National Holiday for Iraq

[Cyrus]

Let's assume that eventually everything turns out alright politically for Iraq and there's a new constitution, elections, a new government, relative peace, et cetera.

Like most countries in the world, the (new) Iraq would have a national holiday, like the U.S. has the 4th of July.

The question arises as to what exactly would that holiday be in celebraqtion of. Usually such holidays celebrate national independence and/or an event directly linked to it (e.g. an uprising against invaders or occupiers). Can we expect the Iraqis to be celebrating anything related to the American occupation as a matter of national pride?

There is something wrong with this picture.

[jt1]

ehh, point taken...but not a big deal. Canada has Canada day. and anyway I'd rather a revolution be bloodless and gradual rather than start on a particular day just so there can be a holiday for it. in this case, it could be the day the Americans left or the day they finally kick us out or the day they give us a timeline for troop withdraw or just any day like Canada does it.

[BadBoyBenny]

They could always celebrate Saddam's Birthday

[bobman0330]

Well, this is officially the shallowest argument against the war ever devised.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
This is officially the shallowest argument against the war ever devised.

[/ QUOTE ] Go deeper.

[Wes ManTooth]

just having the option or the freedom to actually decide to come up with a national holiday now is good right?

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is officially the shallowest argument against the war ever devised.

[/ QUOTE ] Go deeper.

[/ QUOTE ]

The argument is shallow so there is no deeper. The Kurds and the marsh Arabs will remember the US fondly. And even lots of the Shi'a. And all them will be glad Saddam is gone courtesy of the US. Only the Sunni who had the run of the country under Saddam and have shown they don't want true democracy will regret our involvement. Of course you didn't have to live under Saddam so it's easy to maintain otherwise.

[Olof]

It would be quite funny if they selected September 11.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
It would be quite funny if they selected September 11.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be quite funny if a Russian sub had a nuclear accident in Swedish waters.

[nicky g]

"Only the Sunni who had the run of the country under Saddam and have shown they don't want true democracy will regret our involvement. "

This myth is becoming more and more widespread and is quite dangerous. Saddam was a Sunni Arab and lots/most of his entourage were Sunni Arabs (more specifically, Sunni Arabs from or from near Tikrit, his hometown) . But the increaingly common idea that Saddam-era Iraq was some sort of South African style ethnic/racist state where all Sunni Arabs "had the run" of the place/controlled government for Sunni Arab purposes/good do and say what they liked, and ran around oppressing Kurds and Shi'ites as their slaves is wrong. There were Shi'i figures in the Ba'ath. All opponents/independent thinkers were oppressed under Saddam, whether Shi'i, Kurdish or Arab Sunni. Sunni Arab areas probably suffered less on the whole, in part because they never mounted a rebellion comparable to the Shi'i uprising after teh 1991 Gulf war, but the idea that "the Sunnis"/all Sunnis were in charge, and are now simply pissed off that they aren't any more, is wrong. A specific group of people, who were mostly Sunni Arabs, were in charge, and they were repressive of all sections of society regardless of their religion or ethnic affiliation. Saddam's Iraq was much closer to a totalitarian regime state than a South African style one.