The votes are still a way from being totalled but early reports indicate that the Iraqi Constitution has likely passed also it looks like that Sunnis did turn out to vote and that even though 5 US troops were killed there wasn't a huge wave of polling related violence. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9659209/
The largest Sunni political bloc had actually endorsed the constitution and urged its people to vote 'Yes' (this was after a final compromise was reached on the Constitution).
The Sunnis still feel alienated and the insurgency will continue. Until the Sunnis buy into what's going on, no peace in Iraq. And the Sunnis don't like this constitution.
Like it or not, they have to deal with the fact that it's not a Sunni-Baathist Party Iraq anymore. *** Iraq's Sunnis must recognise new realities (Filed: 17/10/2005) It is difficult for commentators to be objective about Iraq's constitution. Like every development in that country, it is viewed through the prism of the invasion. Those who supported the war hate the idea that it was all for nothing, and so snatch greedily at any scrap of good news. Conversely, those who opposed it are determined to say "I told you so", and have resolved that democracy in Iraq must fail. In some cases, the bias is unconscious; but it is none the less real for that. So let us try a thought experiment. Forget the war, disregard the continuing occupation and instead ask, in the abstract, what kind of constitution Iraq ought to have. Our starting point must be the synthetic nature of the Iraqi state, which ropes together three large, distinct communities, as well as Turcomans, Armenians, Syriacs and others. From this fact, much follows. Unable to appeal to a shared civic patriotism, successive Iraqi regimes have ruled by elevating one group - Sunni Arabs - over the others. Today, the lack of a common identity has reduced Iraq to an almost Hobbesian condition, in which the forces of order have been supplanted by sectarian militias. The way to address this problem is to recognise that Iraq is a plurality of peoples. This is precisely what the new constitution does. It was drawn up by Iraqis themselves, rather than foisted on them by a foreign power (as in 1925) or a revolutionary clique (as in 1958). Faithful to the aspirations of Iraq's communities, it disperses power. And a good thing, too. Everyone benefits if decisions are taken close to the people they affect. To those who are chiefly interested in vindicating their opposition to the war, of course, none of this matters. The rejectionism of those who did well under Saddam is presented as a fundamental objection to the entire scheme. To see quite how odd this is, cast your mind back to the end of apartheid in South Africa. Then, too, the electoral process was disrupted by irreconcilable supporters of the old regime. But Western commentators never saw Boer grievances as an argument against democracy. The truth is that a number of Sunni Arabs - notably those who were active Ba'athists - have yet to make the mental adjustment that their new status demands. Deep down, they still feel entitled to run the whole country. In much the same way, a number of Indian Muslims argued, in the 1930s, that, since the British had taken India from the Moguls, the entire subcontinent ought to be handed back to them. In time, of course, they realised that they would be better served by an autonomous Muslim polity. By the same token, Sunni Arabs will one day bless the federalism that their leaders currently decry. For, though they have yet to accept it, they are the minority now.
I agree with you but it's not quite that simple. A large number of Sunnis also realize this but they fear for their future because a (defacto) partitioned Iraq leaves them out in the cold. We also have 150,000 troops who are their because Sunni terrorist groups are exploiting the situation and killing American soldiers. If we didn't have troops over there, I'd say reality should be shoved into the face of the Sunnis, however long it takes. But the longer this takes the more American troops die so it is very much in our interest to speed the political integration of Sunnis.
LOL - as expected, all the liberals are on here trying to trivialize the good news from Iraq. Not surprising in the least. Your true colors are obvious to all.
I agree with Wnes. From what I've heard there are potentials for splits in the Shiites between the followers of Al Sistani and Al Sadr and also secular Shiites. One analysis I heard was that many Sunnis might throw their support to former prime minister Iyad Allawi who is a secular Shiite.
The bigger concern, over the last 2 years, is the conservatives (and the WH) trivializing all the bad news, and making strategic decisions based on that. If things are better than expected, that's great - no harm. If things are worse, and you plan for the best case, well, you're in deep trouble. And that's what we've seen the last few years. You should be more concerned about the people in power trivializing the bad than the people not in power trivializing the good.
In all seriousness, we probably will establish a permanent presence in the Kurdish area of Iraq. It's been discussed already and not doing so is the same as leaving them high and dry. They want us to stay. I guarantee you we will not stay permanently in the Shia and Sunni parts of Iraq. Can't say exactly when, but public pressure here and inside Iraq will force us to leave. Put money on it. The American public will not tolerate an indefinite number of casualties. Hopefully we can exit in a somewhat diginified way.
You’re wrong.....the U.S will leave...cause they know there will be a civil war....thus the return of the U.S is basically guaranteed!
a point all the naysayers are overlooking is, it doesn't matter whether a majority of sunnis support the constitution. what matters is they voted, and participated in the democratic process, and their voices were heard. unless of course, they've adopted the new, america liberal, definition of "disenfranchisement", ie, "we lost, we wuz disenfranchised!"
It's like an extreme version of Survivor on a desert island. The top vote getter will be thrown off the cliff to death by the rest. Well of course the voting process is very democratic, only with an outsider referee holding a gun to the head of unwilling participant to cast his own death ballot.
