Thread: Do you think that Iraq will form a democratic government

Here is the timeline for our US Contitution:
The Convention Timeline


This timeline is in contrast to the Main Timeline on this site. While that timeline attempts to put world and national events into some chronological perspective, this timeline intends to get into the details of the Constitutional Convention and the ratification process.


Dates are of format YYYY/MM/DD (year, month, day).

1786/09/11 - Annapolis Convention convenes
1786/09/14 - Annapolis Convention adjourns, calling for a convention
to take place the following May 2nd
1787/02/21 - Congress approves a convention to amend the Articles
1787/05/03 - James Madison arrives early for Convention
1787/05/13 - George Washington arrives for Convention
1787/05/14 - Convention scheduled to open - postponed
1787/05/25 - Constitutional Convention opens
1787/05/29 - Edmund Randolph presents the Virginia Plan
1787/05/29 - Charles Pinckney presents his plan
1787/05/31 - Representation debated
1787/06/01 - Executive power debated
1787/06/02 - Debate on executive salaries
1787/06/04 - Unitary v. Committee Executive debated
1787/06/06 - Method for selection of representatives debated
1787/06/07 - Method for selection of senators debated
1787/06/11 - Roger Sherman proposes the Great Compromise
1787/06/15 - William Paterson proposes the New Jersey Plan
1787/06/18 - Alexander Hamilton proposes the British Plan
1787/06/21 - Federalism debated
1787/06/26 - Senatorial terms debated
1787/06/28 - Debate on state suffrage in the Senate starts
1787/07/17 - Debate on term of executive
1787/07/21 - Debate on appointment of judges
1787/07/23 - Method of ratification discussed
1787/07/23 - Committee of Detail established
1787/07/26 - Committee of Detail begins to meet
1787/08/06 - Committee of Detail submits rough draft of Constitution
1787/08/07 - Suffrage qualifications discussed
1787/08/09 - Citizenship for immigrants debated
1787/08/15 - Executive Veto Power debated
1787/08/21 - Slavery in the Constitution debated
1787/08/31 - Issues referred to Committee of Eleven
1787/09/04 - Committee of Eleven begins to submit changes
1787/09/04 - Powers of the President debated
1787/09/07 - Committee of Eleven submits final changes
1787/09/10 - Amendment procedure debated
1787/09/10 - Drafts submitted to Committee of Style for revision
1787/09/12 - Committee of Style submits draft
1787/09/12 - Inclusion of a Bill of Rights debated
1787/09/15 - Final draft ordered engrossed (written)
1787/09/17 - Final draft of the Constitution signed
1787/09/28 - Congress approves the Constitution and sends it to the states
1787/10/05 - First Centinel Anti-Federalist letter published
1787/10/27 - First Federalist Paper is published
1787/12/07 - Delaware ratifies
1787/12/12 - Pennsylvania ratifies
1787/12/18 - New Jersey ratifies
1788/01/09 - Connecticut ratifies
1788/02/02 - Georgia ratifies
1788/02/06 - Massachusetts ratifies
1788/03/24 - Rhode Island referendum rejects Constitution
1788/04/28 - Maryland ratifies
1788/05/23 - South Carolina ratifies
1788/05/28 - The Federalist published (Federalist Papers 1-85)
1788/06/21 - New Hampshire ratifies
1788/06/21 - Constitution Ratified
1788/06/25 - Virginia ratifies
1788/07/02 - Congress is informed the Constitution has been ratified
1788/07/26 - New York ratifies
1789/03/04 - The Constitution goes into effect
1789/11/21 - North Carolina ratifies
1790/05/29 - Rhode Island ratifies

Based on the fact that the Iraqi government is barely two months old, isn't a bit premature to assume that they will have a ratified constitution and a formal government?

Or should they be done by now? What say you?

They should take as much time as they need to get it right. One thing you can't rush is the constituion of your country.

Article 2.

(A) The term “transitional period” shall refer to the period beginning on 30 June 2004 and lasting until the formation of an elected Iraqi government pursuant to a permanent constitution as set forth in this Law, which in any case shall be no later than 31 December 2005, unless the provisions of Article 61 are applied.

Article 61.

(A) The National Assembly shall write the draft of the permanent constitution by no later than 15 August 2005.

This needs an exectutive and a president

Article 36.

