Printable View
As I said all those long years ago. There are three options for Iraq:
- Partition
- Civil War
- A Saddam Style dictator
Well we all know that Partition is possibly the worst option in terms of a wider Iran/Turkey/Kurdistan/Jordan war, and the civil war possibility is there for all to see.
However the third option does seem to be materialising too:
Assasination of Iraq Dissidents
I still say partition.It may cause problems in the short run but only real option to bring stability and democracy,is to first give the people their own national states.Since Shiias and Sunnis still mostly come from same ethnics groups i would split Iraq in two parts Kurdistan and Iraq.
We can do a little comparison by thinking what kind of Europe would we be living if the Empires of Europe would not have been splitted to National states.Ofcourse it creates problems first,no births are painless but i think in the long run the Middle east have to go through the same process.
Somewhere out there, OBL is clapping his hands.
Sorry m8.But who is OBL?:embarassed:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dâriûsh
He was some bigshot a few years ago. Few people remember him now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
The name Dariush the Name?:book:
Osama Bin Laden. ~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kagemusha
Thank you kind sir.:bow:
Partition, and to hell with the consequences.
Let them sort out their own mess, and at least then it can't be the fault of the West.
~:smoking:
if we're just gonna let em sort it out i say just move out and let them have there civil war, then in the end America can say to the world "Ha, told you we should'nt have moved out" of course the world will still blame us:dizzy2: .Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
but really partition can be the only smart solution. they are still gonna kill each other and there will be conflict over who gets what and where certain religious centers are going to be but its better that than a violent war followed by war lord mini-wars ending up with just another dicktator leader who will probably just kill his own peoples.
I think there's still a chance that Iraq will weather the storm and become a fragile democracy. It may involve civil war, but heck, the US had a civil war and its still at least a nominal democracy.
And I like the solution that your article gives, Idaho. Paraphrased: "talk" with the insurgents, leave, hope for best. :inquisitive:
*steps in*
Hmmm... I don't feel like getting burnt...
*steps out before the Conservatives arrive* :creep:
And here one is.
"I told you so"? Idaho, please. You really do love to see democracy fail don't you? These poeple are fighting for their lives, fighting for a chnace to have something they never dreamed possible- freedom! And now people as lowly as you wallow and twist in the mud of their misery, relishing every life lost as you feed yourselves at the trough of blood.
It ain't over by a long shot, liberal.
http://smilies.vidahost.com/ups/chao...enchainsaw.gif
Here, I'll bet this guy hates freedom almost as much as you:
https://img141.imageshack.us/img141/...ehugger8lw.png
God that guy is freakin' me out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
How the hell is it 'their own mess', we have been meddling and controlling the Middle East for centuries. 'Their own mess', is in reality 'our mess'. If we were to only leave everyone in the Middle East to sort 'their own mess' out we might get somewhere!
Divinus Arma, you are fairly laughable, freedom? You call what is going on in Iraq freedom?! It is as free as it was under Saddam, in fact the lives of people are most definitely worse and I have to say - though it is peddled out in debates like this constantly, it is still true - Iraq has been taken away from the Iraqi people by us in the form of the IMF, US corporations and the puppet government. The IMF controls the Iraqi economy which leaves it room to hand chunks over to US corporations which in turn means the government already dependent on US troops for security, has no control over economic policy as well. A government with no control over the country in these significant ways, is no government but merely a paper, puppet government.
You do realise there is over 70% unemployment in most areas of Iraq, yet you wonder why there is violence? You must realise - your an intelligent lad, no? - that there is no running water, working electricity and sanitation in significant areas of Iraq, yet you still wonder why there is violence. You also must have seen the Iraqi prisoner abuse which has happened and you still wonder why there is violence? You realise how many innocent Iraqi people have died - though looking back on my sig, that isn't certain now is it? - yet you still wonder why there is violence. You must realise that you have let terrorists into the country and they are causing havoc, yet you still wonder why there is violence. And more, as stated before the invasion the ethnic and religious lines are being exploited as shown - you must have seen it right? - with the bombing of the famous golden dome, yet you still wonder why there is violence.
These people are not fighting because they are violent terrorists out to cause the magnificent spreader of democracy himself, George Dubya(!), a great deal of political damage. No they are fighting for VERY legitimate and VERY predictable reasons, reasons stated by those such as Idaho before the war started, which is exactly why Bush, his cronies and people like you have all got blood on your hands, in fact quite the opposite of what you state in your silly post.
Maybe next time you should listen to those who would call themselves liberals, it would probably be an enlightenment.
oooooh. A direct reply to me by Jag. Wow! That you would even stoop to address one as slowly as myself. I must now grovel at your feet oh Prince of Socialist Darkness...
No Jag, I call it fourth generation warfare. I call it a campaign in a global war. I call it a battlefield against theocratic totalitarianism.Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG
I also dare to call it a place where hope lives amongst the tired and fearful families who desire only for a better life. I call it a place where freedom from fear may one day reign instead of those that would enslave their own race under the banner of religion.
