Arab Reaction to the invasion of Iraq

[Daniel]

I've decided to start this thread because of an issue I think should be talked about, which was brought up in the other thread. That being how does the rest of the world, notably those not within the United States or another western country feel about the US invasion in Iraq.

I'll just the discussion with some quotes from Time Magazine's article about the three year anniversary of the Invasion.

I know, I'm just an American who obviously has no bearing to grasp the complexities of another world (lol) but its surprising to see what other Arabs, especially those in the press have to say about i:

The question is was the invasion of Iraq worth it:


HISHAM KASSEM Sadly, I have to say yes. It is difficult to commend such a bloody scene. But it achieved something useful. Parallel to the chaos and bloodshed, there is a political process evolving in Iraq. Bloodshed is the price of the transition from Saddam's psychopathic dictatorship. The losses would have been higher had Saddam stayed on. You could easily see that regime lasting another 30 years, under his sons and top generals. Negotiating with Iraq was not an option. There had to be a military intervention. You have a bloc of 22 countries in the Arab world dominated by authoritarianism and dictatorship. It is not a bloc you could engage politically and pressure for reform. By military intervention, the U.S. is able to pressure the region into adopting the reforms we are beginning to see across the region that might avert many countries from becoming failed states. The world cannot put up with state failure in the backyard of the world's oil fields, Israel and Europe.

> Democracy activist Kassem is vice chairman of the Egyptian daily newspaper Al-Masry al-Youm

MICHAEL YOUNG Yes, Iraq was worth it, because it exposed more clearly than ever the brutal underpinnings of Arab nationalist rule. From an Iraqi perspective, there is much uncertainty today but also no nostalgia for the savagery of Saddam's rule. From the U.S.'s perspective, the struggle to stabilize Iraq will discourage similar endeavors in the future, but the war also highlighted how subcontracting American interests in the Middle East to supposedly stable Arab dictatorships is no longer viable. The shoddy edifice that U.S. soldiers so quickly dismantled in Iraq is no less present in countries Washington considers allies. Iraq may or may not be the pivot of a regional democratic resurgence, but it is a reminder to Americans that much can be gained by challenging the debilitating status quo if the aftermath is gotten right. Unless democracy becomes a cornerstone of Washington's efforts, its alliances will seem more than ever built on a mountain of illegitimacy.

> Young is opinion editor at Lebanon's Daily Star newspaper

CHIBLI MALLAT Yes, the U.S.-led war to get rid of the dictatorship was worth it for most Iraqis and for those who, like me, supported them against one of the most ruthless governments in modern history. But for the young Marine from Oklahoma or the child in Iraq blown up this past week or the one before, it wasn't. Better things must obtain from the demise of Iraq's dictatorship, even if it is largely accepted now that the end of Saddam's rule represents a positive precedent for Iraq and the modern Middle East. Democratic Iraq, like democratic Germany or Japan, might make all the sacrifices less painful.

> Mallat is an Arab democracy campaigner and a candidate for Lebanese President

It's interesting to note that all three of this people are from Middle Eastern countries and represent the only Arab contributers to this particular piece.

So, I guess the question for discussion is whether or not we as members of Western Society are looking at the issue of Iraq in terms of good for the people from an objective standpoint?

Or are these three people rather anomalies that somehow don't exist in their respective countries? and yes, this question is directed at you XTC.

[xtc]

Lol an American magazine writes an article on the Iraq war and finds 3, count em, 3 Arabs who support it. Maybe this is one of the stories Bush and co. paid to have written.

The fact you are naive enough to ask this question shows how out of touch you are with the Arab world. Spend sometime on a Muslim forum and find out what Arabs think of the Iraq invasion, better yet go to a Mosque and ask them.

[Daniel]

Spend sometime on a Muslim forum and find out what Arabs think of the Iraq invasion, better yet go to a Mosque and ask them.

^

I do actually...

I wanted to discuss it with the people here.

[Hog]

Arab rection..heh. Boner with a turban.

[Warriorbird]

Daniel... you're more personally objective than this and you know it. Keep playing rah rah if you want though.

[Parkbandit]

PEOPLE:

IF IT ISN'T BAD NEWS OUT OF IRAQ, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

THANKS,

THE MEDIA

[Warriorbird]

Funny. Here I thought that was a media puff piece suggesting just the opposite...that there's a ridiculous amount of conservative bias.

Here I thought you quit posting in Politics. Oh...wait.

[Valthissa]

The fact you are naive enough to ask this question shows how out of touch you are with the Arab world. Spend sometime on a Muslim forum and find out what Arabs think of the Iraq invasion, better yet go to a Mosque and ask them.[/quote]

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/166.php?nid=&id=&pnt=166&lb=hmpg2

better yet, ask Iraqi's themselves - oh wait, that's happening all the time.

Interesting, eh? 77% of Iraqi's think ousting Saddam was worth the price and 64% think the country is headed in the right direction. Those numbers may be inconvenient for people who have a prejudged this issue.

But I'm certain with a little research anyone opposed to the war can come up with polling results of Iraqi's that show something different.

I hope this data meets WB's criteria for objective....

C/Valth

[Wezas]

I'm assuming you're using some kind of translation tool to view the Muslim forums?

Or are these american/british Muslims talking on forums. I'd be more interested in people that actually live in the countries we've invaded.

[HarmNone]

Many people in Islamic countries speak very good English, so it wouldn't be odd to find a forum to discuss Islamic issues with these people.

I don't care who you ask, or in what country you ask, you're going to have varying opinions of what's going on, just as we have varying opinions here. Each person sees things from his/her own particular view. If you've lived in these countries, or if you are, yourself, Islamic, your view might be very different than that of a Baptist from Iowa (nobody in particular in mind here) who's never seen the shores of another country.

[xtc]

The fact you are naive enough to ask this question shows how out of touch you are with the Arab world. Spend sometime on a Muslim forum and find out what Arabs think of the Iraq invasion, better yet go to a Mosque and ask them.


http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/166.php?nid=&id=&pnt=166&lb=hmpg2

better yet, ask Iraqi's themselves - oh wait, that's happening all the time.

Interesting, eh? 77% of Iraqi's think ousting Saddam was worth the price and 64% think the country is headed in the right direction. Those numbers may be inconvenient for people who have a prejudged this issue.

But I'm certain with a little research anyone opposed to the war can come up with polling results of Iraqi's that show something different.

I hope this data meets WB's criteria for objective....

C/Valth

lol, so a few Americans stand beside an American soldier and ask them what they think about the American invasion. Wonderful, fantastic, we couldn't be happier......can we go now ?

As for the poll:

"Polling was conducted January 2-5 with a nationwide sample of 1,150"

[Daniel]

Funny. Here I thought that was a media puff piece suggesting just the opposite...that there's a ridiculous amount of conservative bias.

Here I thought you quit posting in Politics. Oh...wait.

Sorry. I forgot to post the actual article, but the majority of the quotes from the intellectuals they asked are against the war.

I just found the above quoted exceprts because they represented the only non western respondents.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1176275,00.html

[DeV]

I don't care who you ask, or in what country you ask, you're going to have varying opinions of what's going on, just as we have varying opinions here. Each person sees things from his/her own particular view. If you've lived in these countries, or if you are, yourself, Islamic, your view might be very different than that of a Baptist from Iowa (nobody in particular in mind here) who's never seen the shores of another country.Agreed. Considering the Arab world was united in opposition to an invasion of Iraq at one time it would only make sense for the tides to turn when the outcome is deemed (somewhat) favorable.

[Valthissa]

lol, so a few Americans stand beside an American soldier and ask them what they think about the American invasion. Wonderful, fantastic, we couldn't be happier......can we go now ?

As for the poll:

"Polling was conducted January 2-5 with a nationwide sample of 1,150"



I missed where it said the poll was conducted either by americans or in the presence of soldiers (I'll go back and look for that this evening).