(A) The National Assembly shall elect a President of the State and two Deputies. They shall form the Presidency Council, the function of which will be to represent the sovereignty of Iraq and oversee the higher affairs of the country. The election of the Presidency Council shall take place on the basis of a single list and by a two-thirds majority of the members’ votes. The National Assembly has the power to remove any member of the Presidency Council of the State for incompetence or lack of integrity by a three-fourths majority of its members’ votes. In the event of a vacancy in the Presidency Council, the National Assembly shall, by a vote of two-thirds of its members, elect a replacement to fill the vacancy.

2/3 is tricky. What if they don't meet the deadline?

Article 61 (G) If the National Assembly does not complete writing the draft permanent constitution by 15 August 2005 and does not request extension of the deadline in Article 61(F) above, the provisions of Article 61(E), above, shall be applied.

Article 61 (E) If the referendum rejects the draft permanent constitution, the National Assembly shall be dissolved. Elections for a new National Assembly shall be held no later than 15 December 2005. The new National Assembly and new Iraqi Transitional Government shall then assume office no later than 31 December 2005, and shall continue to operate under this Law, except that the final deadlines for preparing a new draft may be changed to make it possible to draft a permanent constitution within a period not to exceed one year. The new National Assembly shall be entrusted with writing another draft permanent constitution.

and on to article 62...

Article 62.

This law shall remain in effect until the permanent constitution is issued and the new Iraqi government is formed in accordance with it.

And so it goes... We shall see how long it takes.

According to one senior American officer recently: “We can live with the kind of casualty levels we’re getting.

“It’s not the kind of thing that creates big campaigns back home.”

Even the cost to the US tax-payer – $4.7bn a month – is something the American economy can easily absorb

source

These things take time. Iraqi democracy may look far different than what we have come to expect.

Originally Posted by okipunk

Here is the timeline for our US Contitution:
The Convention Timeline


This timeline is in contrast to the Main Timeline on this site. While that timeline attempts to put world and national events into some chronological perspective, this timeline intends to get into the details of the Constitutional Convention and the ratification process.


Dates are of format YYYY/MM/DD (year, month, day).

1786/09/11 - Annapolis Convention convenes
1786/09/14 - Annapolis Convention adjourns, calling for a convention
to take place the following May 2nd
1787/02/21 - Congress approves a convention to amend the Articles
1787/05/03 - James Madison arrives early for Convention
1787/05/13 - George Washington arrives for Convention
1787/05/14 - Convention scheduled to open - postponed
1787/05/25 - Constitutional Convention opens
1787/05/29 - Edmund Randolph presents the Virginia Plan
1787/05/29 - Charles Pinckney presents his plan
1787/05/31 - Representation debated
1787/06/01 - Executive power debated
1787/06/02 - Debate on executive salaries
1787/06/04 - Unitary v. Committee Executive debated
1787/06/06 - Method for selection of representatives debated
1787/06/07 - Method for selection of senators debated
1787/06/11 - Roger Sherman proposes the Great Compromise
1787/06/15 - William Paterson proposes the New Jersey Plan
1787/06/18 - Alexander Hamilton proposes the British Plan
1787/06/21 - Federalism debated
1787/06/26 - Senatorial terms debated
1787/06/28 - Debate on state suffrage in the Senate starts
1787/07/17 - Debate on term of executive
1787/07/21 - Debate on appointment of judges
1787/07/23 - Method of ratification discussed
1787/07/23 - Committee of Detail established
1787/07/26 - Committee of Detail begins to meet
1787/08/06 - Committee of Detail submits rough draft of Constitution
1787/08/07 - Suffrage qualifications discussed
1787/08/09 - Citizenship for immigrants debated
1787/08/15 - Executive Veto Power debated
1787/08/21 - Slavery in the Constitution debated
1787/08/31 - Issues referred to Committee of Eleven
1787/09/04 - Committee of Eleven begins to submit changes
1787/09/04 - Powers of the President debated
1787/09/07 - Committee of Eleven submits final changes
1787/09/10 - Amendment procedure debated
1787/09/10 - Drafts submitted to Committee of Style for revision
1787/09/12 - Committee of Style submits draft
1787/09/12 - Inclusion of a Bill of Rights debated
1787/09/15 - Final draft ordered engrossed (written)
1787/09/17 - Final draft of the Constitution signed
1787/09/28 - Congress approves the Constitution and sends it to the states
1787/10/05 - First Centinel Anti-Federalist letter published
1787/10/27 - First Federalist Paper is published
1787/12/07 - Delaware ratifies
1787/12/12 - Pennsylvania ratifies
1787/12/18 - New Jersey ratifies
1788/01/09 - Connecticut ratifies
1788/02/02 - Georgia ratifies
1788/02/06 - Massachusetts ratifies
1788/03/24 - Rhode Island referendum rejects Constitution
1788/04/28 - Maryland ratifies
1788/05/23 - South Carolina ratifies
1788/05/28 - The Federalist published (Federalist Papers 1-85)
1788/06/21 - New Hampshire ratifies
1788/06/21 - Constitution Ratified
1788/06/25 - Virginia ratifies
1788/07/02 - Congress is informed the Constitution has been ratified
1788/07/26 - New York ratifies
1789/03/04 - The Constitution goes into effect
1789/11/21 - North Carolina ratifies
1790/05/29 - Rhode Island ratifies

