Skip to main content

View Diary: The Iraq Election: Defining Success (489 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Uh (3.66)
    What about Turkey? They never seemed very comfortable with a new Kurdistan right next to the portion of Turkey with a large Kurdish population/problem. I am no fan of the Bushists, but to claim that the three state solution didn't fit into the Neo-con thought process as the ONLY reason for the lack of action is, in my opinion, not correct or fair.

    Don't blame me....I voted for Kodos! Neo-Cons don't die....they just go to the private sector to regroup

    by coheninjapan on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 09:16:24 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Disagree (none)
      The turkey thing has always been way overblown.  If they'd wanted to make it happen they could have.  I could think of plenty of scenarios where it could work.  In view of the current situation, do you really think it wouldn't be better.

      To his virtues be very kind, to his vices, very blind. moralquestionsblog.com

      by Descrates on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 09:19:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  In the first place (4.00)
        Who are we to decide what the country should look like. In the second place Turkey will not allow an independent kurdistan because they fear an uprising among the Kurds in Turkey. In the third place the largest oil fields are in Kurdistan. Allowing Kurdistan to become an independent entity would deprive the rest of Iraq of a major source of income, which they desperately need at this time.    

        You know you're in trouble, when you've got to ask Dick Cheney to "cheer up" the voters.

        by amsterdam on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 09:26:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  We are going to decide the future of Iraq (none)
          one way or another.  Period.  We could leave a small force in Kurdistan to guarantee the peace--"peacekeepers"?  Then, for the most part, everyone else goes home.  In a few years, after Turkey accepts how things are, we take them home too.  The multistate solution is doable with a little thought and definitely preferrable to the current situation.  Just have to think instead of swallowing everything you read in the IR columns.

          To his virtues be very kind, to his vices, very blind. moralquestionsblog.com

          by Descrates on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 09:30:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Turkey is a nato partner (none)
            And I don't believe the current adminstration has the diplomatic skills to pull it off.

            The Turks have been prety good at fighting of US bulying. This is a very sensitive isue with Turkey.      

            And what will happen to shi's? they probably will realign themselves with Iran. I don't think that is the solution this adminstration is looking for.    

            You know you're in trouble, when you've got to ask Dick Cheney to "cheer up" the voters.

            by amsterdam on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 10:09:19 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  It (4.00)
        is not overblown, and it is a HUGE issue in that region.

        Turkey does not want a Kurdish state, and no, it wouldn't be better.

        The Kurds are the largest minority in the world that does NOT have their own country, and they have populations in Turkey, Iran, Iraq and other neighboring areas.  

        None of the existing countries in that area want to see a Kurdish state created, and creating one will cause futher political turmoil in what is increasingly becoming an unstable region.

        Read up on the history of the Kurds and Turkey, this issue is not way overblown.

        "September 11, 2001, already a day of immeasurable tragedy, cannot be the day liberty perished in this country." Judge Gerald Tjoflat

        by SanJoseLady on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 09:57:23 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  We have to do something different (none)
          This is the best choice available.  We could make it work.  If we established a relatively small US presence in Kurdistan and guaranteed the stability of the situation, we would still be involved, yes, but not to the extent we are now.  We could pull out most of our forces--which is the most important thing to me, personally.  I think it could be done--and it would be a lot better than the situation we're in now.

          To his virtues be very kind, to his vices, very blind. moralquestionsblog.com

          by Descrates on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 10:23:08 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That (none)
            is exactly how we got into this Iraq mess, determining that "we" know what is best for everyone involved.

            Do I personally think the Kurds should have their own country? Yes.  Do I think it will ever happen?  No.

            What would be "best" is for Iraq to become a nation that is truely ONE nation (though I don't see that happening either), instead of the three it really is right now.

            We would end up being far more "involved" than you realize, as it is not just about the Kurds and Turkey, it would involve the whole region.  You think things are bad now?  Create an independent Kurdish nation and all hell breaks loose.  

            It wouldn't be better than now, it would be worse.  As has been stated:  the northern part of Iraq has oil, as does the south and NOT the middle.  If the kurds are allowed to create their own nation, the shiites will want to do so as well, in the south, which leaves the Sunnis in the middle with no natural resources to speak of, as well as being squeezed from both sides.  

            Please read the history of the region and you will see that your "solution" just isn't what it appears.

            "September 11, 2001, already a day of immeasurable tragedy, cannot be the day liberty perished in this country." Judge Gerald Tjoflat

            by SanJoseLady on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 01:44:36 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm well enough aware of the history of the region (none)
              Are an expert on Turkish history?  Unless you have detailed knowledge of the situation, I just don't see your point unilateerally ruling out such an option.  From where I stand, it's common sense.  Either we act to get our boys out of there or we leave them there to die for the next 5-10 years.  Sorry, I'm not playing that game.  I was Marine squadleader. I know what these guys are feeling.  

              To his virtues be very kind, to his vices, very blind. moralquestionsblog.com

              by Descrates on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 04:03:18 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  No (none)
                I am not an "expert" but have recently taken a class in Middle Eastern politics, as well as having read a number of books on the subject.

                While your intent is to get our tropps out of the area, doing what you suggest would have the exact opposite effect.

                Again, I ask you to read up on the area before you make assertions of "common sense."  

                I may not have been a Marine sqaudleader, but I do know that doing what you propose is sure to leave our guys there to die for eternity.

                Just, please, use some "common sense" and read about the history and current political situation of the Kurds.

                No one is unilaterally ruling out the Kurds oneday having their own state, what is being ruled out is the United States creating that nation (Iraq was created by the British, and look what a great job they did.)

                "September 11, 2001, already a day of immeasurable tragedy, cannot be the day liberty perished in this country." Judge Gerald Tjoflat

                by SanJoseLady on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 04:38:20 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

        •  If no civil war leading to (none)
          separate states, then you have the option/likely realy of bringing a Saddam style strongman back to power.  Maybe that is why the more knowledgable Bush I stayed away from toppling Saddam.

          Hey, it is one or the other unless true divine intervention comes about, IMO

          Political censorship is the root of all evil! It is the antithesis to a functional democracy!!

          by truthbetold on Sun Jan 30, 2005 at 11:27:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (70)
  • Baltimore (64)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Elections (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (26)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Education (20)
  • Labor (20)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Science (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Politics (15)
  • Environment (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site