The sample size relates to the margin of error, in this case 3% - I'm sure you know that.

Other than that, glad to see you are open to information from outside sources, like posters here on the PC. Assuming you're trying to communicate with other posters, I suggest you at least attempt to make a substantive argument.

I said in my original post that I was sure that those opposed to the war in Iraq could uncover recent polls of Iraqi's that show the opposite of what I linked to here. In fact, I intend to look for some more data on Iraqi opinion polling when I get the chance.


C/Valth

[Latrinsorm]

Dishonest reasons were given to start the war. It was greed for power by US and UK to control oil rich regions, and the last thing on their plate was freedom, facts, humanity. The result was death, distruction, poverty and disorder.

Mohammed Farhat
Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia

This is from the reader response section, so it could just as easily be Mo Franken from Al's Tavern, South Carolina, but I thought it was worth noting.

Also, C/Valth is right (as usual) and for all xtc's posturing about how "wet behind the ears" Daniel is, it's pretty surprising that he feels the need to start his posts with "lol" and doesn't produce any sort of actual counterpoints besides wildly inaccurate character attacks. I *agree* with Daniel on this point and I managed to find (disputable) evidence against his point.

[Warriorbird]

That's a very different question than whether they want the US to still be there, Valthissa. But, then again, I'm sure you don't want to research that one or judge tribal prejudice in the "polling" because it's not so easily quantifiable then, is it?

[Daniel]

This is from the reader response section

I don't think I've ever meant to suggest that there aren't Iraqi's or arabs that do not approve of the Us presence (wtf, sp?) in Iraq. Nor do I believe that they don't have justification for feeling the way they do.

The question is whether or not those people share the same belief as everyone else in Iraq, or do they represent just themselves, their sect, their neighborhood or whatever else.



That's a very different question than whether they want the US to still be there

You're right it is, and I think the above question is rather loaded. I don't believe for a second that a single person in Iraq relishes the notion of an outside presence in their country, American or not. The imperative questions are whether or not that presence was *neccessary* and whether or not it is neccessary at this point in time.

I'm personally beginning to believe that we need to be stepping back our presence in Iraq to the point that we are still able to provide security without effectively controlling. However, I'm not a strategist and I'm not even sure this is possible.

Also, for all I know things are already happening that way, as the news has reported that several areas have been handed over to Iraqi control. I'm just inclined to think that whichever areas have been handed over were the more stable and ultimately had less of a need for it.

[Warriorbird]

It is a lot easier to run death squads against Sunnis in areas we've given up control of.

[xtc]

I missed where it said the poll was conducted either by americans or in the presence of soldiers (I'll go back and look for that this evening).

The sample size relates to the margin of error, in this case 3% - I'm sure you know that.

Other than that, glad to see you are open to information from outside sources, like posters here on the PC. Assuming you're trying to communicate with other posters, I suggest you at least attempt to make a substantive argument.

I said in my original post that I was sure that those opposed to the war in Iraq could uncover recent polls of Iraqi's that show the opposite of what I linked to here. In fact, I intend to look for some more data on Iraqi opinion polling when I get the chance.


C/Valth

I did a little research the firm that did the polling is a US firm based out of D.C. The polling was done during the Iraqi election so they polled people who were voting. Polls guarded by US soldiers with guns. It is a rather small sample and considering how chaotic Iraq is it would be tough to even assess a margin of error. The poll was funded by The Stanley Foundation which has links to the Bush Administration. The only other firm to do polling was International Republican Institute who this polls refers to and who also have been tied to Bush.

I think I made a substantive argument.

I don't think a lot of other firms are doing polling in Iraq. They have bigger problems to worry about.

[xtc]

Here is a poll done by the University of Maryland and Zogby International. They surveyed 6 Arab nations.

"Only 6% thought spreading democracy was an objective in the war in Iraq, while 76% thought control of oilfields was important, and 68% believed support for Israel was the key motivating factor."

