Org Mobile Site
Thread: Kurdistan
Iraqi Kurdistan has not been oppressed since 1991. In fact, it's the Iraqi Kurds who now oppress their minorities, religious and ethnic.
On topic, I find the desire for independence stupid. There is no issue for oppression, as the largely invented Catalan identity hasn't been suffocated since the death of the Caudillo.
Yes, like the Croats and the Slovenes, they believe that they are being taxed disproportionately, in the sense that "they pay for roads and healthcare in Andalusia". Not a very altruistic sentiment, not to mention that prosperity is not guaranteed in a geopolitically isolated Catalonia.
Still, if that's what the majority wants (I doubt it, according to most polls, only a minority is pro-independence and its numbers fall dramatically, in the hypothetical scenario of a tax decrease), then they should enjoy their rights, after negotiating with the Spanish government without violating the Spanish constitutions.
Instead, they acted like jerks, Madrid responded in kind and we have alt-right crusaders that they actually predict that Islamists will exploit the chaos to establish the Ummayad Caliphate.
On topic, I find the desire for independence stupid. There is no issue for oppression, as the largely invented Catalan identity hasn't been suffocated since the death of the Caudillo.
Yes, like the Croats and the Slovenes, they believe that they are being taxed disproportionately, in the sense that "they pay for roads and healthcare in Andalusia". Not a very altruistic sentiment, not to mention that prosperity is not guaranteed in a geopolitically isolated Catalonia.
Still, if that's what the majority wants (I doubt it, according to most polls, only a minority is pro-independence and its numbers fall dramatically, in the hypothetical scenario of a tax decrease), then they should enjoy their rights, after negotiating with the Spanish government without violating the Spanish constitutions.
Instead, they acted like jerks, Madrid responded in kind and we have alt-right crusaders that they actually predict that Islamists will exploit the chaos to establish the Ummayad Caliphate.
Originally Posted by Crandar:
Iraqi Kurdistan has not been oppressed since 1991. In fact, it's the Iraqi Kurds who now oppress their minorities, religious and ethnic.
Sure seems like that: http://www.dw.com/en/in-iraq-minorit...ate/a-40692381Iraqi Kurdistan has not been oppressed since 1991. In fact, it's the Iraqi Kurds who now oppress their minorities, religious and ethnic.
Did you read the entire article or only the obviously biased title, made by the editor? The article clearly says that the communities are divided.
Meanwhile, skirmishes have occured between Yazidis and Peshmerga, Turkmens feel clearly intimidated and threatened by the referendum and Arabs from Kirkuk have been thrown out of their homes.
Even Kurds have been deprived of their rights, as Barzani remains illegally head of their state. He's basically a dictator, but god forbids insulting one of America's best buddies in the region.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/03/...g-arabs-kirkuk
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/Co...tan-referendum
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.a5e8444d28a9
https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/...nce-referendum
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-997874
His presidential mandate was unconstitutionally extended again in 2015.
Meanwhile, skirmishes have occured between Yazidis and Peshmerga, Turkmens feel clearly intimidated and threatened by the referendum and Arabs from Kirkuk have been thrown out of their homes.
Even Kurds have been deprived of their rights, as Barzani remains illegally head of their state. He's basically a dictator, but god forbids insulting one of America's best buddies in the region.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/03/...g-arabs-kirkuk
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/Co...tan-referendum
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.a5e8444d28a9
https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/...nce-referendum
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-997874
His presidential mandate was unconstitutionally extended again in 2015.
Originally Posted by Crandar:
Did you read the entire article or only the obviously biased title, made by the editor? The article clearly says that the communities are divided.
Meanwhile, skirmishes have occured between Yazidis and Peshmerga, Turkmens feel clearly intimidated and threatened by the referendum and Arabs from Kirkuk have been thrown out of their homes.
Even Kurds have been deprived of their rights, as Barzani remains illegally head of their state. He's basically a dictator, but god forbids insulting one of America's best buddies in the region.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/03/...g-arabs-kirkuk
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/Co...tan-referendum
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.a5e8444d28a9
https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/...nce-referendum
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-997874
His presidential mandate was unconstitutionally extended again in 2015.
Ive never claimed Kurdistan being anything perfect. Just comparing to Iraq, Syria,Turkey,Iran, never mind Isis, their political climate seems rather healthy. Considering Barzani. Iraq Kurdistan is holding general election for both Presidency and parliament, during 1st of November. I want to see those through before buying your rhetoric considering him.Did you read the entire article or only the obviously biased title, made by the editor? The article clearly says that the communities are divided.
