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 : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (186)	5/15/2007 4:15:21 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

Iraq is 80% arab, 20% kurd 20% sunni arab and 60% shiaa. You do the math. Michael, the point was that Vietnam was not as homogenous as you asserted it was. And it was to point out that Vietnam, like Iraq, was a an artifical creation of external powers dividing up colonial holdings. They BOTH have considerable similarities with regard to demographics, was my point. Where they differ is that the country is not (yet) officially divided, although certainly it is, unofficially, along sectarian lines. So we're faced with a quandary here Michael. Are we, as the international community, going to focus on promoting multi-cultural tolerance within geographical borders? Or are we just going to fuel the flames of nationalism/separatism by permitting every one of these nation/states to subdivide along ethnic lines? Sure, as in the case of Yugoslavia, it may prove unavoidable. But certainly in that case it has not stopped the violence, only defined geographical boundaries along ethnic lines according to the most homogenous demographic areas. But I don't think we're there yet with Iraq. Iraq possesses something that Yugoslavia did not, intrinsic wealth derived from natural resources. And if the benefits of this natural wealth is equally distributed by the government, it may.. just may, go a long way towards the Iraqi people choosing to affiliate with the government more than their tribal and religious networks. Certainly the Kurdish question stands out amongst all of this. Do they deserve their own nation/state? Some could argue that. But few are willing to try and twist the arms of both Turkey and Iran for force such a creation. And I don't see any benefit from the creation of a Kurdish "homeland". But again, it may prove unavoidable. I prefer that each of the various ethic/religious groups have regional autonomy under the umbrella of a centralized government. They can possess their own militias in the vein of a "national guard", but they should eventually submit to the combined authority of the national government. I personally think it's a goal that is worth pursuing until partition proves unavoidable. Btw, I thought heinz had 57 varieties. Did Mr. and Mrs. Kerry perpetrate "genocide" against one of them?.. Wouldn't surprise me in the least.. ;0) Hawk