"Seventy-eight per cent of people questioned believed the Iraq war had resulted in more terrorism than before, while 58% said it brought less democracy, with only 9% believing it enhanced democratic development.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B0E3E94-3394-4763-8911-29745BDF7723.htm

[Valthissa]

Here is a poll done by the University of Maryland and Zogby International. They surveyed 6 Arab nations.

"Only 6% thought spreading democracy was an objective in the war in Iraq, while 76% thought control of oilfields was important, and 68% believed support for Israel was the key motivating factor."

"Seventy-eight per cent of people questioned believed the Iraq war had resulted in more terrorism than before, while 58% said it brought less democracy, with only 9% believing it enhanced democratic development.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/0B0E3E94-3394-4763-8911-29745BDF7723.htm

Fascinating stuff. Only 6% of the people in 6 Arab nations (not including Iraq) think Iraqi's are better off after the fall of Saddam (the link in this post) but 77% of Iraqi's think they are better off after Saddam's departure (the link in my previous post). That's a lot of variation to explain - I'll leave it to someone that knows much more about arab politics than I do.

The University of Maryland is heavily involved in both polls. As far as I could tell, in the poll I linked to KA Research did the actual polling (they are in Turkey) assisted by the DC firm and the university.


Daniel's original question:

'The question is was the invasion of Iraq worth it' (as perceived by Arabs)

seems to be very difficult to accurately measure at this time.


I feel certain that we are too close in time to have any meaningful answers to the actual result as to whether Iraq will turn out to be better off because of the american invasion. I'm also certain that over the next 50 (or more) years it will appear at times to have been a positive event in the middle east and at times a negative one.

This may help clear up margin of error calculations:

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm

The key to sampling is getting a random sample - without a random sample you can't generalize the results to a larger population. It takes a surprisingly small raw number of data points to produce a study (check the difference between a population of 2 million and 20 million at a confidence interval of 3, for example). It's not trivial to collect a random sample, so it's not out of the question that either or both polls don't accurately reflect arab opinion.


C/Valth

oh, WB - my sense is that no one wants to be occupied and tribal prejudice in polling is self evident in the results of the poll I linked to. Those are certainly different questions than the one posed by Daniel.

[Alfster]

It's not hard to find different results from polls on anything...

surveys really do mean jack shit. Any anonymous one that was forced upon me in highschool was always answered with a random coloring of a random letter just to get the damn thing done so I could sleep.

Oh, and I also am an eskimo according to those polls.

[xtc]

Another interesting note is that The Stanley Foundation who funded the Iraq poll that Valthissa posted, have ties to the US Department of Defence. The Stanley Foundation has also funded research into drugs being implanted directly into your brain. Some people believe these drugs are mind control agents.

[Valthissa]

Another interesting note is that The Stanley Foundation who funded the Iraq poll that Valthissa posted, have ties to the US Department of Defence. The Stanley Foundation has also funded research into drugs being implanted directly into your brain. Some people believe these drugs are mind control agents.

This is where you lose me. The World Public Opinion organization posts where they get their funding from.

WPO is made possible by the generous support of:
Ford Foundation
JEHT Foundation
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Stanley Foundation
Calvert Foundation
Circle Foundation

anybody that clicked the link could read that. Is it relevant to the accuracy of the poll?

Zogby is a for profit company, I'm sure they take money from anybody. Is that relevant to the accuracy of the poll taken for Al Jazeera?

I suppose the point could be that the Stanley Foundation is funding some strange research, but that would seem to be a topic for another thread.

C/Valth

[Daniel]

Polls guarded by US soldiers with guns.

^

No one made them vote...

[Kranar]

It's not trivial to collect a random sample, so it's not out of the question that either or both polls don't accurately reflect arab opinion.


And that is the key to understanding the phenomenon behind why statistics often contradict one another. One study says 50 percent, another study says 60 percent, another study says 40 percent, so on so forth...

The most common phenomenon for why this happens is known as a selection effect, in particular a selection bias between those willing to participate in a survey and those who are not.