Meanwhile, skirmishes have occured between Yazidis and Peshmerga, Turkmens feel clearly intimidated and threatened by the referendum and Arabs from Kirkuk have been thrown out of their homes.
Even Kurds have been deprived of their rights, as Barzani remains illegally head of their state. He's basically a dictator, but god forbids insulting one of America's best buddies in the region.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/11/03/...g-arabs-kirkuk
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/Co...tan-referendum
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.a5e8444d28a9
https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/...nce-referendum
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-997874
His presidential mandate was unconstitutionally extended again in 2015.
What rhetoric exactly? Barzani has been the president of Iraqi Kurdistan since 2009, while the elections have been cancelled twice, in 2013 and 2015. That's a fact.
The referendum itself was declared exactly because of the upcoming elections in 2017. That means that his regime is less democratic than that of Turkey, Iran and Iraq.
His militia's irresponsibility is partially blamed for the Yazidi genocide and I just cited numerous cases of ethnic conflicts in Iraqi Kurdistan.
You never claimed it was perfect, but you obviously implied that minorities are happy with Barzani and his circle, something that was directly contradicted by your source and four others provided by me.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
The referendum itself was declared exactly because of the upcoming elections in 2017. That means that his regime is less democratic than that of Turkey, Iran and Iraq.
His militia's irresponsibility is partially blamed for the Yazidi genocide and I just cited numerous cases of ethnic conflicts in Iraqi Kurdistan.
You never claimed it was perfect, but you obviously implied that minorities are happy with Barzani and his circle, something that was directly contradicted by your source and four others provided by me.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
Originally Posted by Crandar:
What rhetoric exactly? Barzani has been the president of Iraqi Kurdistan since 2009, while the elections have been cancelled twice, in 2013 and 2015. That's a fact.
The referendum itself was declared exactly because of the upcoming elections in 2017. That means that his regime is less democratic than that of Turkey, Iran and Iraq.
His militia's irresponsibility is partially blamed for the Yazidi genocide and I just cited numerous cases of ethnic conflicts in Iraqi Kurdistan.
You never claimed it was perfect, but you obviously implied that minorities are happy with Barzani and his circle, something that was directly contradicted by your source and four others provided by me.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
Like i said. Lets wait for the elections and then trash Barzani if necessary. 2013 and 2015 were pretty damn bad years to hold elections. War kind of disturbed the situation a bit. What rhetoric exactly? Barzani has been the president of Iraqi Kurdistan since 2009, while the elections have been cancelled twice, in 2013 and 2015. That's a fact.
The referendum itself was declared exactly because of the upcoming elections in 2017. That means that his regime is less democratic than that of Turkey, Iran and Iraq.
His militia's irresponsibility is partially blamed for the Yazidi genocide and I just cited numerous cases of ethnic conflicts in Iraqi Kurdistan.
You never claimed it was perfect, but you obviously implied that minorities are happy with Barzani and his circle, something that was directly contradicted by your source and four others provided by me.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
Considering the Sinjar massacre. If the Kurdish commandant was a coward at the time when everyone had their butts handed by Isis, makes Kurdish responsible for the massacre. Strange enough why did the Yezidi join the Kurdish in the counteroffensive during 2015? Also if the Kurdish were plotting to leave the Yesidis for ISIS to be slaughtered, why were they so loud about discovering Yesidi mass craves when Sinjar was taken back? Surely they would have known their evil plans would have been revealed, why help such eventuality?
Where is Kurdish Spartacus when you want him...
Originally Posted by Kagemusha:
Like i said. Lets wait for the elections and then trash Barzani if necessary. 2013 and 2015 were pretty damn bad years to hold elections. War kind of disturbed the situation a bit.
Even if his performance will be stellar his record as an authoritarian potentate is already blackened. That's a fact, a bit inconvenient one, but still a fact that renders Barzani a less democratic ruler than his colleagues in Iran, Iraq and Turkey. Like i said. Lets wait for the elections and then trash Barzani if necessary. 2013 and 2015 were pretty damn bad years to hold elections. War kind of disturbed the situation a bit.
I guess he beats Assad, though.
2013 was not a bad year, daesh was irrelevant and in any case held actually fewer lands than it does in 2017, so that excuse doesn't make sense. Not even Barzani has used it, presumably due to its irrationality.
