• Los Angeles Times, on the bloodshed preceding elections in Iraq Los Angeles Times, on the bloodshed preceding elections in Iraq The attack Tuesday on a U.S. military base in northern Iraq that killed more than 20 people … provided
• Los Angeles Times, on the bloodshed preceding elections in Iraq
Los Angeles Times, on the bloodshed preceding elections in Iraq
The attack Tuesday on a U.S. military base in northern Iraq that killed more than 20 people … provided graphic evidence that the insurgency is little diminished.
Many of the guerrillas driven from Falluja last month when U.S. officials proclaimed a major victory moved to Mosul and other cities and continue to wreak havoc. President Bush’s belated admission Monday that suicide bombers are “having an effect” understated the problem. …
Some Sunni leaders already are urging a boycott of the elections, which will choose a transitional national assembly to write a constitution and pick a prime minister. This is a mistake on their part. A boycott would undercut, though not destroy, the legitimacy of the balloting. But it would ensure that Sunnis have even less of a voice in the future of their nation.
For Washington, the main concern is protecting thousands of polling places in order for the election results to be deemed credible. Bush said Monday the training of Iraqi security forces had produced “mixed” results. That was another understatement — many troops have fled when attacked. We can only hope that an Iraqi government with more legitimacy might command more loyalty and a greater willingness among police and soldiers to stand and fight. Trouble is, for that to happen the election that could provide that greater legitimacy needs to be held, and protected.