Not that I know whether Iraqi's are in favour of the occupation or not, and perhaps they very much are in favour and appreciative, but I'd say that given the overall very chaotic environment, there would definitely be subtle selection biases between those willing to participate in a survey, and those who are not willing to, or simply unable to participate.

I'd be skeptical of any general Iraqi population poll at this stage, be it in favour of U.S. occupation or against U.S. occupation.

[Back]

I'd like to hear the everyday Iraqi on the streets opinion. People trying to make a living like you and me.

[Alfster]

I'd like to hear the everyday Iraqi on the streets opinion. People trying to make a living like you and me.

One simple solution, head over there and ask yourself.

[Sean of the Thread]

Polls aside I myself am 100% CERTAIN that they would rather have a temporary US occupation as opposed to being chained upside down and having their testicles blow torched because they are on Hussein's shit list or failing at the olympics. Personally I'd rather been a victim of Hussein's chemical attacks on his own people. My balls.. are afterall.. are my balls.

[Back]

One simple solution, head over there and ask yourself.

I don't see you buying a fucking ticket or enlisting in your cause. I have a friend over there. I'll ask her.

[Alfster]

I don't see you buying a fucking ticket or enlisting in your cause. I have a friend over there. I'll ask her.

You also don't hear me pondering what Iraqi's think.

Plus, the military hates stoners.

[Back]

That you don't care what Iraqi's think speaks of your ignorance to the entire thing.

Oh, also, I heard they lowered the standards for enlistment recently.

[Alfster]

That you don't care what Iraqi's think speaks of your ignorance to the entire thing.



In general with politics I'm quite apathetic and it suits me fine. .

Think I said that myself in another thread. I support the war merely because my friends are there - I support them, therefore I feel I should support the war.

[StrayRogue]

Personally, I dislike Republicans and conservatives less over people who just don't give a shit because they at least have chosen to have an opinion.

Apathy is the most retarded solution.

[Warriorbird]

Stoner Republicans are just as bad as self hating liberals, Alfster. Stop deluding yourself.

[xtc]

This is where you lose me. The World Public Opinion organization posts where they get their funding from.

WPO is made possible by the generous support of:
Ford Foundation
JEHT Foundation
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Stanley Foundation
Calvert Foundation
Circle Foundation

anybody that clicked the link could read that. Is it relevant to the accuracy of the poll?

""This study was made possible by a grant from the Stanley Foundation"

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/jan06/Iraq_Jan06_rpt.pdf

He who pays the piper calls the tune.


Zogby is a for profit company, I'm sure they take money from anybody. Is that relevant to the accuracy of the poll taken for Al Jazeera?

The poll was doesn't for Al Jazeera, they just published the results as did some US newspapers. Zogby and The University of Maryland did the study.

Zogby doesn't have ties to the Bush Administration or the Department of Defence.


I suppose the point could be that the Stanley Foundation is funding some strange research, but that would seem to be a topic for another thread.
C/Valth

They are working with the DOD on some strange drug research, it shows they are in bed with the DOD.

[xtc]

Polls guarded by US soldiers with guns.

^

No one made them vote...

No vote, no rational card, no food.(reported in New York Times Jan 31, 2005)

"In Fallouja, polling stations were set up "at centers that distribute food, water and cash payments to residents whose homes were devastated by the offensive" (reported in LA Times Jan 31, 2005)

[Tea & Strumpets]

The Stanley Foundation has also funded research into drugs being implanted directly into your brain. Some people believe these drugs are mind control agents.

Admit it! You are the "some people". Could I read the source on that information so I can see if there is ANY factual basis for that conclusion?

I am pretty sure you saw this on a Twilight Zone and are confused about the source.

[xtc]

Admit it! You are the "some people". Could I read the source on that information so I can see if there is ANY factual basis for that conclusion?

I am pretty sure you saw this on a Twilight Zone and are confused about the source.


Lol I am not the some people and it isn't my conclusion.

