SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: gao seng who wrote (219521)1/17/2002 5:37:53 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof  Read Replies (1) of 769670
 
Interesting article....

"Many Turks believe they were cheated out of the Northern Iraqi oil-producing region of Mosul in the carving up of the Turkish-ruled Ottoman Empire after World War I. The Turkish prime minister briefly raised the question of taking back northern Iraq in 1995."

"Would Turkey go along with an American invasion of Iraq? Possibly, but its price might be high. For example, it might want the whole of northern Iraq. What Turkey did not want in 1991 and does not want in 2001 is self-determination within Iraq."

"That's because, besides the Iraqi Arabs and the Turks, there is one more nation that believes itself entitled to the mountains and oil fields of Northern Iraq: the stateless Kurds. There are some 22 million Kurds, most living in the mountains near Turkey's borders with Iraq, Iran and Syria."

"They are often said to be the largest ethnic group in the world without their own state, though that seems debatable. (African-Americans, for example, are more numerous, and India is full of larger ethnic groups.)"

... "So, there is only one ideal launching pad for an invasion of Iraq. It's the same one as in 1991: Saudi Arabia.

...There is only one little problem. Saudi Arabia would almost certainly refuse America permission to use its soil to launch an invasion, just as the royal family has not allowed the U.S. Air Force to attack Afghanistan from U.S. airfields in the kingdom. (The Saudis were one of only three countries to recognize the Taliban regime.)"

"The Gulf Arabs have many reasons to prefer the current accommodation to war with Iraq. When Hussein grabbed Kuwait in 1990, the Saud family initially assumed it would pay off Hussein rather than fight."

"Further, the Saudis and other Sunni Muslim Gulf Arabs still fear that the collapse of central government in Iraq could unleash chaos that could sweep them away, too. Just as the Turks dread an independent Kurdistan growing out of the ruins of Iraq, the Sunnis fear a Shiite state aligned with Iran emerging in the oilfields of Southern Iraq."

>>> So that's at least three new states that could emerge from a disintergrating Iraq: Kurdistan, Turkmen, and the Shiites in the south... as well as 'border adjustments' such as Turkey grabbing northern oil fields....

>>> And, regarding the American conquest and administration of Saudi Arabia ("Saudi America"?):

"If the United States isn't willing to be ruthless enough to rule an empire, then perhaps it should restrict itself to rooting out bin Laden and the Taliban rather than planning an empire for which it doesn't have the stomach."

>>> Interesting series of speculations... and it seems to lead to the logical conclusion that we're not going to be attacking any large nation-states.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext