Senator Biden (and several other candidates) are proposing the division of Iraq into a series of ethnic states (Sunni, Shia, Kurd, etc.) as a way to end the civil war, and start the peace process. The idea conflicts with the Bush concept of a single, unified Iraq, but it has the support of a number of our allies as an alternative to ongoing civil conflict.
I have a few ideas about it, but no real opinion. I am curious as to what you guys think.
2007-07-31 08:59:24 · 10 answers · asked by Buffy Summers 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think that allowing Iraq to separate into regions based on their desire for self-rule, and leaving it as a confederate model, is a lot better than trying to force a top-down federalist system on a population that is clearly not ready or interested in a federalist democracy.
It will promote stability faster, avoid sectarian violence better, and still get us 90% of what we wanted.
2007-07-31 09:21:00 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I've been sure since the was started that we'd wind up with three separate countries, Shia, Kurd, and Sunni. it's just a matter of time.
Unfortuantely, there's a good chance that Turkey will attack the Kurds as soon as it happens.
And the Iranis have gained tremendous influence in the south so it may go Shia radical also.
2007-07-31 09:04:02 · answer #2 · answered by mikeleibo 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
it, in some form, will likely be the eventual outcome for Iraq. our adventure there has completely destroyed the fragile balance that allowed it to operate as one nation. the best hope for the Iraqi people would be a weak central government and three semi-autonomous regions. that would allow the country to remain intact and separate the factions in an orderly manner. if it can be done is to seen.
by the way...Biden first brought up this idea over 2 years ago. it was shunned in favor of the myth of victory.
2007-07-31 09:02:40 · answer #3 · answered by jonny y 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
In a perfect world, it would be great. However, look at the Isreal. It's a constant religious war based upon land. The same thing would happen in Iraq. But instead of it being about religion, is will be about class systems. So, I don't think it would work.
2007-07-31 09:28:37 · answer #4 · answered by Lisa M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Partitioning Iraq won't necessarily stop the violence. What's to prevent the provinces from going to war with each other? How do you divide the oil rich areas fairly? And then we'd have to monitor the progress of 3 governments, and provide security for 3 governments....
2007-07-31 09:11:16 · answer #5 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it will make it a lot easier for the civil war. It's nice to know where to point the guns.
2007-07-31 09:15:18 · answer #6 · answered by Joseph G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think this would eventually create more havoc for the region.
i think they need to learn to be accepting of sunni shai'a and other religions to live according to their own beliefs and respect others but then...that is why they have been killing each other, and us, for so long.
2007-07-31 09:14:36 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
jonny y said "our adventure there has completely destroyed the fragile balance that allowed it to operate as one nation"
Fragile balance my @ss...try oppressive dictatorship!!!
That being said, the only real solution involves either taking away all their destructive toys and securing the Iraqi border (nearly impossible), or a few strategically placed "kilo-ton devices" if ya know what I mean!!! That'll learn 'em!
2007-07-31 09:16:40 · answer #8 · answered by iroteb 5 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Oh, sure if you divide those people up they will just stop fighting? do you believe that?
2007-07-31 09:04:12 · answer #9 · answered by Steven 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
yawn
2007-07-31 09:09:37 · answer #10 · answered by Funnyaccountant 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