What defines a civil war.....shouldn't we just call it day ...and admit Iraq is in the midst of a civil war

Question

A civil war is defined as war between two factions of the same nation.

Answer 1

According to the definition in American History,
There must be TWO separate governments.
Strangely, the British might look at the American Revolution as a colonial civil war.
Also, the South might look at the American Civil War as the Southern Revolution (albeit failed).
The French Revolution was to the Louis XVI, possibly a Civil War, although I think he would have considered it a Revolt, at least in the beginning.

The Winners always write the History Books and Define the terms.

As for Iraq, One of my friends said this new "Two or Three Separate states" idea may carve it up like former E/W Germany, but not for the same reasons.

Currently neither government in Iraq is firmly established (Their American supported leaders or the "Insurgency"). It is under a military occupation and an ongoing state of semi-anarchy.

Israel and Palestine is much more a case for Civil War. As the Palestians have established a government that has recognition by foreign leaders and seeks independence.

The schism between Sunnis and Shi'ite Muslims dates back to the death of Mohammed and who would be his sucessor and properly interpret his message.

As I recall there were centuries of violence and opression between Christian factions (some still continue), we are fools to think we can resolve this issue for Islam. Change must be internal.

We continue to damage the country with our presence, leaving early would still damage it further. We have a moral obligation to resolve Iraq, but not the capability or ideal strategy at this time. It is a real conundrum.

Personally, I think the division is the ultimate (meaning final and inevitable, but not "best") solution. It may be 40 some years, like in the case of Germany, for them to put aside their differences, if not a day short of forever.

After all this blood shed, no one is going to forget or forgive easily.

One IMPORTANT note: This hasn't been a horrible American War by any means. It has actually been one of the safest. LOOK AT THE DEATHS OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR. If you add ALL Deaths from 9/11, casualties of war, and deaths of Iraqis it barely comes close to the American Revolution (100,000+). Or either World War.

Are we chickening out? Giving up? Calling it quits?
Maybe leaving now will save more American lives?
Maybe it will led to more violence in Iraq?

There are no easy answers facing the nation.

But as to answer you questions, in my opinion,

Iraq is a sorry mess, but not a True historical Civil War.
That remains to be written.

Answer 2

I think you are in the right neighborhood of Baghdad on this one!

Just what does it mean 'cut and run' anyway. No one has actually said, "Well, darn it. The British 'cut and run' when they fought here. A 100 years changes nothing! They cut and run. Now we should too!"

If Americans could admit there is a civil war, at least we could say, yes, one side called Sunni appear to be on the recieving side of a genocide by another side called Shia.

Even if it turns out to be the other way around, we at least know the players. We even know that surronding countries have an individual stake in the outcomes and they are trying to influence the situation.

Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and don't forget the Kurds are all at least up to their eyeballs trying to gain a partisan advantage.

But nooo....we insist to the world...no civil war here....This is a regular war...a war that can be "won" on our terms....a war that by the Gods that George Bush prays to, will be won!!!

But the US, and her hapless allies, don't know who it is 'we' are 'warring' against.

We do know that our soldiers have for the last few nights approached houses in the capital city for the purpose of "warring".

After politely knocking, squads of America's finest, not San Diego Police, more like the few, the proud, enter those homes and take up temporary residence on various rooftops and wait with night vision scopes to shoot other 'warriors' in the streets.

Meanwhile the families we are there to protect, rescue, etc. get to spend the night with warring soldiers in their homes???

Just call it a day is right!!!!

Answer 3

I think the Iraqis would not define the war as a civil war but rather a war between the "collaborators " and freedom Fighters .

Traditionally Civil wars tend to Classified as war between two different people within a country in which one group takes up arms to over throw the order of things or to gain separation as opposed to a revolution where one group wants to take control instead of the other . within a Revolution there may or not be a civil war.

Answer 4

YUO could say that butit goes futher than that.
Iraq is represented by an elected government, and leader. However the leader of Iraq is getting his political support from a few muslims clerics who are just murderers themselves.
He is following the path of Saddam in trying to plurge the country of sunni, and kurds will follow. His aim is to keep the civil unrest going until he can kill or disencourage enough sunni to leave that Iraq will in the future become sheite only.
If civil war does breal out and the USA troops leave than his task of genicide will be that much easier.
Iraqi is still a country of trible losers, and will remain for a long time to come or until the proplr have enough and see for themselves what their beautiful religion has done for them.

Answer 5

No because a civil war is two politically orientated groups. Not a group trying to force people out of the country

Answer 6

defining a civil war is like defining what is pornographic. "I don't know, but I will tell you when I see it."

I think it is safe to say when a society is ripping itself apart through violence they are in civil war. By that definition Iraq entered a civil war a long time ago.

Answer 7

if the faction has a clear leadership and goal. would you call the northern Ireland vs england civil war?

I say it's just a big police action. We should just go "Big brother" on iraq to stablize the country.

Answer 8

According to the senile madman (rummy), it's not a civil war unless both sides dress up in uniforms, one side blue the other gray. Line up in long formations and slaughter each other in open formal combat.

So by his thinking(sic) Iraq is not in a civil war.

Answer 9

Lets see, Sunni's are killing Shites, Shites are killing Sunni's, I think we can safely say that there is a civil war going on in Iraq and we are in the middle of it, matter of fact we caused it. Saddam was a bad man, but he did keep those two apart.

Answer 10

finally a real question worth answering... you're right my man... IRAQ IS IN A CIVIL WAR... the government/media down play it so it looks like that we are in somewhat control of in that country....