How about making Iraq the 51st state?

I know that sounds like sarcasm, but I'm offering it out there genuinely. Of course that's basically taking the country, but you know if they have voting rights, and are tied to us so closely economically, defended by our military....maybe it would be the best thing for them?
It's prolly a bad idea, but I dunno....I'm just throwing it out there.

On edit: I guess I'm asking why it's a bad idea, aside from the obvious bad PR (I think there could be some good PR, too- they need a government, we said they'd get democracy. Seems an easy way to give it to them) and the civil war we'd have on our hands. But maybe they'd like the idea of legitimate, secular democracy, in time?
It's kind of "taking them under our wing" in an extremely paternalistic manner, but there's some kind of "good faith" feeling it has to it...it might help win people over.
Again, I dunno.

the uk is already 51st

how many electoral votes do you believe it'd have, roughly?

Not that I think Iraq should become a US state or anything, I just am curious of the question at hand.

...on the size of their population. We'd have to get a census.

Second only to California, population 33 million with 54 votes

Texas and NY are CLOSE to 20 million and are in the low 30's for votes.

I'm sure they wouldn't mind having a nice, big voice.

bringing together an unholy alliance of all the peoples' of the world of all political persuasions against the U.S, including 95% of Americans. Do you think the freepers would like this idea? Do you think DUers would like this idea?

I mean, so many things wrong with even the thought of your idea that one could go on all night.

SOMEONE SLAP SOME SENSE INTO THIS BOY!!!!!!!!! he is driving me crazy.

...what's wrong with the idea? ;)

...hundreds of years ago, when kingdoms would just have their royalty marry each other to resolve conflicts.

It would ensure that Bush won't spend another dime on Iraq. Apparently he doesn't give a shit about the US, based on all the states he has driven into bankruptcy. Iraq would just become another state that he managed to completely fuck over.

It's definitely one way to save $87 bil.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I'm j/k.
Man I don't see it like that.
Look, they know we have a legitimate democracy. If we approach them in a manner asking them if they'd LIKE to join us, who knows what would happen? I think that at the very least they'd have to seriously consider it. It seems like a good deal all around- there would be some cultural issues, but luckily the cultural tolerance of our constitution allows for that. And I'm not saying there wouldn't be the naysayers, but I think if offered correctly it would seen as very sincere and a genuine opportunity for the Iraqi people. If anything one would think the other Arab states would be jealous that the Iraqis get to have a real part of what we have. If we aren't forcing it upon them, and just leaving it as an option, I don't see how anyone could hold it against us.

a 'legitimate democracy...' Dude, really...
Sure, there is cultural tolerance in our Constitution but the Constitution ain't the one paying the bills... are you on planet nine? it jus' don't make no SENSE boy... NO SENSE whatsoever... silly boy. silly silly silly boy.

I have faith that at least for the most part our electoral system works correctly. 2000 was a farce, but it was just real close. Someone was gonna be pissed either way.
Have more faith, man! The fathers of our country set this thing up to withstand just about anything. The greatest part of democracy is it's adaptability.

who thinks the whole world envies the US, and wants to live in the US, aren't you?
We don't. A large proportion of the world, and I'm not just talking about the middle east, despises you. I feel that the US is best symbolised by Disneyland, and I personally would like to burn that place to the ground.
And many of your 'fellow Americans' on this site may debate just how legitimate your democracy is. I don't believe any of the major countries have a legitimate democracy.
Get this through your head... WE DON'T WANT TO BE AMERICANS!!!

...and screaming about how Pooh Bear won't stop chasing him because he has the secret to making MAGIC CRACK COCAINE HUNNY out of Miracle Whip and the pickled testicle of South Dakota Highway Patrol officers.

And, the secular kind, I'm assuming?
Well, THAT'S what we have here, and it's as good as it's getting ANYWHERE.
You don't like George Bush, neither do I. You don't like our money-grubbing culture, neither do I. But one thing I LOVE is our Constitution. You wouldn't understand because you don't live here. But I will tell you that the structure of our government is as good as it gets (even if you don't like who's occupying the structure), and that can be seen in the way that every industrialized nation has taken it as a model.
ENJOY YOUR DEMOCRACY.
On edit: not EVERY industrialized nation. But most, and all of the legitimate democracies.

