Even if Iraqi voters don’t approve the Constitution in today’s vote, the large turnout is still a huge victory for the Bush doctrine. Until our troops liberated that land from Saddam’s tyranny, these people had no say over their government. By turning out in droves to vote in today’s referendum, Iraqis showed that they recognize how their country has changed since coalition troops came two and a half years ago.
According to a curious AP article:
Sunni Arabs voted in surprisingly high numbers on Iraq’s new constitution Saturday, many of them hoping to defeat it in an intense competition with Shiites and Kurds over the shape of the nation’s young democracy after decades of dictatorship. With little violence, turnout was more than 66 percent in the three most crucial provinces.
I call the article curious because it begins by noting the opposition to the constitution. At least the headline did acknowledge the “large turnout.” What makes the piece even curioser is the last line where the reporter seems to have looked all over Iraq to find one of the few Shia who longs for “someone like Saddam.” But, since even this guy acknowledged that he was a small minority among Shi’ites, it seems the reporter could have ended the piece by showing support for the charter among this group.
Despite the reporter’s curious spin at the end of his piece, the large turnout represents a big victory for the Bush doctrine. Even if Iraqis don’t approve the charter, the Iraqi people recognize that, even with American troops in their country, they can participate in the political process and vote against a measure favored by what many on the left define as an imperialist occupying force.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
UPDATE: Violence is down this time as well. Over at GOP Vixen (where I occasionally blog as Wordluf), my pal Dirty Harry notes there were fewer terrorist attacks during today’s elections than during the elections last January, “13 vs. 347.” Now read the whole thing!
UP-UPDATE: Despite the adminstration’s errors of communication in this fight, Manos finds that the Iraq fight was “worth it.” I agree. He also thinks we should put this vote in the “proper historical context“:
The United States invaded another country not for riches or gold or conquest but to spread ideas. Liberals from earlier generations, who went to war against fascism in Spain in the 1930’s, would have supported this war.
UP-UP-UPDATE (also via Instapundit): More historical perspective at Gateway Pundit on the time it takes a war-torn nation to ratify a new constitution. Seems that in historical terms, they’re working pretty quickly in Iraq.
UP-UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: Gateway Pundit offers some pictures from Saturday’s vote that you are unlikely to see in the MSM, including one of Iraqi women waiting to vote while holding pictures of our president and theirs. Seems some Iraqis do appreciate the good that President Bush has done for their land. (Via Powerline.)