5/15 I'm naive and don't know all the issues there, but it seems to me
that the root of the Iraq Civil War stems from the fact that three
major ethnic groups hate each other and don't like to run the
government together. Why can't they be split up into
three separate Emirates, each governing its own affairs while
having common Federal government-like structures like utilities
and the military?
\_ Short answer: the Turks (our allies) are violently opposed to an
independent Kurdistan, because they think that would inspire
further separatism among their own native Kurds; Iran would most
likely annex (or at least welcome under their protection) an
independent Shiite nation; and the Sunnis and Shia have wildly
different ideas of what's Shiite territory and what's Sunni.
That said, we may be heading in that direction anyway.
\_ I'm just waiting for the headline "Bush meets secretly with Saddam
for tips on running Iraq"
\_ All the oil is in the Shiite and Kurdish areas. Sunnis would love
to have a share of that distributed through a federal apparatus.
Shiites and Kurds would love to keep it, based on their people
sitting on it. How do you come to an agreement?
With Saddam it was easy: It all goes to Sunnis, and if you're
unhappy with that, you go into the woodchipper, feet-first.
\_ Did I miss something? Iraq Civil War? Anyway, the above already
answered your core question, but most of the problems in the
Middle East and Africa date back to European nations intentionally
carving up tribal groups, drawing artificial lines, and generally
creating such a huge mess of things that untangling them now is not
as simple as just drawing new lines. You'd just be making a new
mess to replace the old one. There's also this very new concept
of "international stability" which is all about everyone shutting
the hell up and dealing with whatever mess they've got. Wars of
conquest are no longer allowed. Wars to fix the broken European
lines are not allowed. Nothing is allowed. Buy Mcdonald's is
allowed. Those intentionally messed up artificial borders are the
root cause of things like the Hutu and Tutsi killing each other,
several famines, and a lot of other ugliness in that large part of
the world.
\_ So why doesn't Europe do more to fix these messes they've made?
\_ why would they? it was done intentionally and sometimes
through ignorance, apathy and/or expediency. what do you
think has changed that suddenly the european powers would
feel the desire to fix their previous messes? and where do
you come up with the idea that a) they have the power to do
so and b) the right? why don't the locals fix their own
messes and redraw their own borders in a more sensible and
equitable way?
\_ Where do you come up with the idea that I came up with
the idea that Europe can or should do anything you stupid
motherfucker. I merely asked why don't they.
\_ First, they weren't asked; if the UN had decided to
invade Iraq, it would have attempted to draw equitable
borders, but the UN was ignored so now it's our mess.
And second, there's no reason to believe that
Europe (or America for that matter) can draw borders
any better than the people living there. -tom
\_ They weren't asked to ruin these places by making
fucked up borders in the first place and that didn't
stop them.
\_ Therefore they should go in and make more
fucked up borders? Do you have a point? -tom
\_ Why are you limiting this discussion to Iraq?
Europe messed up Sudan, Kashmir, Rwanda also.
There's no shortage of other places to fix.
\_ When sectarian violence is killing hundreds, if not thousands,
of people every week, I don't know what you can call it but a
civil war.
\_ business as usual for that area.
\_ bushshit.
\_ its public info. go look up the death tolls for iraq.
\_ How 'bout you provide the info. This is a specious
claim.
\_ i don't know what you guys are arguing about, but
the Iraqi president said "1,091 people were killed
between April 1 and 30". About 260 per week.
In Baghdad only. Only bodies which got to the
morgue. |