It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Shiite Candidates Hold Wide Lead Over Iraqs Prime Minister

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 12:59 AM
link   
With 45% of the votes counted, the United Iraqi Alliance has received more than two-thirds of the 3.3 million votes counted so far. The Alliance has won much of the expatriate vote, according to the International Organization for Migration, reports are varying between 30% and 36%. Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi’s party has captured 18% of the total vote so far. The counts from the Kurdish and mainly Sunni provinces have not been released yet nor have those from the more heavily populated areas, so these results are by no means final.
 



www.cbc.ca
With relatively few votes tabulated from major population centres, the final makeup of the 275-member National Assembly remained unclear. However, a two-thirds majority in the assembly, possibly in a coalition with Kurds and other, would enable the cleric-backed ticket to wield considerable influence in the drafting of the new constitution and in the shape of a new democratic Iraq.

The leader of the Shiite ticket, Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, has promised an inclusive government and a role for the Sunnis and others in the drafting of the new constitution, the major task of the new assembly.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Well, so far the Iraqi people have certainly made an overwhelming choice in favour of the Alliance. It is good to see the Shia gain representation; I can only hope the Sunni will accept this government. If the Sunni turned out in large enough numbers there should be no fight over the legitimacy of the newly elected government. If they didn’t, things will just continue as they are.

Related News Links:
www.cbc.ca

[edit on 2-7-2005 by Valhall]




posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Just to update, Iraq's Independent Electoral Commission has said that the final result will be annouced by Thursday:


The final result of Iraq's historic election will be announced within five days, the electoral commission said on Saturday.

"God willing, we will announce the final results before February 10," said commission official Farid Ayar.

HindustanTimes.com



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 03:27 PM
link   
The Kurdish vote has yet to be tallied, but Allawi loss would be a blow to the Bush administration. The United Iraqi Alliance does lean towards Iran. Will the world consider the rise of The United Iraqi Alliance as more "legitimate" than say a U.S. backed ticket?



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
If the Alliance does win, I think that it will add some legitimacy to this fledgling government. It will be harder for people to accuse them of being a US puppet government. I will be very interested to see the US reaction if this does end up being the result.

One thing I've wondered, is if the reason for the overwhelming Alliance support may indeed have anything to do with the fact that they are not backed by the US. Was this more of a vote against the US than for the Alliance?



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey
One thing I've wondered, is if the reason for the overwhelming Alliance support may indeed have anything to do with the fact that they are not backed by the US. Was this more of a vote against the US than for the Alliance?

I don't know? THe grand Ayatollah Sistani while he may be linked with Iran by religion, to term the relationship as "chummy" would be overstating things. THere always may be an anti-US element to things, but I think this was more a religious thing than anything elese. He did endorse the slate, and that carries huge weight.



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
THere always may be an anti-US element to things, but I think this was more a religious thing than anything elese.


Which leads to all sorts of new implications. While Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim insists that he will not have a cleric-run state, what happens if he does what so many other politicians the world over do and changes his mind? Do the US troops get to 'liberate' them again or would a theocracy be accepted?

edited to add the following:

I just wanted to touch on your comment about the endorsement of the Alliance, and the support of the Grand Ayatollah Sistani a little further. Religious groups tend to usually endorse candidates when they feel there is some benefit for them in it. Allawi is a secularist, and this could indicate the Ayatollah's feel they could influence the direction of the constitution more through an Alliance victory.

If this happens, will the US administration be able to gracefully accept the will of the people of Iraq?

[edit on 5-2-2005 by Duzey]



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   
Sorry to said that the Al-Sistani will rule behind them all and it will be a clerical ruling class in Iraq.

It is something US can never change in Iraq is the fact that they are muslin.



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 05:26 PM
link   
The US should absolutely accept the results of the election in Iraq. The entire point was to give the Iraqi people the choice, which I have agreed with. Now they are making it. If they choose to live under religious servitude, there isn't much we can or should do about it.

Yes, it would be a setback to closing the gap of instability in that region, but we talk the talk of democracy, so we need to be walking the walk.



posted on Feb, 5 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
The majority of Al-Sistani followers belong to the Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution of Iraq, one twist here Al-Sistani is Iranian.



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Picture this: Al-sistani promises Bush to keep control and pump up the oil and honourable withdraw for the american army in iraq, with his huge sji'ite follwing, if the usa government stops harassing Iran over it's nuclear program ?

Rice says, no attack "at this point", in other news Rumsfeld says "Iranian nukes years away" , speaking about flip-flop in the Kerryan sense of the word....misinfo strategy, or Possible this is happening ?

Lol, they gonna like that in Tel aviv...Yet another theocracy installed by american sponsored elections


On the other hand put yourselve in Bush shoes, if you attack Iran now, you also have the sji'ites in Iraq to deal with, also, maybe Iran already has got one or two nukes.....


[edit on 6-2-2005 by Countermeasures]



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join