>SNIP
>>Interesting to note after all the rhetoric, the Iraqi's aren't going to get the chance to vote for their government, maybe George Bush doesn't trust them to vote for the right people.
>
>Well, if you read further down, the American (or leader from whatever country it turns out to be) in charge is only supposed to be 'interim' until elections can be put in place. I still think it is a mistake and if that plan comes to pass, then it should be a representative from another country in the UN that performs that role.

The way I read this :
"An additional commission would write a new constitution, although officials emphasized that they would not expect to “democratize” Iraq along the lines of the U.S. governing system. Instead, they speak of a “representative Iraqi government.”"
was that the "representative Iraqi government" would be appointed not elected, maybe I'm wrong. I did re-read the article & couldn't find any reference to elections.


>>
>>I wonder how long before the US trained opposition troops decide that they want their own country back & turn on their liberators.
>
>Good question. Minor revolts are common during country rebuilding efforts. It would be a first in a attempt by the majority of the countrymen though that I am aware of.

The leading Iraqi opposition parties are seeking to set up their own provisional government once the war begins. If those parties are not allowed a big say in the running of the country immediately, their could be big problems for any interim government set up by the US.

It will be interesting to see what the UN view is on this US plan for Iraq, it doesn't seem to have been passed to them for discussion/agreement. There may be questions over whether or not resolution 1441 allows for military action to take place to ensure that disarmament is done, but I'm sure it doesn't allow for the country to lose it's sovreignty.
>
>Tracy