PDA

View Full Version : Kurdistan: The Other Iraq



George Eller
09-16-2006, 11:27 PM
-

Kurdistan: The Other Iraq

http://www.theotheriraq.com/

-

Panzerknacker
09-17-2006, 01:24 PM
:shock: Unbeliable.

Norris
09-17-2006, 02:40 PM
i knew there was a part for the kurds but the never had a specific terittory it was a combination of iran syria and iraq near the top of iraq to the right of syria and the left of iran

Nickdfresh
09-18-2006, 10:31 AM
There's now a movement in the U.S. to break up Iraq into its three precolonial component nation-states in order to stave off and end the Civil War there. Most of the U.S. forces would be redeployed to "The Republic of Kurdistan" in order to maintain a counter-terrorist quick-strike capability.

The Turks would not like this however...

Norris
09-18-2006, 05:48 PM
that would be very hard for the US to do and it just might get bush to be the most hated president in the 20th and 21st centuary, he might have to declare war (or the senate would have to declare war) on 3 different other countries (Syria, Turkey, and Iran) and i believe if they do that then there will be another WW because all the stans would side with the middle eastern countries and welcome to WW3.

Dani
09-18-2006, 11:38 PM
[...]he might have to declare war (or the senate would have to declare war) on 3 different other countries (Syria, Turkey, and Iran) [...]

1) Syria - Syrians close ties with Egypt would prevent this.
2) Turkey - no chance. It's a NATO country.
3) Iran - unlikely. Iran isn't Afghanistan nor Iraq. USA might support Iranian opposition exile and the oposition within Iran.

Off-topic: Norris, would you be so kind to change your avatar with a WW2 related one? It is one of the rules on this board. Thanks.

Nickdfresh
09-18-2006, 11:46 PM
that would be very hard for the US to do and it just might get bush to be the most hated president in the 20th and 21st centuary, he might have to declare war

Actually, the Iraqis are talking about it. In fact, it is Bush's Admin that is largely suppressing the idea because it's politically embarrassing. And he already may well be the most hated President of the 21st cent. His approval rating hovers around at or below 40% here.



(or the senate would have to declare war) on 3 different other countries (Syria, Turkey, and Iran) and i believe if they do that then there will be another WW because all the stans would side with the middle eastern countries and welcome to WW3.

Well, it would be up to the Iraqis to decide if they want more foreign influence in their country. But in fact, many Iraqis want a very weak federal system, or a complete breakup along sectarian lines. All the murder-gang/death squad killings in Baghdad should tell you that!

Norris
09-19-2006, 04:54 PM
. And he already may well be the most hated President of the 21st cent. His approval rating hovers around at or below 40% here.


very good point

he still hasn't done a very good job by killing over 1100 of our troops over there and WW3 may not start but it would make a couple countires very mad at bush and our country....... not the greatest way to fight a war on terrorism when it would make more

George Eller
10-06-2006, 01:44 PM
-

How The Kurds Succeeded, And Why No One Cares
Strategy Page
http://www.strategypage.com/qnd/iraq/articles/20061005.aspx

October 5, 2006:

While the new Iraqi Army has been developing nicely, the national police remain mired in corruption, brutality, and sectarianism. These are traditional ills in Iraq, and most of the Middle East for that matter. But they are also major obstacles to suppressing the terrorist organizations, since effective police work is at least as important as capable military operations. Efforts are underway to improve training, pay, and leadership. Some police units are being disbanded, when the leadership of the unit has been found totally inadequate. This is all a result of the Sunni Arab monopoly on military and police commands when Saddam was in power. Saddam only trusted Sunni Arabs, and few Kurds or Shia Arabs got senior police posts. Because of this, the new government had to start from scratch in building new leadership for the new army and police. This effort was more successful with the army. Many of the new police commanders were more loyal to their tribes, or their own financial success, than to their police responsibilities.

Anbar and the Wild West. The recent pact between the government and local leaders that established "Anbar Tribal Sheiks Council" (ATSC) is beginning to pay off. A number of tribal leaders have agreed to initiate routine patrols of roads in the province, to supplement government military and police patrols. The patrols will help reduce insurgent attacks on road traffic, which will lead to an improved economic situation in the province. In addition, by increasing the number of security personnel, and the number of check points, the tribal patrols will impede terrorist movements. Since the terrorism activity in Anbar is not almost completely dominated by Al Qaeda (viewed as "foreigners" by the locals), this will have a serious impact on the security situation there. Naturally, al Qaeda action against the ATSC is expected. It will probably come in the form of assassination attempts against prominent sheiks or members of their families. This may turn out to be counter-productive, since vengeance is an ancient tribal tradition. In the past, al Qaeda has been driven from many areas in central Iraq, when the terrorists sought to terrorize tribes with the assassination of tribal leaders. There are over a hundred functioning tribal organizations in Iraq, and al Qaeda now has the support of less than a dozen.

Why is there peace and prosperity in the north, and why doesn't anyone talk about it? Actually, the economy is booming in the Shia Arab south as well, but there is also some violence down there. But nearly all the violence you hear about in Iraq is in Sunni Arab areas of central Iraq. Meanwhile, the north is so peaceful that Western journalists, and just about anyone else, can move about freely, without fear of attack. How can this be? Well, for one thing, the Kurds have tight controls on their borders, and any Arabs entering are checked carefully. Arab Iraqis are welcome to visit, and many do, for vacations from the violence in the south. When asked, Kurds attribute their peaceful neighborhood to the fact that Kurds are not Arabs. But this is not the main reason, for the Kurds have, in the past, been as factious and violent as the Iraqi Arabs are now. But during the 1990s, when the U.S. and Britain agreed to keep Saddam's forces out of the north (to prevent another large scale massacre of Kurds), the Kurds sorted out their differences and learned the benefits of cooperation and law and order. In effect, the Kurds had a ten year head start on the rest of Iraq, in the "how to create peace and democracy" department. The Iraqi Arabs, Sunni and Shia, who come north on business, or for a vacation, note this. The Arabs believe they are superior to the Kurds ("a bunch of hillbillies," to most Arabs), and find it irritating that the Kurds have made things work, while down south, especially in central Iraq, things are still a mess. Given another seven years, the Iraqi Arabs will probably catch up. But this is not a popular solution to the "Iraq problem," and no career-conscious journalist is going to talk about it.

-