But yeah, I'm sure that poor Barzani was forced to sacrifice his retirement for the good of the common fight against daesh. Even the Kurds disagreed with that assessment, but I guess that their opinion doesn't matter, when it doesn't suit the good old narrative of US allies always being beacons of democracy*.
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/orig...egitimacy.html
Originally Posted by Kagemusha:
Considering the Sinjar massacre. If the Kurdish commandant was a coward at the time when everyone had their butts handed by Isis, makes Kurdish responsible for the massacre. Strange enough why did the Yezidi join the Kurdish in the counteroffensive during 2015? Also if the Kurdish were plotting to leave the Yesidis for ISIS to be slaughtered, why were they so loud about discovering Yesidi mass craves when Sinjar was taken back? Surely they would have known their evil plans would have been revealed, why help such eventuality?
"Partially blamed". Of course, the bulk of responsibility lies with daesh. By the way, where did you get the conclusion that only the commander should be accused of Peshmergha's shameful behaviour?Considering the Sinjar massacre. If the Kurdish commandant was a coward at the time when everyone had their butts handed by Isis, makes Kurdish responsible for the massacre. Strange enough why did the Yezidi join the Kurdish in the counteroffensive during 2015? Also if the Kurdish were plotting to leave the Yesidis for ISIS to be slaughtered, why were they so loud about discovering Yesidi mass craves when Sinjar was taken back? Surely they would have known their evil plans would have been revealed, why help such eventuality?
*That's not directed at you, Kagemusha, but the general tendency of the media to positively portray all the actions of an authoritarian regime.
Originally Posted by Beskar:
Where is Kurdish Spartacus when you want him...
Peshmerga fighting for a free Thrace? Where is Kurdish Spartacus when you want him...
If the Balkans are bad, the Middle East is an order of magnitude worse.
The Kurds probably do "deserve" their own state. But the UK has no more a role in this mess than discussing on an internet forum.
The Kurds probably do "deserve" their own state. But the UK has no more a role in this mess than discussing on an internet forum.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
If the Balkans are bad, the Middle East is an order of magnitude worse.
Oh really?If the Balkans are bad, the Middle East is an order of magnitude worse.
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...o-one-watching
Originally Posted by Crandar:
What rhetoric exactly?
"Manufactured Catalan Identity" for starters, next you'll be telling us there are no Bretons or Occitans, and no Welsh.What rhetoric exactly?
The Kurds are a large and prosperous minority within Iraq, they have shown themselves much better at governing themselves than the Iraqis are, this is why they want independence. For them, being part of Iraq is like having to live with your feckless, violent, uncle.
It's also fairly clear that the minorities that support them support them because they are more secular than the Arab and Assyrian Iraqi Muslims, the minorities who don't support them are less secular and inclusive than the Kurds. I.E, Christians and Turkmen who want their own state/province.
Now, that doesn't mean that an independent Kurdish state is necessarily the right thing but you have to look at it from more than just a 19th Century Imperial perspective. If one relatively small region is carrying a whole, much larger, country then there's an argument that region would be better off alone.
1. Kurdistan is not prosperous.
https://gpinvestigations.pri.org/the...n-1c9a9a18efd1
2. How are they better at governing than Iraqis? Barzani is basically a dictator, Abadi isn't. You may want to apply different criteria, but your claim is just a subjective opinion, not a fact.
3. By definition, there are no Assyrian Iraqi Muslims. The term Assyrian carries some linguistic references, but it primarily is an indication of religion.
Hardly more secular than Turkmens or Christians (aka Assyrians). By the way, I have already linked articles citing the skepticism of Assyrian communities towards the referendum.
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/Co...tan-referendum
https://gpinvestigations.pri.org/the...n-1c9a9a18efd1
2. How are they better at governing than Iraqis? Barzani is basically a dictator, Abadi isn't. You may want to apply different criteria, but your claim is just a subjective opinion, not a fact.
3. By definition, there are no Assyrian Iraqi Muslims. The term Assyrian carries some linguistic references, but it primarily is an indication of religion.
Hardly more secular than Turkmens or Christians (aka Assyrians). By the way, I have already linked articles citing the skepticism of Assyrian communities towards the referendum.
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/Co...tan-referendum
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mi...-idUSKBN1CI0UV
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...h-authorities/
Apparently Iraq government and Kurds are on the verge of war. I sure hope this can be avoided.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...h-authorities/
Apparently Iraq government and Kurds are on the verge of war. I sure hope this can be avoided.
