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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (267568)	1/8/2006 6:15:53 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577224

I see insufficient glue to hold Iraq together, so why pretend? The Shia have a large enough block that they become de facto rulers under democracy. They want a theocracy. Neither Sunni nor Kurd can live under that. Fundamentally the Kurds just want their own state. The only hope for a united, democratic Iraq is if most Kurds, most Sunnis and all the secular Shia hang together in a block which checkmates the religious Shia. Not a stable coalition IMO, so it will either not happen, or won't last long if it does initially work. The current boundaries of Iraq were drawn up by the Brits in the early 20th century and date from the 7th century. Back in the 7th century, the Shia had splintered off from the Sunnis but had not made yet their migration to Iraq and Iran. That would not happen until late in the 7th century or early in the 8th century. The Kurds were mostly in the Zagros Mts in western Iran. So Iraq was mostly occupied by the Sunnis with a smattering of Greeks, Jews, Druze, Alawait and other small sects. The boundaries probably made sense back then. I am not sure they do today given the animosity among the three biggest ethnic groups.

To: neolib who wrote (267568)	1/8/2006 6:47:39 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577224

"I see insufficient glue to hold Iraq together, so why pretend?" Well, it is this way. While an independent Loserstan doesn't concern anyone, independent Shiastan and Kurdistan concerns everyone. Shiastan raise the fear that Iran is now the major regional power, and none of those countries find that appealing. Kurdistan is almost as problematic. Not only is Turkey absolutely rabid on that issue, so is Syria and ironically enough, Iran. Between the three, one or more is going to eat Kurdistan. A fragmented Iraq is probably the most destabilizing thing that could occur in that not too stable region.