It is a government in its infancy. Helpless, needy, crying out for protection until it can protect itself. As a socialist, you should be able to see the clear need for government to do all it can to protect and care for its people, including calling out to foreign protectors if need be. You see a government installed by the United Staes. I see a body of Iraqis that were elected by Iraqis and who have the power to shape the future of their country for better or for worse. Sunni political boycotts and Shiite power-hoarders hardly smell of an all powerful U.S. controlling hand. True, this elected body is largely confused by the sudden amount of power handed to them. And true, the iraqi people are familiar with tyranny and not freedom, thus they do not understand that freedom has its evils also- but that it is up to the people to curb the temptation towards evil in a free society and instead pursue social harmony through individual pursuit of happiness.Quote:
It is as free as it was under Saddam, in fact the lives of people are most definitely worse and I have to say - though it is peddled out in debates like this constantly, it is still true - Iraq has been taken away from the Iraqi people by us in the form of the IMF, US corporations and the puppet government. The IMF controls the Iraqi economy which leaves it room to hand chunks over to US corporations which in turn means the government already dependent on US troops for security, has no control over economic policy as well. A government with no control over the country in these significant ways, is no government but merely a paper, puppet government.
You must have me confused with someone else. I do not question why there is violence. Nor do I disregard the unemployment as a factor in violence. Now, under your very same logic, then it would be of the greatest benefit of the Iraqi people to establish security and promote growth through rebuilding. Given the choice between a rifle and a job, I think we can agree that most Iraqis would choose to feed their families.Quote:
You do realise there is over 70% unemployment in most areas of Iraq, yet you wonder why there is violence?
Let's be cordial.Quote:
You must realise - your an intelligent lad, no?
Where did I ponder the continuing violence? I said it ain't over. I said that Idaho likes to see failure so that he can wallow in and thrill in the failure of his political enemies. I assume this goes for you too.Quote:
- that there is no running water, working electricity and sanitation in significant areas of Iraq, yet you still wonder why there is violence.
While I do not think it was as severe as pumped up by political enemies of Republicans, I am utterly disgusted with the prisoner neglect. The United States has held the moral high ground in nearly every conflict it has ever been engaged in, with the exception of Vietnam, where political idiots interefered at the tactical level and the worst officers in American history allowed instances of horror to occur on a regular basis.Quote:
You also must have seen the Iraqi prisoner abuse which has happened and you still wonder why there is violence?
But on topic, I am not at all surprised at the reaction of the prisoner abuse scenario. And good. That'll teach us to be incompetent and tolerant of abuse.
You really must have me confused with someone else. I know perfectly well "why" there is violence.Quote:
You realise how many innocent Iraqi people have died - though looking back on my sig, that isn't certain now is it? - yet you still wonder why there is violence.
To be honest, it actually seems like we are disagreeing on very little thus far. Except that you have me confused with some moron who constantly wonders why there is violence in Iraq.Quote:
You must realise that you have let terrorists into the country and they are causing havoc, yet you still wonder why there is violence.
I wonder, wonder why...Quote:
And more, as stated before the invasion the ethnic and religious lines are being exploited as shown - you must have seen it right? - with the bombing of the famous golden dome, yet you still wonder why there is violence.
No I said he was happy that there is violence. You're killing me man, was I really that inarticulate?Quote:
These people are not fighting because they are violent terrorists out to cause the magnificent spreader of democracy himself, George Dubya(!), a great deal of political damage.
Let's seeeee..... Hmmm. I believe my original post said... ahhh, yes. Here it is:Quote:
No they are fighting for VERY legitimate and VERY predictable reasons,
These people are fighting for their lives, fighting for a chance to have something they never dreamed possible- freedom!
So. We seem to agree. Again.
I will gladly have blood on my hands so that my fellow Americans can live free from theocratic totalitarian tyranny. And I will be glad to have blood on my hands to see the world free as well. And I would bathe in the blood of my enemies and wallow in their misery, just as the socialists and other elitists who claim to know what is best for others would swim in the entrails of their capitalist foes.Quote:
reasons stated by those such as Idaho before the war started, which is exactly why Bush, his cronies and people like you have all got blood on your hands, in fact quite the opposite of what you state in your silly post.
Quote:
Maybe next time you should listen to those who would call themselves liberals, it would probably be an enlightenment.
It is the continual war of the people versus the aristocracy. The democrats versus the oligarchs. A war against those who would set their own destiny against those that would set the destiny for others. And that is why your precious tyrannical socialism will never work. Because people will die and kill to ensure that petty aspiring tyrants will never take their property and dictate their lives.
It is also why Democracy in Iraq is slowly taking root. It is why the Sunnis are now openly fighting against foreign insurgents. It is why people are dipping their trigger fingers into purple ink, if just for one day.
Oh, and welcome back by the way. Good to see you posting again. :cheers:
Meh! give it all to Israel :gah:
I don't know how Iraq can be partitioned. Who controls the oil? I've read awhile ago that the oil fields are concentrated in a certain political area (South? I can't exactly remember).Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Eh, first let me move out of the solar system then. I don't want the radiation to get me.