Based on the fact that the Iraqi government is barely two months old, isn't a bit premature to assume that they will have a ratified constitution and a formal government?

Or should they be done by now? What say you?

U might wanna point out that US started out as a devastated raging anarchy too, with 100,000 people dying every year and half or so due to insurgency and foreign occupation. Every couple of month some foreign troops lay seige to Philadelphia like they do with Fallujah, and waste it. King George was just like Saddam, and Bush is the modern equivalent of Washington for Iraq, ooops except he's not an Iraqi this time, let's just think of him as an altruistic foreign savior. The American colonists were divided into 3 ethenic groups too- the Shi'cans, Suni'cans, and the elusive Kurdist'cans, so it was really hard to have agreements! The farms and the mines of our ancestors were owned by foreigners, and the fruits and gold were shipped overseas everyday cause our nation started with billions of debt to foreigners and the World Bank of 16th century; and like us, Iraq had thousands and thousands of black slaves working for free for them! I am beginning to like this comparison!

You know that your figure of 100,000 deaths is severly flawed and based on a bogus POLL conducted in Iraq, right?

Besides that, you claim that the US is a colonial power. Really. Where are the superprofits then? I see that it has been a net financial loss so far. Additionally, if we were only interested in oil, then why didnt we simply take all of it instead of investing billions in securing the country and rebuilding its infrastructure?

I never drew an exact comparison, merely pointed out that these things take time. You never answered the question that is at hand, do you think the process should be over or should we give them a lot more time?

You know that your figure of 100,000 deaths is severly flawed and based on a bogus POLL conducted in Iraq, right?

Given that you buggers haven't even bothered trying to count, I'd keep my mouth shut on that one if I were you. It's scandalous enough without having people who aren't actually interested enough to find their own figures questioning the ones that are out there.

Originally Posted by okipunk

You know that your figure of 100,000 deaths is severly flawed and based on a bogus POLL conducted in Iraq, right?

Besides that, you claim that the US is a colonial power. Really. Where are the superprofits then? I see that it has been a net financial loss so far. Additionally, if we were only interested in oil, then why didnt we simply take all of it instead of investing billions in securing the country and rebuilding its infrastructure?

I never drew an exact comparison, merely pointed out that these things take time. You never answered the question that is at hand, do you think the process should be over or should we give them a lot more time?

The only thing I would change in your original post is to include the Articles of Confedreation as well as the Declaration of Independence. If you add that, it took 13 years for us to form the current government. Iraq will become a Democracy based the the country's geopolitical infrastructure. Hopefully, the governing body will use a Federal form of self-rule, not the parlimentary rule that you see in Aussie land or in Europe.

Originally Posted by okipunk

You know that your figure of 100,000 deaths is severly flawed and based on a bogus POLL conducted in Iraq, right?

No I don't, and I don't need to believe you over a far more respected and credible medical journal.

Originally Posted by okipunk

Besides that, you claim that the US is a colonial power.

What? No I didn't! I used "colonists" to refer to the early immigrants from UK to the New World during the 16th century, Doh~

Originally Posted by okipunk

I never drew an exact comparison, merely pointed out that these things take time. You never answered the question that is at hand, do you think the process should be over or should we give them a lot more time?

LOL, if the question is bogus, there's no point answering it.

Originally Posted by Kleinzeit

Given that you buggers haven't even bothered trying to count, I'd keep my mouth shut on that one if I were you. It's scandalous enough without having people who aren't actually interested enough to find their own figures questioning the ones that are out there.

That's a matter of servitude to the prevalent power- the same guys would go on and on about Saddam's millions and millions of victims found in mass graves. They also didn't count it and never counted it, but somehow they know exactly how many he killed. In reality, the victims, whether in the hands of Saddam or under the US, arn't terribly important to them- it can be a few thousands, or it can be millions and millions. They're just talking points to endorse ideologies that serves power.