January 16, 2004

U.N. sides with U.S. on voting in Iraq

U.N. officials said yesterday that direct elections could not be organized in Iraq before the July deadline, placing the international body on the side of the United States in a looming confrontation with Iraq's Shi'ite community led by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani.
    
An estimated 20,000 Shi'ites marched through Basra yesterday, chanting "No, no to America" and demanding direct elections instead of the caucus system for choosing a transitional government determined by the Iraqi Governing Council and approved by the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority.

How ironically funny that the UN is now siding with us.
Given their track record in "managing" a given country's problems and how we feel about them in general, I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing.
Probably good, because it will make for more acceptance for our future administration of Iraq in the minds of many all over the globe and will ease the return of UN agencies to help with the reconstruction.
No matter, because these radicalized Shi'ites must be stopped!
Their dream is to set up another Islamic theocracy just like Iran, with al-Sistani as the leader and Ayatollah of the country.
Note also that al-Sistani's a Hussein--these things do run in the family and the tribe in the Arab world.
Above and beyond that, Shi'ites and Sunnis are shall we say "hell-bent" on battling it out with each other.
There was a reason that Saddam kept the Shiites (as well as the Kurds) under lockdown in his country.
I'm not saying it was right, but I'm just saying that I understand.
I also understand the Shiites not liking the "caucus system;" who could after watching 5 minutes of American TV this week?!