism" to be funny

Capitalism, by nature, is where resources are controlled by private interests for private gain. There is nothing democratic about capitalism. If those same resources were administered in a democratic manner for the benefit of everybody, not just a relative few who control such resources, it wouldn't be considered capitalism. It would more resemble socialism instead.

[Sparkly]

19. I think one's an economic system, the other a form of government.

This country is both a democracy (or democratic republic as we're so often reminded) and capitalist. However, I think it only works with a dose of socialism, which we've long had, much to the chagrin of many Republicans today.