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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (24362)	1/1/2005 4:29:41 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Well the first reason for going to war is the only reason that fills the bill for a reason to go to war. All the rest are either reasons for justifying the war in retrospect or continuing the war. So make them reasons for war, rather than for going to war. Why do you think a divided Iraq is likely and, besides Turkey's fear that a separate Kurdish state in northern Iraq might cause problems with Kurds inside Turkey, what downside do you see to a divided Iraq? The Kurds have pretty much been separate from the rest of Iraq for years now...even before the war...under the cover of the no fly zones. So effectively the country is partitioned into three separate areas now. It's a hopeful scenario that an elected leader will emerge that can represent the diverse groups in Iraq. Sunni's have already been saying boycott the election. Shia, in the majority endorse the election which will probably favor them. Kurds are isolated, and have the Sunni as a buffer between them and the Shia. I'm not coming from an possible outcomes are bad point of view. I'm looking at the situation in Iraq and seeing how partitioning is already in place by culture, religion, geography, history and current events. The election, if successful will try to integrate Iraq. The only time it was accopmlished in the last 1000 years was through strong dictatorships or monarchies. Saddam being the most recent and maybe one of the more brutal. You have the Sunni saying boycott the election. OBL says boycott the election. You have the Kurds who seem to tolerate the election, but will probably not accept any control by outsiders. Possibly a parlimentary system could work in Iraq where each element has some share of the power. Ultimately, I think that what will work best is what works now, which is separation in a formal way into three states. As you point out the distribution of oil resources is not equal in the three regions, which could be the impetus for a power grab. Heck it was surely part of the impetus for the US to invade Iraq. That is evident from the writings of the administration members as members of the PNAC. Those hawkish positions, such as the oil will pay for the war, have morphed into a more politically palatable call to "bring democracy to Iraq", still underlay the fundamental reason for US presence in the Middle East...OIL. And what works best...really doesn't work that well as we see today on the ground. Security has not been achieved. Elections will be bloody...as the lead up to them has already proved. As you point out the exit strategy now seems to be defined by "we will leave when we are successful in bringing democracy to Iraq". That seems to be a long way off. The time line could be shortened if Iraqi forces step up to the plate and provide security. Or additional US troops could be sent, or additional international troops. The best scenario would be Iraqis taking control themselves. But that leads back to the question of who are the Iraqis? The Kurds, Sunni and Shia...and their desires and needs are not the same. From what I understand, the majority of the Iraqi security forces have been tapped from the Shia. This leaves out the Sunnis, currently labeled insurgents. I'm an optimist by nature. By that viewpoint I saw alternatives to going to war. Now that we have stepped into the quagmire we need to find a solution. Looking at the competing factions leads me to think that partitioning is likely. If the elections are to be successful there must be some sort of power sharing and veto...like a parlimentary system. Otherwise any political solution will likely breakdown into a civil war. Orca