Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JDN who wrote (468227)	10/1/2003 9:11:25 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

the strongest thing AGAINST the Kurds wanting their own nation is REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY where they would have a say in their NATIONAL country and even more PEACEFUL INFLUENCE in their own KURDISH state I am not a native speaker of English, so bear with me as I try to clarify some terminology, for I fear I may be misunderstanding what you are saying here: First, Kurds already have a "nation" - a Kurdish nation. They have their language, their customs, their folk songs, etc. What they don't have is a "country" or a "state". Second, I don't understand what you mean by "national country". A country all by themselves? From your sentence above, I cannot tell if you think Iraq will be a single state with "representative democracy" or a federal state where Kurds will have "their own Kurdish state". You mention both and they don't seem compatible to me. Sorry if there is a misunderstanding... I think you are saying Kurds would not want their own state as long as they are granted representation in the government of Iraq. Presumably, that would be through their own political party/parties that should win a significant part of the seats in a future parliament of Iraq. I find it less likely that Iraq will have a presidential system, since that would be impractical in a country with three distinct ethnic groups, and the president would have to be one of these, alienating the other two. I agree with you that such a democratic state could still their nationalistic aspirations, although I doubt if this will be forever. One very important factor in the formation of a new country is its economic sustainability. Kurds are sitting on two very oil-rich regions - Mosoul and Kirkuk. They are not shown within the "Kurdish autonomous region" for now (probably due to Turkey's insistance) but the region passes right outside these cities, and they are predominantly Kurdish anyway, so they will eventually be included. Or they will elect to be, in a referandum. Or something. So a Kurdish state will be economically viable. Given such a choice, nations of the world tend to opt for a country of their own, especially when faced with ethnic tensions within the region. What makes you think Kurds will WANT to live with Turkomans and Arabs, especially since they have spent the last few decades being oppressed by a dictator of the latter group, especially if they have the economic means to go forward on their own? I think it is only a matter of time. The English drew the lines on a map in a haphazard way and formed the country "Iraq". The ethnic groups in that country don't care to live together, they never have. Kurds have made it no secret that they want a country of their own. I think they will eventually get it. Imho, they deserve it no less than any other nation who wanted and fought for a country of their own.