re: Civil war.

gbaikie — 3/7/2004 1:49:00 PM (archived)

"Each of the representatives seems to have two constituencies - to the Americans who appointed them and can and will veto any constitution which doesn't allow for American presence and honor the oil and "reconstruction" contracts given to Americans, and their own religious, tribal, territorial folks."

It's doubtful that a constitution would mention anything to do with "American presence and honor the oil and "reconstruction" contracts".

The whole thread (13 posts)

Constitution Failure Deals Blow to Iraqis - Donald - 3/6/2004 2:03:47 PM
- Actually if it were not contentious it would be very worrisome - ebnelson - 3/7/2004 4:02:07 AM
- Standard bargaining tactic - Gary - 3/7/2004 1:21:08 AM
  - re: This why the US can't win the war in Iraq - Raoul - 3/7/2004 10:32:52 AM
    - We've already won. The task now is to disengage. - Gary - 3/7/2004 5:51:34 PM
      - If you define "won" as "eliminated indigenous civil authority", then yes, we won. - Mary Anne - 3/7/2004 7:37:18 PM
        
        re: If you define "won" as "eliminated indigenous civil authority", then yes, we won. - gbaikie - 3/8/2004 2:28:41 AM
- I expect a compromise will be hammered out in the next few days... - Buck Galaxy - 3/6/2004 8:51:10 PM
- re: Constitutions - Tom Brosz - 3/6/2004 7:01:47 PM
- Civil war. - Bowser - 3/6/2004 5:26:52 PM
  - re: Civil war. - gbaikie - 3/7/2004 1:49:00 PM
    - Hey, you DO have a sense of humor!! - Bowser - 3/7/2004 3:53:35 PM
  - "...anything they all sign will be so vague as to create the conditions for a civil war later." - Tom Brosz - 3/6/2004 7:04:20 PM

Recent posts

On this day in Current Events

The whole thread (13 posts)