U.N. agrees with U.S. on Iraqi elections
: The U.N. says June is too soon for Iraqi elections.
3 responses to “U.N. agrees with U.S. on Iraqi elections”
-
Excellent news. I always thought June was too soon, for the reasons given in the article. Iraq has a much better chance at a free democratic future now. It’s a miracle that the UN is being sensible about this. (I wonder if the Bush admin is actually engaging in ….diplomacy? You know, that activity they are supposed to be so bad at.)
-
The whole story’s not that great. Yes, the UN envoy said Sistani’s drive for immediate direct elections was impractical. He also said the US plan for regional caucuses is flawed, but offered no alternative plans.
This may require W to visit Iraq again to meet with the parties involved to tell them “Whatever!” Let the Iraqis hash out the electoral mechanics. I myself don’t really care what electoral mechanisms they devise; so long as Iraq doesn’t later devolve into religious tyranny. -
Yehudit: LOL. I actually don’t think that the Bushies were that bad at diplomacy. Judging from the data released thus far, it appears that Saddam bought most of the opposition. Money speaks louder than diplomacy.
Now, about that “Oil for Palaces” audit?
