If dems were going to nominate somebody who isn't going to win, why couldn't it have been Kucinich? He was way better than what's-his-name.

Socialist Worker is reporting that the elections are part of a divide-and-conquer strategy:

“The Bush administration is intentionally steering Iraq towards civil war,” wrote Mike Whitney on the CounterPunch Web site. “The elections are merely the catalyst for igniting what could be a massive social upheaval. This explains the bizarre insistence on voting when security is nearly nonexistent, and where a mere 7 percent of the people can even identify the candidates.”

http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-1/528/528_04_AtStake.shtml

also check out
http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-1/528/528_06_Ramadani.shtml
 

What would be gained from a civil war in Iraq?
 

sleight of hand.. look at the war! (don't look at me walking off with the oil rights...) oh, and halliburton needs more of your money.
 

"But one conclusion is obvious now for the antiwar movement--that no one should oppose immediate withdrawal because U.S. forces are needed to stop a civil war. In fact, the U.S. is fanning the flames, not putting them out. The antiwar movement needs to support the Iraqi struggle to free itself of this domination."