Like every other system, it has its good and bad points. I wont bother mentioning the good, they're forced down our throat every day, so I just might mention the worst problem. Short-termism; making decisions that are good for the next election even if they're bad for the long term, and burying decisions that are bad for the next election even if they will be good in the long term. Mob-rule doesn't always translate to good rule, either.
Not that we actually have a democracy, of course. In a democracy, the population gets to vote on every decision. That wouldn't be practical, so what we have now is an elected dictatorship (even more so here, where going against the party line and 'crossing the floor' is nigh on unthinkable).
Winston Churchill once said (as best as I can remember it) "Democracy is the worst system of government we have, with the exception of every other system of government we have ever tried"
Personally, I just want a system where the streets are safe, the people have a decent life, and nobody bothers me. You could have that under any system.

All I'm saying is that I, personally, like having a say in my government. And I like everyone else (who is qualified) having a say, too. It has it's way of keeping things balanced.
You'll see what I mean when Bush gets thrown out of office in 2004. Will you be happy then?

But you have to consider that (at least by the US), it is apparently rated slightly higher than the word of God, and considered just as infallible.
"who is qualified"... Who decides who is qualified?
By its very nature democracy means popularism. That is fine as long as the popular decisions turn out to be good ones.
Any government system needs the decision-makers to be educated and informed. Educated and informed people are often a minority. Democracy (when not rigged) is run by the majority.

I'll let your argument stand for itself. But, I do have a few things to say.
By the way, many Americans don't see the "word" of God as infallible. We've realized that it may not be authentic.
I wouldn't call democracy infallible, either. However, I do believe the free exchange of ideas throughout a culture is the best way to work issues out. Some bad decisions will be made, but at least we take responsibility for it collectively (although there are a lot of "I told you so!"'s).
Besides, I KNOW I'm smarter than George Bush. Don't you think you are? I want the chance to throw his ass out (without beheading him).
In a democracy, "the people" are the thermometer. When things aren't going well for "the people," collectively, it's "the people" who get to decide whose ideas are going to change things for the better. We get to do this every two years for Congress, and every four years for the president. While you may see this as shortsighted, if you look at it in terms of the big picture, you can see the adaptability in the system (and, the accountability of the politicians).

then perhaps we can agree that non-democracies shouldn't be brow-beaten or outright-forced into becoming one. While brow-beating in support of human rights may be defensible (preferably by bodies like the UN, where it's harder for single countries to run the show), you don't need a democracy to have human rights.
I will be fair, however, and say that democracy is working reasonably well. So far. I consider it still in its trial period.

because a lot of the time "the majority" has its collective head up its butt. "The majority" usually can't see further than its wallet and paycheck.

and as far as what I could see on TV, the Iraqis look like westerners to me with the same clothes we wear, etc... That's why I was suprised when we actually went in and killed them.

Why is there constant opposition to statehood within Puerto Rico? Because a majority prefer to remain a sovereign nation, in spite of the fact that they are basically a colony of the US. Despite the benefits they could receive by being full US citizens, still they prefer to remain as autonomous as they can and NOT a U.S. state.

We could drop the health care and set the rebuilding into unfunded mandates letting their bridges rot. We could build them more prisons and up the death penalties on a new TV show we'd call the Iraqi Colosseum. Not that such a show would decline and fall. Why, we wouldn't even have to count their votes and could just label them a Democracy just like US. Then we could privatize their oil for the good of the people who are the privatizers, which unfortunately won't be me. And, our corporations could play with the pipelines causing the value of that oil to rise higher than a California deficit. And, it would help lower the debt each American has yet to pay, provided we don't borrow that much more.

I bet they can't wait to sign up and be liberated.

.

!?

Making Iraq a state would never work though. We're supposed to be working to build Iraq into a democracy, not another Diebold PNAC vassal state.