0
   

Fear of a Republican President

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2008 11:05 am
Lash wrote:
I know we regret going. I'd hate our regret leaving it to be worse.


There's really no other option at this point. That's what happens when you make a dog's dinner out of a precarious situation; all options are bad.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2008 11:07 am
Best to accept our limitations now, and let them handle their own fate. I know our government doesn't plan to do anything like that, with the big embassy and bases, inviting big oil to make deals with the government, etc.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2008 11:13 am
I consider that sort of thinking equivalent to the argument in the early 1970s that we couldn't leave Vietnam because there would be a blood bath. The blood bath, in fact, never materialized, although life was pretty damned harsh for prominent supporters of the Thieu government.

It doesn't matter how long we stay in Iraq, or how soon we leave. You can't put the genie back in the bottle, and Iraq now has a majority Shi'ite government, something which has never been true in the slightly more than 80 year history of that nation. The Turks didn't try to make these people live together, and had three separate provinces which effectively separated the Kurds from the "Arabs" (they're only Arabs in a loose sense) and the Sunnis from the Shi'ites. When Winston Churchill created Iraq in 1920, his only interest was in controlling the petroleum in Basra, Kirkuk and Mosul. To accomplish that it was necessary to force together Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds, all of whom cordially despised one another. Caring little or nothing for the consequences (a foolishness for which they were soon to pay), the English put the Arabian Faisal on an Iraqi throne, and assured, for whatever their intent (and it appears that they simply gave no thought at all to the consequences), that Sunnis would dominate the politics of Iraq, despite being both an ethnic and religious minority.

With a Shi'ite majority government, Iraq's most logical ally in the region will be Iran, the only other Shi'ite dominated state in the world. With a resurgent Kurdish minority, heavily armed and the veterans of decades of insurrection and outright warfare, Iraq is guaranteed a basis for continuing conflict with and interference by Turkey. It doesn't matter how long we stay, Shi'ites have a lot of grudges and long memories, and now have the ways and means to get their revenge, just as soon as we leave, whether that's now or later. The Turks are going to do everything they can to prevent the establishment of a Kurdish homeland in the region, whether it is de facto and not de jure, and will invade Iraq if they deem it necessary to prevent that, which they have already done, despite our presence there.

Arguing that we have to stay in order to assure the peace and security of Iraq is a fool's dream.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Jun, 2008 11:25 am
Setanta wrote:

Arguing that we have to stay in order to assure the peace and security of Iraq is a fool's dream.

If I see anyone doing that, I'll warn them of your opinion.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 03/14/2025 at 06:29:51