satiricalllll

In 2003 the United States invaded Iraq in order “to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein’s support for terrorism, and to free Iraqi people”.(wikispace) Our nation realized that Iraq did not secure weapons of mass destruction; the U.S. ridded terrorism by capturing Saddam Hussein; but how would we “free” the Iraqi people? By capturing Saddam, Iraqis no longer were under a dictatorship; which meant they were not tied down by a sovereign. After years of being told what to do and how to live, Iraq’s citizens were not exposed to an independent lifestyle, therefore Congress reigned with an Iraqi Transitional Government. But, a country’s government can only be powered by Congress for an extended period. From the start, the United States intended on conquering Iraq to broaden their culture and background; on October 15, 2005 a draft of Iraq’s permanent constitution was approved- this was our nations way of improving Iraq and freeing Iraqi people. Establishing a constitution meant Iraq would adopt a Transitional Democracy- “form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.” (//Random House)// America’s government was formulated because our nation needed a firm, stable government, but most important we needed a government that would satisfy our country. A democracy was apparently forced upon Iraq; Iraqi’s were not able to voice their opinion or formulate a government that would suit their needs. A democracy has been practical and functional in the U.S. for decades, but will it gain the same support, stability, and outcome in Iraq- where inhabitants have not been exposed to independence since Saddam Hussein’s term? Throughout history many other third world countries have tried to modify its government to please its citizens. For instance, half of Vietnam fought a difficult and well grounded war for the pursuit of happiness- through a government that permitted them to be independent. Obviously, the other fifty percent of the nation disagreed and Vietnam stayed a communistic country. Because the entire country did not have a solitary outlook, its government could not be adjusted. Although thousands of Vietnamese people still fight for a non-Communistic nation, maybe Vietnam can not be run under any other regime. Even though a democracy maybe unfit for Iraq, it’s worth an attempt- after all Iraq can not sink any lower. Perhaps a sturdy and functional government is what Iraq has been searching for. Almost every human being is entitled to their civil rights, and finally Iraqi’s have received theirs; for years they have not been able to enlighten others on their proposals. So before we doubt Iraq’s ability to undertake something new, we should just let it happen- trial and error. History and our personal experiences demonstrate that if we allow someone to become accustomed to something on their own and learn from it, they have a higher possibility of succeeding. Iraq’s first step in transitioning to a democracy is gain superiority in economics; structuring new government buildings and providing for the common good will be costly to Iraq. Additional, ingredients for a superlative egalitarianism are checks and balances, prime ministers and president, and representatives and parliamentary. Distributing an equal amount of power to different branches and representatives will ensure a non-tyrannical management. Before a policy that impacts the population is adopted, all citizens must have equal and effective opportunity for making their views known to the other citizens as to what the policy should be; when the moment arrives, when a decision about such policy will finally be made, every member must have an equal and effective opportunity to vote and all votes must be counted as equal. Even though aiding Iraq through their journey of forming a new government is partially against the definition of a democracy, it benefits us as well. By guiding them we learn from our mistakes and Iraqi leaders can soon assist us with our predicaments; they can help U.S. democrats enhance our democracy. With commitment and informed dedication of their citizens, checks and balances, and a unified population, they can overcome severe economic hardship, reconcile social and ethnic division, and, when necessary, prevail in time of war. Although our assistance benefits us, and it’s a two for one deal, many anti- democrats might dispute that a democratic government should not force a democracy upon a Middle Eastern nation. It abides every regulation and definition of a democracy. A democracy is a “form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system”; the term itself comes from the Greek words demos, meaning "people," and kratos, meaning "authority."