Here is the Boston Globe article on the drug implants:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/26/drug_implant_offers_hope_spurs_worry/

"David Oaks, an Oregon activist and director of a group of current and former patients called Support Coalition International, said he sees the implant as a threat to human rights.

"We're calling it the mind-control implant," Oaks said in an interview. "This really conjures up images from science fiction, that you could implant something in the human body that would affect it for a year."

"I've been on the sharp end of the needle, and it's a nightmare," said Oaks, who received antipsychotic medication against his will when he was an undergraduate at Harvard in the 1970s. "It's just a prettier lobotomy."

[Tea & Strumpets]

They aren't creating "mind control agents", though.

The argument in that article is that the drug implants could theoretically be used to force psychiatric patients to take their medication, and the guy is arguing that it's basically the same thing as a lobotomy.

Just like the guy admits in the article, saying "mind control" conjures up visions of science fiction (not the mental patients that he is arguing for). I think he raises a few valid concerns of things to watch out for in the future, but the company isn't doing anything diabolical with this research in my opinion. It's certainly not the kind of research I thought it was from your first comment.

[xtc]

They aren't creating "mind control agents", though.

The argument in that article is that the drug implants could theoretically be used to force psychiatric patients to take their medication, and the guy is arguing that it's basically the same thing as a lobotomy.

Just like the guy admits in the article, saying "mind control" conjures up visions of science fiction (not the mental patients that he is arguing for). I think he raises a few valid concerns of things to watch out for in the future, but the company isn't doing anything diabolical with this research in my opinion. It's certainly not the kind of research I thought it was from your first comment.

I said they were drugs implanted directly into your brain and some people considered it mind control. All of which is true. I guess you were thinking more along these lines:

http://www.infowars.com/print/ps/darpa_bm.htm

[Daniel]

No vote, no rational card, no food.(reported in New York Times Jan 31, 2005)

"In Fallouja, polling stations were set up "at centers that distribute food, water and cash payments to residents whose homes were devastated by the offensive" (reported in LA Times Jan 31, 2005)

Having a NYtimes from that day entitled no vote, no Rational card, no food. Care to post it?

However, I did find the titles of these:

THE IRAQI ELECTION: THE ELECTORATE; For a Battered Populace, a Day of Civic Passion

Nobody among the hundreds of voters thronging one Baghdad polling station on Sunday could remember anything remotely like it, not even those old enough to have taken part in Iraq's last partly free elections more than 50 years ago, before the assassination of King Faisal II.

THE IRAQI ELECTION: ELECTION; Defying Threats, Millions of Iraqis Flock to Polls

Defying death threats, mortars and suicide bombers, Iraqis turned out in great numbers on Sunday to vote in this country's first free elections in 50 years, offering a powerful, if uneven, endorsement of democratic rule 22 months after Saddam Hussein was overthrown.


However, having been in Iraq during the 2005 elections and being in Fallujah right up until that time I can say pretty safely that voting wasn't a requisite for getting food.

[xtc]

Having a NYtimes from that day entitled no vote, no Rational card, no food. Care to post it?

However, I did find the titles of these:

THE IRAQI ELECTION: THE ELECTORATE; For a Battered Populace, a Day of Civic Passion

Nobody among the hundreds of voters thronging one Baghdad polling station on Sunday could remember anything remotely like it, not even those old enough to have taken part in Iraq's last partly free elections more than 50 years ago, before the assassination of King Faisal II.

THE IRAQI ELECTION: ELECTION; Defying Threats, Millions of Iraqis Flock to Polls

Defying death threats, mortars and suicide bombers, Iraqis turned out in great numbers on Sunday to vote in this country's first free elections in 50 years, offering a powerful, if uneven, endorsement of democratic rule 22 months after Saddam Hussein was overthrown.


However, having been in Iraq during the 2005 elections and being in Fallujah right up until that time I can say pretty safely that voting wasn't a requisite for getting food.

I wonder if your articles are the ones Bush paid to have printed in Iraq?


