2007-03-09 16:46:51 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You stole my plan. LOL
I have been saying for quite awhile that the best solution for Iraq is to give them the same system we have... states with a federal government. I honestly believe they would welcome this since the last estimate is that 74% has already relocated based on race.
We should help them create a Kurd, Sunni and Shiite state each then use our troops to enforce the borders. There would still be a federal constitution, govt and military... and a president... the same as we have here.
I really think this would work.
To answer the question, we can't do this because it's not what our supreme leader and Hilter wannabe desires...
2007-03-10 14:16:08 · answer #1 · answered by BeachBum 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is what was thought about. The Sunni section would not go for it because they have no oil.
Even though they were promised a share of the revenues, they didn't trust the two other sections to stand by the promise if they divided.
The Kurds are now living in peace and they are flourishing.
Though you will never hear this on CNN, ABC, CBS etc., The only place where there is any real fighting is in the Sunni area.
You hear all the talking heads and Dems saying Iraq is in a civil war? If that is the case, why are the Kurds and the South at peace?
It is all propaganda to get Americans to hate the president.
2007-03-09 17:01:38 · answer #2 · answered by Kye H 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is exactly what the fools are fighting for. At the end of WWII the Middle East was divided up by the European victors, yeah, the US had its hands it the pie also. The place did not follow any secular pattern. The problem is, the poor (Shites) outnumber the Sunnis 5 to 1 in the entire region of the Middle Easy, not just Iraq. This type of division would affect all of the countries int he Middle East; Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Palestinian territories, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somaliland, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Lord knows we do not want to upset anybody over there and turning over the bulk of the oil fields to the poor Muslims would really pi*s off the rich ones.
2007-03-09 17:02:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The social and cultural components of your article have been very thrilling and informative. in spite of if, I do have some comments correct to the political area. Genocide in any form is incorrect, in spite of if it happens in Nazi Germany, Iraq, Bosnia, or Darfur. there is quite some info available that shows that the Holocaust did exist, yet many people choose for to forget approximately that info. by way of fact the rustic of Israel did no longer exist at that element, it form of sounds like logical to assume that a denial of incontravertable info should be linked to a prejudice against the Jewish people. i think of we are able to the two agree that over the years the two the Israelis and the Palestinians have suffered as a consequence of geopolitical judgements that weren't properly thought out. in spite of if, bodily expelling the Israelis would not supply a passable answer to the difficulty. some form of accomodation should be made to allow the two components to stay in peace. and how precisely could you signify the Iranian government's help of Hezbollah? helping a for sure Revolutionary Organization 17 November does little to paint Iran as a peace-loving u . s . a ..
2016-12-14 15:19:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I asked this very question of an Iraqi I know recently, and he said that was tried in the past. He told me that was how the Kurds were isolated and then murdered. I wonder if it would work today, or if Iraq would just end up being three small warring countries?
Good suggestion, though........
2007-03-09 16:55:34 · answer #5 · answered by Joey's Back 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That idea was rejected by the Iraq study group.
However, I could see Iraq split into 3 strong states, and led by a small national gov't.
2007-03-09 16:53:45 · answer #6 · answered by Villain 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
We won't need to. Eventually, they'll do it themselves. The Kurds are defacto independent already, except in name. The Republic of Kurdistan exists (and is a peaceful and prosperous place, I've read). Ask any Kurd, or member of their militia, the KKD.
The mid-section will become a Shia conclave, and the south will be a Sunni conclave.
We needn't do anything to see this come to fruition.
2007-03-09 16:57:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
This has been partialy done by the US Insurgents. All we have to do now is to try and get some oil out of Iraq so we can justify all the murder & treason that it took to get us over there.
2007-03-09 17:29:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Kelly, that is one of those things that look good on paper but will never work out. The Iraqi people themselves are going to have to work it out how they want their government to be, they will never accept a puppet government or a division of their country. If we do not have the Iraqi peoples support we will never be able to have peace in that country. Nor will we ever be able to leave.
2007-03-09 16:55:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
sorry to burst your bubble but USA should know by now that things are not as easy as they seem for you.Like it or not you not only don't have any credibility for years now but you should be worry about your own divided nation before trying to fix another
2007-03-09 17:12:32 · answer #10 · answered by RX 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