Why Iraq Will Probably Have To Be Three States

This is the first time I've seen an analysis of the Iraq scene that really makes sense. I agree that Iraq will never settle down until it separates into three separate states. The differences between the three factions are just too deep for them to come together as one unified country.


http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-luttwak2jun02,0,7182654.story?track=tothtml
From the Los Angeles Times


Will civil war bring lasting peace to Iraq?
History shows civil wars must be fought without foreign interference before stability prevails.
By Edward N. Luttwak
EDWARD N. LUTTWAK is a senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

June 2, 2006

CIVIL WARS can be especially atrocious as neighbors kill each other at close range, but they also have a purpose. They can bring lasting peace by destroying the will to fight and by removing the motives and opportunities for further violence.

England's civil war in the mid-17th century ensured the subsequent centuries of political stability under Parliament and a limited monarchy. But first there had to be a war with pitched battles and killing, including the decapitation of King Charles I, who had claimed absolute power by divine right.

The United States had its civil war two centuries later, which established the rule that states cannot leave the union ­ and abolished slavery in the process. The destruction was vast and the casualties immense as compared with all subsequent American wars, given the size of the population. But without the decisive victory of the Union, two separate and quarrelsome republics might still endure, periodically at war with each other.

Even Switzerland had a civil war ­ in 1847 ­ out of which came the limited but sturdy unity of its confederation. Close proximity, overlapping languages and centuries of common history were not enough to resolve differences between the cantons. They had to fight briefly, with 86 killed, to strike a balance of strength between them.

Continued:


http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-luttwak2jun02,0,7182654.story?track=tothtml

The place is getting pretty darn bad with the government forces being "just one more militia". Actually, probably a dozen more militias under separate chains of command. The US is yet another militia (albeit with tanks and aircraft and arty support).

Yep, everything seems to be at, as Bush would say "A Turning Point" but in the opposite direction Bush is saying. Our troops are tired, starting to fill with rage and making mistakes. Now we are losing any tiny little bit of respect any Iraqi people had for our Military being their. I am 1000% sure the war is lost for us and we need to just get out of the way.



Iraq Prime Minister Blasts Troop Conduct
'No Respect for Citizens ... It's Unacceptable'


http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060601032209990008&ncid=NWS00010000000001

Now we will have three governments to fight. You just can't convince me that the world is better off without Saddam in Iraq. How much has toppling Saddam already cost the western nations in lives and dollars?

People in Iraq will look back at the Saddam days with nostalgia like a Norman Rockwell painting. Those were the good old days for the Iraqi people.

but iraq did have some semblance od law and order.....people worked, went to school, weren't shot in the streets or beheaded.

what we have now is a bunch of religious fanatics trying to up the violence and atrocities.

nt

At one point, Turkey stated that there will not be an independent Kurdish state on its border, it will not allow it. Other Arab nations have a problem with a large southern Shiite Iraq aligned with Iran.

The invasion of Iraq created on huge mess; and the only viable way out may be the restoration of what existed before the invasion; and that may not be achievable.

There was a reason we did not go into Iraq in '91. Junior is a complete idiot and I don't think daddy can bail him out this time.

It may be either unitary, or federal in nature. I think that federal is more likely. The problem is ideological and political in nature. The leadership is chauvinist in the case of the Sunnis, and narrow nationalist in the case of the Kurds. The Shia leadership is too busy collaborating with the occupation, for the most part.

please consider this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1335281