It's unfortunate that the Sunni triangle musliims don't want to participate in the election process. You have 0 chance of winning if you're not even trying.
However, if you know that the elections are going to be rigged, then you'll have no problem telling me in whose favor.

And once again, repeat after me: Kurds are Sunnis too.

Nearly three fifths of the Kurds, almost all Kurmanji-speakers, are today at least nominally Sunni Muslims of Shafiite rite.

There are also some followers of mainstream Shiitem Islam among the Kurds, particularly in and around the cities of Kirmanshah, to Hamadan and Bijar in southern and eastern Kurdistan and the Khurasan. These Siite Kurds number around half a million.

The overwhelming majority of Muslim Kurds are followers of one several mystic Sufi orders, most importantly the Bektashi order of the northwest Kurdistan, the Naqshbandi order in the west and north, Qadiri orders of east and central Kurdistan, and Nurbakhshi of the south.

To begin with:

You discount the very idea of the election being rigged. There is an outcome that is desirable to the US, who control the situation. This is THEIR party, and they'll invite who THEY want to. Are you so naive that you actually believe the US wants DEMOCRACY?

As for the Kurds: It's not quite as simple as you perceive it (which comes as no surprise to me, as you see the world in absolutes):



You DO know what Sufism is, of course

I should feel sorry for Clinton now?

You claimed that Iraqi Sunnis are not going to participate in elections, which is patently false.

Iraq's election system is anathema to Sunni voters

By Michael Young
Daily Star staff
Thursday, December 09, 2004

It has become second nature for many an onlooker to listen to what the United Nations has to say on a given matter, and then advise the exact opposite.

That was my first instinct upon hearing what the UN's advisor on Iraq, Lakhdar Brahimi, told a Dutch newspaper last week. He remarked that given the present dire security conditions in Iraq, elections next January were all but impossible. Brahimi, in implying the need for a delay, went on to observe that "elections are not a magic potion, but part of the political process; it is imperative to prepare for them in a proper way, and for them to take place at the proper time to achieve the desired objectives."

It is difficult to dismiss Brahimi's warning as hogwash. Rather, he merely misses the point. The real problem with Iraq's elections is less their timing, since the U.S. and the interim Iraqi government are destined to alienate one group or another whatever they decide, than the nature of the electoral system that Iraq was compelled to adopt.

Iraq will vote as a single constituency, with nationwide slates of candidates competing for seats on the basis of proportional representation. An implicit rationale behind the idea (recommended by Carina Perelli, the director of the UN's Electoral Assistance Divisions, and adopted by the former Coalition Provisional Authority administrator Paul Bremer) was that given a relatively high turnout by all communities, the ensuing parliament would more or less reflect Iraq's communal and ethnic makeup.

Today, this reasoning has been thrown to the winds by the threat of a Sunni boycott, which may lead to a parliament where Sunnis are under-represented. Given that the new legislature will also be a constituent assembly, the argument goes, the absent Sunnis may have no say in their own political future if elections go ahead as planned, compromising the legitimacy of the new Iraq. That is doubtless one of the anxieties of Brahimi, who knows the value of cajoling the region's mostly Sunni Arab leaders.

Then you discover nuance ("oh, some Kurds are also Sufis" - which, as you know, does not preclude them from being Sunnis).

Wht the fuck would YOU, of all people, feel sorry for Clinton? People like you LOVE to see liberals get smeared. The Dems believe in fair play, the GOP does not.

Don't believe me? One word: Watergate

That ought to shut you up.

The GOP uses dirty tricks. The Dems do not.

Even YOU - the even-handed libertarian - jumped on the Swift Boat when the Vets (who WERE connected to Dubya's campaign) launched their carefully-orchestrated attack. It was all bullshit, but if you're going to lie you gotta got for the BIG one, like Stalin and Hitler used to do.

All a candidate should really have to do is explain what his platform is all about - to run a POSITIVE campaign. He shouldn't have to be constantly defending himself against a barrage of attacks that have been planned in advance by the GOP.

The GOP was able to convince gullible Americans that Kerry was a baby-killer who was going to legalize gay marriage and that he was a flip-flopper who would open the door to terrorists. All of this was a complete fabrication. The GOP couldn't run on Dubya's horrible record, so they just focused on the negative campaign... because FEAR was the key to Dubya's re-election.

FYI: this was my last response to any of your threads or comments.

Way ahead of you there. I'm getting more than a little tired of taking you to school every day.