US Military Paints Bleak Iraq Picture

[Table 5]

Well appeasing 1/3 is still better at this stage than 0/3! I'm with johhny on this one, seperating these guys is the best strategy in the long run.

[Flash Walken]

if you 'appease' the kurds by letting them form kurdistan, you're ****ing off Turkey, a more important historical ally who has no desire to see a kurdish state on their border.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

if you 'appease' the kurds by letting them form kurdistan, you're ****ing off Turkey, a more important historical ally who has no desire to see a kurdish state on their border.

And Syria. The idea of the birth of Kurdistan is extremely short sighted and could cause even greater violence in the region. As I challenged Johnny in another thread, learn about the geographic and historic challenges of a Kurdish homeland before suggesting a poorly thought out idea. As the world evolves to become more regionally ethnically hetrogenous the ideas of homogenous states become less likely to work.

[Mr.Coffee]

So like, what do you do when there really is no solution?

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

if you 'appease' the kurds by letting them form kurdistan, you're ****ing off Turkey, a more important historical ally who has no desire to see a kurdish state on their border.

Yep, Turkey would be extremely po'd to find a Kurdish state on its border. It would cause huge problems with the Kurds on the Turkish side of the Iraqi border, and might dramatically escalate Kurdish separatist violence in South-Eastern Turkey. Besides, I'm pretty sure when the US went in one of their main objectives was to keep Iraq together, not split it up. Re-drawing borders sounds sort of neo-colonialist ala Africa.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

So like, what do you do when there really is no solution?

The obvious answer to that is you don't invade in the first place, but since that road is long since passed, I have no idea.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

So like, what do you do when there really is no solution?

The only solution is to use the regional countries to find stability. It's their problem if Iraq blows up, so that means the bordering nations have to be given the responsibility to help find the solution. The United States should butt the F out and let Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, and Syria do most of the talking and call in Kuwait and Jordan as moderate voices. These countries have the most to lose or gain, so they should be front and center.

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

And Syria. The idea of the birth of Kurdistan is extremely short sighted and could cause even greater violence in the region. As I challenged Johnny in another thread, learn about the geographic and historic challenges of a Kurdish homeland before suggesting a poorly thought out idea. As the world evolves to become more regionally ethnically hetrogenous the ideas of homogenous states become less likely to work.

Baloney -- check out the many examples in Europe since the the USSR went kaput or the Balkans split up etc. Look at the rubbish caused by combining the tribes together idiotically in Africa.

Kurds are going to do it anyway. The Turks be damned!!!

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Yep, Turkey would be extremely po'd to find a Kurdish state on its border. It would cause huge problems with the Kurds on the Turkish side of the Iraqi border, and might dramatically escalate Kurdish separatist violence in South-Eastern Turkey. Besides, I'm pretty sure when the US went in one of their main objectives was to keep Iraq together, not split it up. Re-drawing borders sounds sort of neo-colonialist ala Africa.

Exactly the opposite -- Instead of putting together groups that hate each other with a passion as in Nigeria for an example you break them apart. Who cares if the Turks are ****ed --are they somehow more important than the Kurdish people?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

The only solution is to use the regional countries to find stability. It's their problem if Iraq blows up, so that means the bordering nations have to be given the responsibility to help find the solution. The United States should butt the F out and let Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, and Syria do most of the talking and call in Kuwait and Jordan as moderate voices. These countries have the most to lose or gain, so they should be front and center.

This isn't a comedy thread. Iran as moderator --that is funny.

Turkey --yep the Kurds will agree to that.

If you want to include some other nations ask Syria to help the Sunni's establish their government and Iran help the Shia's and the UN can help the Kurds.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

Exactly the opposite -- Instead of putting together groups that hate each other with a passion as in Nigeria for an example you break them apart. Who cares if the Turks are ****ed --are they somehow more important than the Kurdish people?

Why are you asking me? Ask the US government if they're more important. Turkey is a major US ally... what they want matters to the US administration, even if it doesn't matter to you and I.

Its fun to debate this and all, but I don't really see the point. If the US isn't going to create a partition, then its all moot anyway. I haven't heard anything from the Administration thus far that would point in that direction... have you? While we're randomly theorizing about plans to stabilize Iraq, I think it would be just great if all sides would put down their weapons and hug and kiss. But if it ain't going to happen, why bother debating how their going to hug and kiss?

[JohnnyFlame]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Why are you asking me? Ask the US government if they're more important. Turkey is a major US ally... what they want matters to the US administration, even if it doesn't matter to you and I.

Its fun to debate this and all, but I don't really see the point. If the US isn't going to create a partition, then its all moot anyway. I haven't heard anything from the Administration thus far that would point in that direction... have you? While we're randomly theorizing about plans to stabilize Iraq, I think it would be just great if all sides would put down their weapons and hug and kiss. But if it ain't going to happen, why bother debating how their going to hug and kiss?

Latest I've heard is they are looking at what some reporter called "Blame and run" as opposed to cut and run. Setup the Iraqi PM for the blame as in give him more troops, say he should be capable now, cut the American troops and then if it falls apart then use "Blame and run".

But there is plenty of evidence of people and not only Kurds heading to Kurdish territory. Of course the genocide is in full swing with death squads racking up body counts everyday. Also ample evidence of large numbers of people fleeing to either Sunni or Shia territory.

So is is official US policy yet --- Nope but it sure looks like it's official IRAQ reality.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by JohnnyFlame

This isn't a comedy thread. Iran as moderator --that is funny.

Turkey --yep the Kurds will agree to that.

If you want to include some other nations ask Syria to help the Sunni's establish their government and Iran help the Shia's and the UN can help the Kurds.

Where do you come up with this crap??? What do you miss about the Kurd issue? That the tribe transends international borders and extends into Turkey and Syria, or the fact that no one wants to see the birth of Kurdistan as a nation? Turkey and Syria would be establishing their own social unrest by establishing this country.

ALL nations mentioned have to be involved as the security of the region is at risk. One can't be discounted because YOU don't agree with their politics.