Violence Continues in Iraq

Yahoo! News - Truck Bombing, Shootings Kill 23 Iraqis

This is no surprise. However, the article also discusses the growing certainty that Iraq is soon to be ruled by a Shiite theocracy, infused with minimal proponents for secular government. Shiite dominated and neighboring Iran must be happy with the way that politics are unfolding in Iraq as they stare over their shoulder at a potential U.S. invasion.

I've wondered for a long time, indeed, since before the U.S. invasion, about the problem with a "democratic" Iraq. Is Democracy the best system in a place with intense religious sectorial passions? In short, I think that representative democracy is the best answer anywhere, but huge pitfalls exist when the system is being born. Overall, my point is that the U.S. could have been better off with a contained Saddam Hussein than an elected Iraqi theocracy. Of course, this analysis is purely from a U.S. interest perspective, and leaves out the moral question of leaving a man in power that gassed his own people. But, that was not the main reason we invaded, was it??

As a brief sidenote, I've thought often recently about the defining moral values of Christian and Muslum extremists. Both abhor some of the same practices, i.e abortion, gay-marriage. In fact, one would think that some pro-lifers would welcome the Islamic stance against abortion. Of course, there are many flavors of Islam, just as there are Christianity. My concern is the fringe far right element of both religions, which seems to be growing into more than just a fringe.

Comments

Sean Meade said…
Barnett would say that a sectarian Iraq can handle democracy as long as we connect them up faster than the fundamentalists can disconnect them. he would say Iran is opening to connection (indeed, their acquisition of nukes could _help_ this) from which point it could move slowly toward democracy in the way China and Russia are. democracy is the end goal, but connection is the path to get there. the more people get connected up to the outside world, especially economically (through Direct Foreign Investment, etc), the more they will move toward helpful expressions of democracy and capitalism.

and, since i've downed the Kool-Aid, that's my opinion, too ;-)
7:09 AM
Eric said…
Hi Sean. Thanks for providing some input on this issue. It is an interesting topic. Since you are more Barnett "well-read" than I am, I appreciate you paraphrasing what his point of view is on the issue. I catch bits and pieces of Tom, but I don't always make it through all of his posts, and I still haven't managed to pull PNM off of eBay. From what I know though, I'm on board with Barnett on this point also, at least more than I am with anyone else's philosophy. I have no doubt that democracy can thrive in a sectarian society. In fact, the U.S. is a pretty darn good example of this fact. The "wildcard", in my thoughts, is the simple phrase of "as long as we connect them up faster than the fundamentalists can disconnect them." I think that we "can" do this, but I'm not so sure that we "will" do this. Proponents of Barnett's viewpoint, I think, will have a difficult time convincing hardliners to be so open to the Iranian mullahs, and the new religious leaders of Iraq.

Forgive my rambling tone here, I'm typing this in a hurry before my battery goes dead!!
7:13 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The agony of victory....a.k.a. picking my jaw up off the floor

Allright. I've now had nearly 24 hours (although its taken me a couple of days to complete this post) to calm down, reflect upon and digest the improbable gut wrenching game yesterday in which the heavily favored Colts lost to the Steelers 21-18. I wrote last year of not being as emotionally attached to the Steelers as I have been in the past. I wrote last week of how I thought that I might be spending too much valuable time following the Steelers, especially since I have absolutely no control over the outcome of their games. Let me just say this: yesterday's game was probably in the top five emotionally draining, and ultimately gratifying, experiences of my life. Ouside of my wedding and the birth of my two sons, I can't remember being as nervous, deflated, joyful, stunned and exhilirated as I was yesterday----all withing about a ten minute stretch of seemingly neverending time! What could have been a devestating loss to live with in the offseason (and, forever, for Jerome...
Read more

"The Axis of Evil and the Doctrine of Preemption Three Years On"

Jerod and I attended a lecture by Brookings Institution fellow Michael O'Hanlon last night at Park University in Parkville, MO. The lecture was part of the Jerzy Hauptmann Distinguished Guest Lecture series. As a Park University M.B.A. alum, I received an invitation to the 13th annual lecture in the series. I like going to events like this, especially since I was interested in the content of this particular lecture, of which the title was the title of this post. Dr. O'Hanlon described himself as a Sam Nunn Democrat at the beginning of the lecture. It's always difficult to prevent political feeling from entering into objective analysis, and I don't know how you measure the "objectiveness" of analysis, but I feel that most Brookings scholars are at least "fair", and Dr. O'Hanlon was no exception. His analysis of the doctrine of preemption was focused on the effectiveness of the doctrine, as opposed to any moral righteousness or implications of the...
Read more

Removing a password that was created in a previous version from an Access 2007 database

Earlier this week I was banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how to remove a password from an Access 2007 database (file extension .accdb). The database was created in a previous version of access and subsequently "upgraded" to the Access 2007 format. I believe some type of a wizard was used to perform the "upgrade." The security model is evidently different in Access 2007 than in previous versions. It doesn't appear that you can set/unset database passwords. Instead, in Access 2007, there is an option to Encrypt with Password. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be logically similar to the earlier version password architecture, but there was no way that I could find to easily remove the password that had been created in the earlier version when using the Access 2007 interface. Access security has always been confusing to me, and I need to take the time someday to understand how the security model is supposed to work in Access 2007. An...
Read more