O'Reilly: Dems are right, get out of Iraq now

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

(..) it could be argued that Iraq wasn't founded in a natural way and that it is little more then 3 races trapped within borders (..)

---

The same goes for the former Yugoslavia. You must be aware of the chequered history of the Balkans and the fact that Y. was kept together by undemocratic regimes (first by the Ottomans, then by a monarchy, and lately by a 'peoples' democracy').

The main concern of opponents of a break-up seems to be the attitude of Turkey toward a future Kurdish state on its border. If this state is established under an American guarantee to both Turkey and Iraqi Kurdistan that the border will be inviolate, the Turks will have to accept it. And they will accept it if the border is sealed under American supervision, knowing that they can always appeal to a higer instance (the U.S.) in case of incidents and conflicts with this Iraqi Kurdistan.

What worries me much more is the fall-out of the uncontrolled break-up that we are seeing now. If the U.S. pull out and leave a weak, ethnically fractured Iraq behind in which an Iraqi Kurdistan is established de facto in the midst of an ongoing civil war, then Turkey is bound to intervene and there will be no U.S. forces present to deter it.

Surely a lot of the pacification in the former Yugoslavia has been achieved by the carrot of eventual EU membership? You're in the continent of Europe, it'll be logical to eventually admit you to the club, but cause any more trouble and you can forget it. There was some unrest in the province of Macedonia which was settled by this threat, and now it's being wielded again regarding Ratko Mladic. A bunch of wanted Croatian war criminals handed themselves over to the Hague after the carrot was extended, provided the names in the list were accounted for.

Shouldn't the Kurds be allowed to have the right to persue their own country? It's what they want, and have wanted for years.
Rory;
OK , but where ?
And what happens to the non Kurds who live there , or the Kurds who live elsewhere ?
For example , what about the Kurdish population East of the Caspian, are they to be moved , maybe a land corridor , perhaps something like East/West Pakistan , or are they just going to be left out of the equation ?


The main concern of opponents of a break-up seems to be the attitude of Turkey toward a future Kurdish state on its border.
Adrian , the main concern is not the State on its border , but the large population within its border , and the fate of ethnic Turks within that portion of Iraq where the Kurds are in control .

“Adrian , why do you think that a breakup along religeous or ethnic lines would work ?
The population is so fragmented it would involve huge movements of people (ignore the fact that the ethnic cleansing is already well underway anyhow)”:
I agree with that. Adrian, remember that the Vance-Owen Plan in Bosnia, dividing Bosnia following Religious backgrounds (Muslim, Catholic/Croats and Orthodox/Serbs) was just the signal to speed up the Ethnic cleansing in all Bosnia.
You have to cut the territory in peace but also the resources… I remember one of the Serbian claim was that all industrial town (Tuzla for ex) were in other populations hand. And also because Serbs were mainly peasants, they should have more territory. It was endless discussions at that time…
“In the end the United States (in the person of their envoy, who was none other than Mr Galbraith mentioned above) sanctioned the Croatian invasion of the Serb Krajina”, and the Muslim Offensive on Ozren Mountains (well, hills), provoking a massive exodus of the Serbian Population and some slaughters, reason why Gal. Gotovina is the guest of your beautiful country….
“yet the region has been pacified by Dayton and the Kosovo intervention” Always optimistic Adrian. Kosovo isn’t resolved (independence isn’t an option –break first UN article, recognised borders and if the UN passes over it, what about Croats and Serbs in Bosnia), Mostar and Brcko are still under E.U. mandate. Croats have still territorial problem with Slovenia and Serbia, the Serbs won’t accept independence from Kosovo (I Metohija for them), and the Albanian won’t accept something less than Independence of Kosova.
“If anything, the break-up has served to allay concerns in surrounding countries”: Except Macedonia, of course…

Iraqization, is the word. Give pride to the Iraqis to be in the Army, to fight for their country, without to have to ask for a litre of petrol to the US army.
Again, example from Vietnam. I was always amazed how the Vietnamese fought bravely when they were in the Viet-Minh/Vietcong side, and how fast they disbanded when alone. But they also fought bravely under the French uniforms. In Dien Bien Phu the 6th B.P.V.N. earned the respect of all the others units and they showed a spirit that made the admiration of all, paratroopers, Foreign Legionnaires, Goums (Tunisians Troops) and Tabors (Moroccans, veterans of the Italian Campaign, Garigliano).
The reason was because they proud to be in their uniforms, whatever side they choose…
As a person and former professional soldier, I am telling you that if my country should be in the same situation then Iraq, total subordination, I won’t join this kind of Army…
Give back their pride to the Iraqis. Give back their looted archaeological artefacts. Samara, where a bomb exploded, is the place where one of the most ancient known civilisations took place.

Do not underestimate the National spirit, and the sense of belonging to one Nation. The biggest (or at one in many) mistake of the Bush Administration was to separate artificially Iraqis in Religious Groups, with the notable exception of the Kurds. I still don’t know why.

“Yep , but how are you going to get the UN to agree in the first place , how on earth are you going to get countries to voluntarily commit enough troops , as you will not be able to get enough how do you sell it to the US that they will supply the bulk of the troops but will not be in command”. Yep, the US will have to swallow that. Just choose a Politically Correct Commander, Canadian for ex, who will be accepted by all the big players…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Adrian , the main [Turkish] concern is not the [Kurdish] State on its border , but the large population within its border , and the fate of ethnic Turks within that portion of Iraq where the Kurds are in control .

---

As I wrote before, the stick of military guarantees from the U.S. plus the carrot of oil revenues distributed by an international body should do the trick. Together they should keep irredentism in line and enforce a decent treatment of minorities in all territories. Non-compliance means no oil revenues plus increased American overflights... I do not foresee any major regional conflagration, just years and years of muddling through, gradual rapprochment and possibly a new diplomatic settlement that emphasises closer cooperation between the three entities ten years from now.

How arrogant we are!

Perhaps there are large proportions that don't want to be part of Iraq, such as the Kurds who were forced into it, have been repressed by it and have had pseudo independence for years now.

Ethnic cleansing has even occurred in such countries is Poland, Russia, Germany, Scotland and Ireland. And although the upheaval is extremely difficult to put it mildly, the entities that are created wished to be there. The West seems to ignore this as for us it was a long time ago.

Iraw is a constructed country, first made, then upheld by the West and finally overthrown by the west, and now again being created by the West. Elections with Americans standing behind and around all the balots.

Does this feel like an indiginous display of nationalism? No, we have seen extreme outpourings of pride and violence in defence of tribes and religion, but little for Iraq.

The fact the Iraqis are prepared to destroy ancient structures loved by their "fellow Iraqis", and then gun down tens of people in revenge shows how little Iraq there is to save, outside of a political fudge by the west.

I think the last comment by Brenus says it all: to "solve" the problem we need to appoint a different outsider to get Iraq to work. Possibly if we hold it together for long enough it'll work... Unlike every other example in the world admittedly, but I admire the optimism... I guess the EU is still going :dizzy2:

~:smoking:

Divinus

I don't know that there is a solution at this point with the infighting as it is, but my first step would be ensuring quality recruits, which unfortunately is hard to do since you don't know who you are recruiting. How do they verify the backgrounds of these people, I wonder? Did Iraqi have a version of social security numbers, or a national ID card? And if the coalitions got into the business of making some sort of tracking system then how would we keep people from forging faker IDs or stealing each others identities.

I'm amazed at how these large groups of Iraqi police and recruits are kidnapped and taken out and executed, I'm amazed that they don't try to fight these buggers off, I'm amazed that they don't see their imminent fate when they roll up to that roadblock on a dark dirt road.

I don't have any answers, TBH. Short of sequestering recruits and not letting them ever leave sight of command (much akin to boot camp) until they are "trained", I don't know what would work. I'm less worried about their longterm efficiency and more worried about them backstabbing american soldiers. Not letting them go home to their families and not letting them have any outside social contact would be a start, if thats not already being done, but people who were bent on selling out the good guys could still pass thru the cracks, it would just mean they had to wait a little longer.

Does anyone know if the Iraqi forces are split by ethnic/religious lines, like do they av oid putting Shiites with Suniis?