Saddam got 99.99% of the vote. Here's why

[emprworm]

note: this is a joke guys, though it does reflect realisty.

[TMA_1]

lol here we go again. Another ultra extremist view from empr.lol

[exatreide]

dang didnt have my glasses on and checked the bottem one, whares my shot gun ::)

[emprworm]

yea, like you don't think thats what happened?

TMA, I hope you watch fox news tomorrow. There is going to be a national march of MUSLIMS FOR BUSH in New York city. All of them Iraqi. Thousands will be attending. I just saw a woman interviewed on the news 2 days ago who's family was butchered by Hussein (she escaped) and she was saying that the Iraqi people are counting down to the second for the Americans to arrive...they can't wait. She is just overjoyed at bush's speech. Thousands of Iraqi's are marching in New York tomorrow to voice their support of Bush. But I take it the people of Iraq doesn't really matter much in this?

That ballot, though humorous, is indeed accurate. people that did not vote for Hussein were killed. you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise. but I have a feeling you will not even be watching the news tomorrow or even listen to the iraqi's talk about what its like there.

you call it extremist, TMA, and unfortunately, the truth is sometimes extreme. even if you refuse to face it.

[TMA_1]

nah I just think your way of expressing this is a little wrong.

[exatreide]

you said 99.99% which means someone else got atleast .01 of the vote :)

[emprworm]

nah I just think your way of expressing this is a little wrong.

well its accurate, unfortunately. maybe the humor doesn't come clean, but accurate nontheless.

[TMA_1]

hehe, a dissatisfied ant I guess.

[zamboe]

This is not humor , but the truth :P

http://www.dune2k.com/forum/attachments/ultimatum.jpg

[attachment archived by Gobalopper]

[rigel6669]

That is normal, simply because there is no voting.

There is only the dictator

The 0,01% comes from a party member that accidentley used a vote slip as toilet paper :P

[SurlyPIG]

That was in my school's newspaper. There was a little blurb of commentary from the social department as well, talking about how satire like that could never exist in Iraq. They also said, and I agree with them, that although it IS satire, it's sadly not far from the truth.

From what wintesses have said, there is only one option on the ballot, and two armed guards stand over you while you vote just in case you dont do something like write down a second candidate or something.

The percentages are made up. In the 'election' before last, Saddam recieved 99.97% of the votes, with the 0.03 interpreted as him saying "See, I allow free speech!" In the most recent one, just a few months ago, he recieved 100% of the votes as if to portray the message that all his people are behind him in times preceeding war.

[emprworm]

actually, that cartoon zamboe posted is entirely false.

bush never said that.

"Saddam must fully disarm as mandated by UN resolution 1441 or we invade"

get it right, zamboe

[Tenzul]

That is normal, simply because there is no voting.

There is only the dictator

You're right. Almost 100% in elections can only mean dictatorship or

communism.

[DjCiD]

I'm not sure my chad was punched out all the way threw... so did I just vote for Saddam and ask to be tourtured?! ;D

oh wait I was supposed to mark with an X not punch out chad...

*walks over to Chad*

"sorry bout that mate... no harm done?"

[Anathema]

Never mind that you didn't say anything that is really any less than established fact that everyone knows.

[Dante]

actually, that cartoon zamboe posted is entirely false.

bush never said that.

"Saddam must fully disarm as mandated by UN resolution 1441 or we invade"

get it right, zamboe

Didn't he also just say that he didn't need the permission of the UN to invade? That he didn't need anyone's permission. If that isn't dictator talk I don't know what is.

[vidiware]

You can vote:

A) KEEP OUR HERO SADDAM

or

B) I WANT TO BE TORTURED AND WANT TO ELECT ANOTHER PRESIDENT

[stefanhendriks]

Actually, there are no other kandidates. Thats typical for a Dicatorship. So these voting, yes, ofcourse the voting is:

Elect saddam?

[yes]

[no]

Ofcourse if you do not elect Saddam you probably have a big problem, yet again, that is a dictatorship and it aint new either. But, because of the current situation on Iraq we have to squeeze as much out of Iraq to convince people we should go in and play cowboy.

Again, in any country which has dictators you cannot EVEN VOTE. Actually, i think Saddam is doing a keen play-around with the US by forcing up democracy.. He gave democracy... you had a choice... sort of!

[Davidu]

What Saddam did was absolutely nothing, zero. An election like that is tha biggest fake the world has ever seen.

It's like Windows: Error - blow up PC?? [YES] [Yes]

[stefanhendriks]

true. I see it as an indirect 'stick the middle finger up to the USA' action from Saddam in a cynical way...

[SurlyPIG]

Again, in any country which has dictators you cannot EVEN VOTE. Actually, i think Saddam is doing a keen play-around with the US by forcing up democracy.. He gave democracy... you had a choice... sort of!

Yep, you can choose to vote for Saddam, or you can choose for you and your family to die.

[ayer05]

Would any Dictator allow his people to take up arms and defend its country against any invading army? There are so many factions of people in Iraq, it would best be divided into seperate countries, with their own leaders....BUT...after the gulf war, when the US retreated, they gave the Kurds that they had just 'liberated' back to the Iraqi army...why? Because it is easier to invade one country in a state of inter-termoil, then raise a campaign to invade many countries @ once...and so the son comes back to finish the fight.

[emprworm]

Would any Dictator allow his people to take up arms and defend its country against any invading army? There are so many factions of people in Iraq, it would best be divided into seperate countries, with their own leaders....BUT...after the gulf war, when the US retreated, they gave the Kurds that they had just 'liberated' back to the Iraqi army...why? Because it is easier to invade one country in a state of inter-termoil, then raise a campaign to invade many countries @ once...and so the son comes back to finish the fight.

you know why the US retreated right?

we could have easily finished the job, but we didn't. You know why that is?

UN CEASE FIRE DECLARED

yup! Thats your wonderful UN at its finest. (making stupid decisions)

[Anathema]

That's a dumb argument Emp and you know it. The US never cared sh1t about what the UN thought before the Gulf War, and still don't.

Note: Sadam used mostly choppers to eradicate Kurd settlements. Choppers wich could easily have been taken out by the US, but apparently Schwarzkopf, the leader of the US forces, wasn't interested.

[emprworm]

That's a dumb argument Emp and you know it. The US never cared sh1t about what the UN thought before the Gulf War, and still don't.

i don't know that, because it is false. I dont think you know GUlf war history. The day after Hussein invaded Kuwait, the UN held an emergency meeting authorizing use of force in a unanimous vote. The US did not drop a single bomb w/o UN authority. And when the UN demanded the US cease hostilities, it complied (a mistake.)

was the UN wrong in demanding a ceasefire allowing Hussein to remain in power? that was not a US decision.