Originally Posted by Kagemusha:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mi...-idUSKBN1CI0UV
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...h-authorities/
Apparently Iraq government and Kurds are on the verge of war. I sure hope this can be avoided.
I doubt it. The Kurds have always had that "chip on the shoulder" towards any government in Baghdad, and now they have had years of sustained military training and doctrine improvements courtesy of USA. I just hope the establishment of Kurdistan will involve relatively few deaths.http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mi...-idUSKBN1CI0UV
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...h-authorities/
Apparently Iraq government and Kurds are on the verge of war. I sure hope this can be avoided.
Originally Posted by Kagemusha:
Apparently Iraq government and Kurds are on the verge of war. I sure hope this can be avoided.
Will go pretty badly for the Iraqi's..Apparently Iraq government and Kurds are on the verge of war. I sure hope this can be avoided.
Originally Posted by Beskar:
Will go pretty badly for the Iraqi's..
I agree, but dont like the idea still as there is lot better fighting to do then this.Both forces are still in standoff at the Kirkuk province border. I think it only pressure/ bluff from Iraqi government.Will go pretty badly for the Iraqi's..
Originally Posted by Kagemusha:
I agree, but dont like the idea still as there is lot better fighting to do then this.Both forces are still in standoff at the Kirkuk province border. I think it only pressure/ bluff from Iraqi government.
If I am honest, it would be in Iraq's interest to allow it to become independent. The Peshmerga have fought bravely for themselves and the neighbouring nations (like Iraq) in the battle against ISIS. They have proven themselves to be an potential ally in the region. They have been de-facto independent since Iraq effectively lost control of itself and this is more making that arrangement a formality.I agree, but dont like the idea still as there is lot better fighting to do then this.Both forces are still in standoff at the Kirkuk province border. I think it only pressure/ bluff from Iraqi government.
The current borders in the region are an artificial creation from the British and French colonial possession in the area after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and fighting to enforce these borders is silly when there are more natural borders which can flourish and make the region more stable.
The middle-east really needs stability. The various wars, conflicts, civil wars, all cause the area to become toxic and a humanitarian crisis. If this can all be done without a single of a blood, it would be fantastic.
Apparently Iraqi troops have given a deadline of 23:00 gmt today for Peshmerga to withdraw from threir positions at the border of Kirkuk province.
So the two enemies of ISIS that we paid and armed are now going to fight one another?
Is that another foreign policy victory?
I personally see the biggest problem here with the Iraqi side because however imperfect the Kurds may be at times, the Iraqi government failed to protect them and the very least they earned for fighting for themselves and in favor of the failing government would have been a thank you and a place at a table for talks over how to proceed. Just demanding they surrender now seems a bit...power hungry and arrogant?
Perhaps I'm missing something (not an expert on the area and didn't follow every event), but it just doesn't seem like the right thing to do.
Is that another foreign policy victory?
I personally see the biggest problem here with the Iraqi side because however imperfect the Kurds may be at times, the Iraqi government failed to protect them and the very least they earned for fighting for themselves and in favor of the failing government would have been a thank you and a place at a table for talks over how to proceed. Just demanding they surrender now seems a bit...power hungry and arrogant?
Perhaps I'm missing something (not an expert on the area and didn't follow every event), but it just doesn't seem like the right thing to do.
Originally Posted by Beskar:
Will go pretty badly for the Iraqi's..
The Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.Will go pretty badly for the Iraqi's..
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus:
The Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
Likely of some weight regarding any breakoutThe Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
The Iraqi army has yet to show the discipline or morale the Kurds' have demonstrated.
I doubt Iraq can defeat the Kurd's within the territory they are claiming. Granted (unlike Iran) it is possibly an opponent they can bleed dry.
Does the Iraqi army have the stomach for it?
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus:
The Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
Sure stopped ISIS in its tracks.The Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus:
The Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
True, since neither the Iraqi government nor the Turks would have been happy with that level of force improvement.The Iraqi's have tanks and MiG Fighters.
There's a very good reason the US hasn't provided the Kurds any real armour.
Nevertheless, the peshmerga seem to be a decidedly better infantry force in terms of quality. Dzhugashvili's crew found such a force tough to beat despite numbers, tanks, and aircraft. The Kurds could well exceed expectations.
Originally Posted by Beskar:
Sure stopped ISIS in its tracks.
