1 "Does anybody think this sort of thing would be happening if Saddam were still in power?" Why not?

2 Well, Greg, I don't know if you noticed, but democracy easn't exactly flourishing over there before...and women's rights weren't exactly being championed by anybody... I'm just saying...

3 I fail to see the cause and affect. Just sayin...

4 Let me guess, you also think that Libya would have spontaneously given up their WMD programs while Saddam was still in power too... Reforms such as this didn't have any kind of support prior to the democratization on Iraq...now that there is a free Arab nation in the Middle East, people in surrounding countries want it too...that's about as 'cause and effect' as it gets.

5 Forget Lybia Matt. The question is how did Saddam's removal contribute to the Kuwaiti decision to allow women to run and vote for political office? I fail to see the connection and you haven't provided one. I'll let you have a do over.

6 Clearly you don't believe in the transformative power of democracy. I can't make you see it, man... Is it POSSIBLE that Kuwait would have allowed women to vote if Saddam were still in power? Sure... Is it likely? I don't think so. But really, neither of us is going to be able to "prove" it to the other because we're engaging in speculation. My whole point in asking the question was to see which types of people would say exactly what you said...

7 Matt, referring to Kuwaiti women's new found right to vote you made the statement, "Does anybody think this sort of thing would be happening if Saddam were still in power?". You were given two chances to provide an argument that supports your contention. The best you can do is attriibute the affect to the "transformative power of democracy". That's baby talk Matt. Maybe one of the other readers will be kind enough to come to your rescue.

8 greg is at it again I see. So greg, tell us why it isn't related.

9 I can't help it if you lack the ability to understand me, Greg...would smaller words help you out some?

10 The new guy's an Idiot.

11 And that makes you, what? Some kind of genius? Whatever, dude...

12 lol internet

13 Greg, I'll explain it for you, but I'm afraid I will have to use lots of big words, so get someone to help you if you can. First, with the establishment of parliamentary democracy in Iraq, which of course had nothing to do with the fall of Saddam, which of course was not due to the war, women are guaranteed 27% of all legislative seats. In most places, this is called "progress", except by progressives of course, who pretend it doesn't exist, as it could only be called progress if the UN was involved, in which case the female children of the country would have been introduced to the progressive notion of child prostituion, but I digress. Oh also, Afghan women have guaranteed seats in their government as well, but of course, one thing has nothing to do with the other, and the fact that both followed closely on the heels of American wars of liberation are purely coincidental, and as we all know, both wars have been double-plus-ungood for all those poor people who have had to suffer the indignities of freedom. Second, the women of Iraq and Afghanistan no longer have as much to fear as they once did, i.e. kidnapping, rape rooms, etc.. The women of Kuwait, who have been more free up to this point than the women of Iraq and Afghanistan, don't like the fact that they're now less free. It's not a jealousy thing, they just want to be free. Imagine that, don't they know they'd be better off if Saddam was still in power? I'm not sure how they would be, but if you, the all knowing, all seeing greg say so, it must be true. So, greg, why are you so dead set against making people free? Is it the fact that they're just "little brown people", or is it that in your heart, where you secretly admire "Uncle Joe", you think autocractic authoritarianism is better than freedom? I'm guessing the latter, since people who are free to choose and well informed rarely choose the left hand path of politics, and that just kills you.

14 greg: "I fail to see the cause and affect. Just sayin..." But you can't deny the timing.

15 Granting full political rights to Kuwaiti women has nothing to do with the fact that Saddam was driven out of power. Kuwait has been known as the only democratic country in the gulf since it was established. The first sheikh Sabah the 1st was chosen by shoura (elections within the tribes of kuwait). Study Kuwait's history, and you will know for a fact that women activists were pushing for rights since the early 70's. Oh and not to forget mentioning the Amiri decree of 1999 ( the Amir granting the women full political rights before Saddam's fall , was shut down by opposing groups in the parliament).

16 Well, Greg, I don't know if you noticed, but democracy easn't exactly flourishing over there before...and women's rights weren't exactly being championed by anybody... I'm just saying... Posted by: Matt Hurley at May 16, 2005 02:16 PM ------------------------------------------------ In addition, ((Kuwait's organic law, with its formal commitment to equality, is a feminist mainstay, providing a normative justification for women's continuing efforts to achieve equal rights under a constitution that is widely respected by the population.))

17 benım adım kerım hepınızı severım