This gentlemen was in Iraq at the time of voting as well:

"”Two of the food dealers I know told me personally that our food rations would be withheld if we did not vote,” said Saeed Jodhet, a 21-year-old engineering student who voted in the Hay al-Jihad district of Baghdad."

"They said they had to sign voter registration forms in order to pick up their food supplies"


Here is the IPS News article on the matter.

http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=27256

[Daniel]

So what happened to your New york times article again?

[xtc]

So what happened to your New york times article again?

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F6091FF93E5F0C728FDDA80894DD4044 82

[Daniel]

Well, I had to log into my Times account because the headline didn't say anything about what you said it did, and surprise surprise, neither did the article itself.

What the article actually did say:

Ultimately, he said, registration went better than expected, thanks largely to Mr. Tuccinardi's suggestion of using the rolls for Iraq's food rationing system as a sort of makeshift census to guide the effort.

That's quite a leap to no vote no food

Also, from the same article:

Still, after the end of balloting on Sunday, a group of electoral officials from 11 nations who were brought in to provide independent oversight gave their seal of approval to the process, and they commended the Iraqis' work.


Oh, and the guy quoted above who made the suggestion:


Domenico Tuccinardi, Election Expert, Italy
Domenico Tuccinardi has worked as an international electoral consultant for various organisations and think tanks. Most recently, he worked in Iraq as the Election Administration Specialist for the IFES electoral assessment team. He previously observed elections in Nigeria, Kenya, Kosovo, Albania, Serbia and Montenegro. Domenico has also managed technical assistance projects in Bosnia and Croatia. As Deputy Director of the OSCE Elections Department in Bosnia, he managed the transfer of the election administration from the OSCE to the BiH Election Commission, where he also served as Commissioner on behalf of the OSCE mission. He graduated in law and has an MA in international law and international organisations.

[Sean of the Thread]

Tuesday, April 4, 2006; Posted: 10:02 a.m. EDT (14:02 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein has been charged for the first time with genocide, Iraqi chief investigative judge Ra'id Juhi announced Tuesday.

[xtc]

Well, I had to log into my Times account because the headline didn't say anything about what you said it did, and surprise surprise, neither did the article itself.

What the article actually did say:

Ultimately, he said, registration went better than expected, thanks largely to Mr. Tuccinardi's suggestion of using the rolls for Iraq's food rationing system as a sort of makeshift census to guide the effort.

That's quite a leap to no vote no food

Also, from the same article:

Still, after the end of balloting on Sunday, a group of electoral officials from 11 nations who were brought in to provide independent oversight gave their seal of approval to the process, and they commended the Iraqis' work.


Oh, and the guy quoted above who made the suggestion:


Domenico Tuccinardi, Election Expert, Italy
Domenico Tuccinardi has worked as an international electoral consultant for various organisations and think tanks. Most recently, he worked in Iraq as the Election Administration Specialist for the IFES electoral assessment team. He previously observed elections in Nigeria, Kenya, Kosovo, Albania, Serbia and Montenegro. Domenico has also managed technical assistance projects in Bosnia and Croatia. As Deputy Director of the OSCE Elections Department in Bosnia, he managed the transfer of the election administration from the OSCE to the BiH Election Commission, where he also served as Commissioner on behalf of the OSCE mission. He graduated in law and has an MA in international law and international organisations.

Sorry I was doing several things at once when I went looking for the link, anyway I posted the IPS News link which should suffice.

But here is the quote again in case you missed it the first time.

"Two of the food dealers I know told me personally that our food rations would be withheld if we did not vote,” said Saeed Jodhet, a 21-year-old engineering student who voted in the Hay al-Jihad district of Baghdad

Here is an interesting article in the New Yorker about how the United States tried to influence the outcome of the election by funding candidates friendly to the U.S. and not funding others despite appeals.

"A State Department official confirmed that there was an effort to give direct funding to certain candidates."

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/050725fa_fact

...and let's not forget the United States was paying reporters in Iraq to write favourable articles.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-infowar30nov30,0,5638790.story?coll=la-home-headlines