The Iraqi Army at the start of the war were basically what was left of the American's Golf Caddies. The Iraqi army now is battle hardened. The Kurds may still be better motivated but the Iraqi army is no longer apt to crumple at the first sign of pressure, and the Kurds aren't the insane zealots ISIS are.Sure stopped ISIS in its tracks.
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus:
The Iraqi Army at the start of the war were basically what was left of the American's Golf Caddies. The Iraqi army now is battle hardened. The Kurds may still be better motivated but the Iraqi army is no longer apt to crumple at the first sign of pressure, and the Kurds aren't the insane zealots ISIS are.
Peshmerga have modern Western AT and AA missiles, also APC´s. US alone has given the Peshmerga equivalent of heavy equipment for two US Brigades worth 2.6 billion dollars. They also have tanks, but those are old Soviet types.The Iraqi Army at the start of the war were basically what was left of the American's Golf Caddies. The Iraqi army now is battle hardened. The Kurds may still be better motivated but the Iraqi army is no longer apt to crumple at the first sign of pressure, and the Kurds aren't the insane zealots ISIS are.
Originally Posted by Beskar:
Sure stopped ISIS in its tracks.
Peshmerga also ran away from daesh. They are as untrained, incompetent and corrupted as the Iraqis. Now that the US stopped paying their salaries, things will probably deteriorate. Sure stopped ISIS in its tracks.
Their sudden route was a leading factor to the Yazidi genocide. If there's any conflict about Kirkuk without any foreign intervention, chances are that the city will be captured by the army. They will probably can't advance into predimoniantly Kurdish areas, though.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...kurdistan.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
Originally Posted by Kagemusha:
Peshmerga have modern Western AT and AA missiles, also APC´s. US alone has given the Peshmerga equivalent of heavy equipment for two US Brigades worth 2.6 billion dollars. They also have tanks, but those are old Soviet types.
You need tanks to fight tanks, and jets to fight jets. AT and AA missiles are secondary defences that can help to deter the enemy or hold them off until your heavy hardware arrives.Peshmerga have modern Western AT and AA missiles, also APC´s. US alone has given the Peshmerga equivalent of heavy equipment for two US Brigades worth 2.6 billion dollars. They also have tanks, but those are old Soviet types.
Originally Posted by Crandar:
Peshmerga also ran away from daesh. They are as untrained, incompetent and corrupted as the Iraqis. Now that the US stopped paying their salaries, things will probably deteriorate.
No, just no.Peshmerga also ran away from daesh. They are as untrained, incompetent and corrupted as the Iraqis. Now that the US stopped paying their salaries, things will probably deteriorate.
The Peshmerga withdrew from Sinjar (without protecting the civilian population) where the Iraqi army fled from Mosul, losing a lot of its equipment in the process, where it had all the advantage against IS.
Originally Posted by :
Their sudden route was a leading factor to the Yazidi genocide. If there's any conflict about Kirkuk without any foreign intervention, chances are that the city will be captured by the army. They will probably can't advance into predimoniantly Kurdish areas, though.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...kurdistan.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
Again, "rout" is not the word. Having said that, without US material support the Kurds can't stand up to the Iraqi army and hold the ground they have taken, though they might decide to bleed the army white.Their sudden route was a leading factor to the Yazidi genocide. If there's any conflict about Kirkuk without any foreign intervention, chances are that the city will be captured by the army. They will probably can't advance into predimoniantly Kurdish areas, though.
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...kurdistan.html
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-th...-isis-attacked
The bit about stipends was interesting, though, I think that might have more of a knock-on effect for the Kurdish economy than their direct combat power, though.
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus:
You need tanks to fight tanks, and jets to fight jets. AT and AA missiles are secondary defences that can help to deter the enemy or hold them off until your heavy hardware arrives.
If you are defending you dont. The Iraqi air force is crap with outdated equipment, while it has been the West which has been providing the air support, which i cant see happening now. Modern AT missiles can handle modern tanks and are the only real option for a low budget force.You need tanks to fight tanks, and jets to fight jets. AT and AA missiles are secondary defences that can help to deter the enemy or hold them off until your heavy hardware arrives.
Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus:
You need tanks to fight tanks, and jets to fight jets. AT and AA missiles are secondary defences that can help to deter the enemy or hold them off until your heavy hardware arrives.
Distinguishing AT from AA, hasn't defensive AT always held strategic advantages over tank-to-tank, even more so now than before the Cold War?You need tanks to fight tanks, and jets to fight jets. AT and AA missiles are secondary defences that can help to deter the enemy or hold them off until your heavy hardware arrives.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO