Iraqis Prefer John McCain
Although we often speak about who foreigners, especially Europeans, prefer to win, we have spent little to no time explaining what Iraqis – a key foreign population – think. Agence France-Presse reported Friday that quite some of them want John McCain to win.
That may surprise quite some Americans who, after all, are often told that Iraqis want the United States to withdraw immediately. Since Barack Obama advocates a quick withdrawal, one might have expected Iraqis to support his candidacy.
Not so.
Many Iraqis told AFP that they are afraid that if Obama becomes president he will withdraw too soon. One Baghdad resident, Mohammed, explained: “Our army is still too weak and Turkey and Iran are threats. Iran’s President (Mahmoud) Ahmadinejad has warned Iran would fill the void left when US troops depart.”
Iraqis seem to fear Iran tremendously, and rightfully so of course. They believe that the U.S. will not do anything to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons if Obama becomes president, which would alter the balance of power in the region considerably.
“The Iranians believe that if Obama is elected he will not take action against them despite their nuclear ambitions. That worries me,” said Ali, a university professor.
Whamith Shadhan, another Iraqi, agreed with Mohammed and Ali, saying: “I trust the Republicans more. They’re more capable of establishing democracy in the world, especially in Arab countries. Obama is far too left.”
Unlike Barack Obama and many other liberal Democrats who talk a good game about how people should rule themselves, the U.S. withdraw, and everyone will get along just fine, Iraqis actually live in the region and know that when given the opportunity, Iran will try to dominate every single Middle Eastern country, and especially Iraq, which is majority Shiite after all.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