As for the topic- I daresay there's still hope. But DA's right about the perverse pleasure of some leftists over the hardships facing the US and democracy in Iraq.
I take it you've made your weekly donation to the IRA?Quote:
No they are fighting for VERY legitimate and VERY predictable reasons,
Crazed Rabbit
Remember that Big red button i somtimes mention in these situations..
Usualy connected to Huge ammounts of nucular weapons...
Well heres a nother oppertunaty for me.
"ahem"
PUSH THE BUTTON!
----------------------
And just to stir up the water.
I say..
after the fallout dissipates.
and some thing starts growing back there
Give it all to the Jews
I agree, it's a little premature to chuck it in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
I call it a battlefield against theocratic totalitarianism.
Divinus , in that case , since your campaign in Iraq has given control to the Iranian backed theocrats does that mean you have lost the battle ?
And since it is a global war , does the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the fact that they are more popular with the population now than when they were in government mean that that battle is lost aswell ?
Tiresome ad hominem attacks, cliches, regurgitated and well past it's sell by date US gov mantras - basically more bandwidth stealing nonsense from DA. You'd think that just once in a while you'd scare yourself with an original thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
Lol.Quote:
Tiresome ad hominem attacks, cliches, regurgitated and well past it's sell by date US gov mantras - basically more bandwidth stealing nonsense from DA. You'd think that just once in a while you'd scare yourself with an original thought.
I liked that reply :)
as subtle as a pneumatic drill to the teeth!
Pure Class!
“including calling out to foreign protectors if need be”: Who called who? When? The only problem with the F.I.I (Forces Irakienne de l’Interieur, reference to the F.F.I., Forces Francaises de l’Interieur which fought against the Germans during WW2) is that they were equal zero.
Soory, nobody asked help to the U.S, or certainly not by in invasion and the looting of their country… Experience in Balkans proved that the targeted bombing campaign, follow by programme of democratisation and development help work.
if we use Windows on Iraq it should partition on autorun
Nope Windows would only lead to the blue screen of death as Iraq has never successfully run the democratic upgrade package. Nor do they have the indepth technical training or resources to do that. Also while the syphon oil program is running it is impossible to free up enough resources to allow the infrastruture upgrade program to run.
As seen the Iraq computer is using a lot of old parts as evidenced by IEDs and using former hardware controllers from the Saddam OS. The Iraq PC has a lot of OH&S issues and may electrocute users. Even during Safe Mode it was found that the PC would redirect resources to S&M practices under the guise of a Trojan labeled Reservist Task Manager. It would even use the internet to send data out to questionable 3rd party data retrival experts located in the ME and former soviet block countries who use out of date hardware modifications.
Its a long shot, but maybe it could be upgraded to a Mac with an Ipod for all the people to sing along to.
:balloon2:
Before the failure of centralization the only reasonable answer is partition. Forcing them to the center will cause even more conflicts and subsequents deaths. A civil war could be the mean and the end in itself to end with it all, many countries wich looked for freedom themselves, and independency, had to suffer civil war before they reached an instance where we can talk about sovereingty and transitory peace. The final option is the worst one, it will be counter productive, once you've done the mess on the land you cannot excuse yourself and return everything to what it once was.
I'm still surprised about this paternalistic rethoric of the USA, I think that a country wich arose from blood cannot say I'll take care of the rest because I don't want them to learn for themselves. The best way to achieve democracy is by political action carried out by the people who want it. The war in Irak is the opposite of that, a third party gets involved in a sovereing nation and starts to throw a bunch of moralistic statements in favor of the invansion and the development of the armed conflict, because their vission of the world is better than everyone else. The procedimental democracy is better and that's it, I'll be the judge and the hangman, no one will stop me. Tell me Divinus that that makes sense and then I'll know that there's no way to talk about this subject with a man that supports such a view of the world. It will make much more sense if you stated that your country invaded the other to secure political simpathy and resources. But no it has to be the only, the unique moral vission that materializes out of the nothing, in the air, and all of a sudden a party knows that that's what's right, but not only that, they know that they should impose that view on the rest of the world. Democratic paradox.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divinus Arma
Seriously Divinus, let's talk with property and say why a country engages in war with another country, and then we'll know that it's not about democracy, it has never been about democracy. In this particular case I'm specially surprised. I mean all wars suppose the trial and execution of a lot of people based on the acts of their representatives or leaders, however there was no connection in this case and the trials and executions carry on day in and day out. By principle you cannot hold the high moral ground while calling yourself a democrat, and by fact you cannot see moral reasons that justify the involvement of a third party in a foreing nation.
All of us hippy liberals would of course, decry these proprietary solutions and call for Linux of all flavours (the more command line needed for installation the better) to be installed - as it should have been from the start. Never mind that the drivers don't work, it's the damn principle of freedom that's at stake. :stupido2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
(Ignore the real nutters who think FreeBSD is a solution - they're known commies). :ahh:
:bounce: