Replies

From the article:

he problem is, of course, oil. Kurdistan has oil, Shia Iraq has oil, Sunni Iraq does not.

False premise from the very get go. There is no "sunni Iraq" there is no "shia Iraq" and there is no "kurdistan Iraq". Simply stated there are various regions in a country called Iraq that has internationally recognized borders.

" can Sunni Iraq demand a share of the oil if the others dont want Sunnis to be part of the country?"

The progress made in the constitution they VOTED on shows that the majority cannot ignore or shut out the minority.Checks and balances are there. Red Herring here.

"Which in any case was made into a "country" by the British after WWI"

So What?

"3 provinces of the Ottoman Empire that nothing to do with each other "

OOOPS they are all muslims part of the muslim world right? Cmon now.

"The British kept the minority Sunnis on as overlords, just as the Turks had done. Their ascendancy has come from imperial dispensations, not from any natural process such as numbers."

That changing today is a very good thing HUH? Thank the troops DUDE!.

"We have repeatedly suggested: the US should indeed break up Iraq."

Who is the "we"? It sure aint me and it isn't the majority of Iraqis.

"US had no hesitation to break up Yugoslavia into the original six states and let each become its own country."

That isn't Iraq is it?

How come the US found it acceptable to see India breakup into India and Pakistan, and then Pakistan breakup into Pakistan and Bangladesh, and would like nothing better than an independent Kashmir, which would mean breaking up India and Pakistan still further, and would result, inevitably, in the final breakup of Pakistan itself. And how come the breakup of the Soviet Union is welcomed, and the drive to break up Russia has only just begun?

They aren't Iraq either are they?

After breaking Iraq up the US should: strongly protect the Sunni state and support it to grow strong; maintain close relations with the Kurd State, acting as its protector against Turkey, and maintain principled relations with the Shia state, not seeking to sway it one way or the other, but helping it to stay independent of Iran.

I fail to see why breaking up Iraq into parts is what it takes to do this. Is this to say that the USA has to be broken up into 50 parts to remain stable? See the error yet?

"Okay, so your editor hears the litanies of "we can't do this because". Right. Turkey will go berserk, Saudi will go berserk, Iran will go berserk with joy, etc etc. All valid points. "

Like Afghanistan would be a failure?
Like the Mighty arab street will rise up?
Like we would lose tens of thousands of soldiers upon invasion of Iraq?
Like we would be bogged down in a quagmire (said at three weeks!) My aunt might be my uncle too JEEEZZZ.

"But consider this: the success of a world empire lies not in imposing what Washington wants."

LMAO @ world empire.

"It lies, rather, in Washington working with the various subordinate states to achieve a balance where both sides are happy."

Right working the nation called IRAQ.

"If Washington does this, the American world empire will last, metaphorically, for a 1000 years."
America IS doing this and the votes in Iraq show you that. Again I laugh at world empire.

"If, however, it persists on incorrect calculations of its interests - which it is doing by forcing Iraq into staying a unitary state and other follies we don't think Washington will fall into, then between 2030-2050, America can fuggedabhatit."

Laughable in the fact that this author take the position that America wants a world empire. The only thing to forget about is the foolishness presented here. NOW on to YOUR posts.

"Tell the country, dude, 2000 dead with no end in sight."

Ane END isnt what we seek a new path is what we seek. A new path is what we SEE today.

"All Dubya says is more sacrifice required."

Oh really? Better check that one out a bit more. LMAO.

"The American people have a finite capacity for casualties without end."

I cannot say the last has died already anymore than you can predict how many more will die.

"A democracy cannot fight foreign wars without the support of the citizens."

UMMM seems to me that on 911 EVERYONE was about fighting this war THERE and NOT here! That is to say FOREIGN WARS.

"As of now, victory is undefined."

Like hell it is. The war was done in a month, codified in 8 months with the capture of Saddam himself. What is waged there now is not the same as what was waged there to remove Saddam. Today we fight for peace against the people that do not want to see Iraq move forward from such dark days under Saddams rule. The very same folks that attacked us on 911 (among so many other examples I could cite here).

"All we get from the generals and politicals is pablum."

The truth is never trite my friend. If you suggest that what you are told is not factual then by all means lets have examples.

"How many American soldiers will die before it's enough."

With this statement right here YOU set the terms of victory or defeat at NUMBER OF SOLDIERS DEAD. Remember you said this here.

"And I also a remember a nursery rhyme about a large egg....

All the King's horses,
And all the King's men...
Could not put Mesopatamia together, again."

Here you JOKE about war that you supposedly abhor. Very telling about how serious you are about this subject to begin with. Germany was put back together and it sure was not done in a couple years. Same with Japan. THINK before you post will ya.

"Nice talking points. Slick, glib but not really relevant to today's situation."

Were you talking to yourself right there? LMAO I love this! LOOK at your last post.... Could not put Mesopatamia together, again.".... BWAAA HAHAHAHA hypocrite.

"Based on your logic, at what amount of dead will we have won? 5000, 10000 what."

I recently showed you how YOU define winning or losing by soldiers killed and here you ask another if THEIR logic poses such a thing? Laughable!.

"That's the ticket.

Let's keep soliders dying for an artifical country created by the Britishers. "

So I guess America is artificial? All countries are? More foolishness.

"Beautiful. Americans dying for an archaic colonial creation. Let me know when we win."

More of the same.

"Basically we have a strong ally in Kurdistan, and we could live with a non aggressive Shia theocracy in the south.
When the Sunnis tire of fighting each other we could help 'em, as the author maintains."

All of the above is true in a country called Iraq. This is hardly a reason to break the country up. There is no need.

"Oh, semantic games."

That is your department LMAO.

I asked you this: Do you make the case that a soldier dying is a reason not to fight?

"Only if the reason is worthwhile." and "The reason is not worth the deaths"

Lots of reasons to oust Saddam that are absolutely worthwhile. But anyway you didnt read this question properly from the start.

"That's why we destroyed a secular regime."
HA HA HA Ok.

"In the meantime, Osama romps free."
Have any evidence of that? Where does he 'romp' and what evidence of his existance today do you present?

"how many days since 911 and Osama's still free"

And you complain at me about discussing this article??? HAHAHAH hypocrite.

"Iraq attacked us?"
YUP, he shot at our boys daily for years.

"Okeydokee. It helps when fighting back to go after those who actually attacked you"

I see you indeed forgot Afghanistan. I also see that you think this nation cannot "chew gum and walk" at the same time.

"The problem with bringing democracy is that the majority of the people would vote for a theocracy"

They been voting is it a theocracy yet?

"Our best bet is not to put democracy as a holygrail, but support for secularists, who are the minority."

Chosing their own path forward is the Holy Grail...and that is EXACTLY what they are doing. You say to support the minority, when indeed we need to support ALL.

"Let them have their tribal cultures, because a foreign imposed regime will never have legitimacy in the eyes of the people."

You call for another PAKISTAN, DUDE!! The claim that anything is imposed by foreigners is FALSE. They have elected a temp gov to draft their own constitution. That constitution that they VOTED on passed and will govern the next election for a permanent government. Foregn imposed it is NOT. Blatant inaccuracy right there.

"What's our priority?"
Progress moving Forward. Seeing Iraqi people come together as a nation and begin on a new path. One of self determination and free choice.

"Stopping terror or imposing democracy."

False premise there.

"I say the former, because I don't believe the latter leads necessarily to the cessation of the former, especially if democracy is looked upon as a foreign imposition."

If they Choose their own path, how is it imposed on them? That is crap. The choice itself is forced on them? What choice to make is forced on them? Inked fingers show you they WANT to make the choice. Blatant inaccuracy there.

"While we impose democracy on Iraq"

Whatever.....

" a Pakistani dictator wins 90% of the votes in the last election; we support the most reactionary monarchy around, the Saudis."

If you pay attention, many changes are happening in BOTH those nations. The statement ONE BY ONE also comes to mind here and they KNOW that.

"If we were honest"

Implying we are a nation of dishonesty eh? How american of you!.

"we'd have started with the Saudis. Get our friends to change and we'd have some credibility."

Banking changes, voting rights changes, school ciriculum changes have ALL been happening. I guess you are so busy opposing W that you missed these things eh?

"CAPS make your post impressive. I'm IMPRESSED."

You slam imposition and then try to force my compliance to suit you, as you take issue with my way of emphasis. Typical.

"We should want friendly states, not democracies necessarily.Democracies aren't always friendly, look at Europe."

Examples please?

"Spilling blood is not a sign of victory. In fact, getting what you want with minimum spillage is far preferable."

You pose that lack of it is victory. Think about that a minute eh?

"and considering alternatives is prudent. This is one."

Breaking Iraq up is not an option to be considered any more seriously than that of ignoring Saddam and his actions for another thirty years.

"That's assuming, as you do, that democratization will not put in power the very jihadis we are fighting against"

If it does SO BE IT, there is noone to blame but themselves. BUT, I will offer to you that ISN'T happening now IS IT? So what is the point again? SPIN is your point here.

"That's one hell of a statement to make when US soldiers will have died to ennable jihadis."

OH yes, our soldiers are there to empower jihadis FFS dude wake up will ya.

I wrote: 1700 soldiers have died in combat?

You Wrote: "Nice propagandistic spin. Splitting the difference between combat and noncombat deaths. How absurd."

You really hate facts when they do not parrot YOUR ideological line eh?

"For all your "respect" for the troops, you simply parrot the goooberment line."

Examples please? Truth is what it is, I will be happy to repeat that for you over and over.

"They died in a war zone. If the govt classifies their death as non combat deaths, is it to screw them out of their death benefits."

Show the difference for me as to what you get each way?

"Over 2000 Dead in IRaq and counting. Spin it, justify it any way you want,but I agree with General Odom, Iraq is the biggest strategic disaster in US history."

Without invading Iraq how could it be split into three nations? You sir, offer ZERO alternative to removing Saddam by force. The biggest error here is your attempt at hindsight being your guide to the future.

"YOu type a lot, use too many caps and it's hard to argue with such a skilled shill like you. "

This is a typing forum right? It IS hard to argue against rational posts, and you can call me names all you want to but you cannot qualify them anymore than you can your positions or oppositions.

"Sweetie, it's too late for alternatives. They are bad, worse, disastrous and catastrophic."

NEVER EVER too late for alternatives.

"I have no desire to correct your propaganda, spin, lies and halftruths going back years."

You mean you cannot do so.

"Inshallah. Enjoy the dead. Remember them."

More playing games of politics with soldiers lives from you here.

"And wake me when we find Osama, LOL!"

You need to wake up all right!

"At the end of your lengthy missive is the cheap shot and innuendo."

Post what you claim, I stand by my posts and will gladly explain any of them.

"That, demonstrates both paucity of the quality of your arguments and similarly of your character."

Really, define that for me with examples.

"Thank you very much for your discussion of the posted article. "

Was that about Osama??? Ha Ha....pot calling the kettle black on your part there.

"Enjoy the Dead."

MORE playing GAMES with deaths of honorable soldiers doing an honorable thing.

You sir are the sick and disgusting one and your own posts show that clearly.

Breaking Iraq up isn't the plan. It isn't going to happen and there is no need for it to happen. They are ona new path and could have already chosen that if that is what they wanted. Yet you still talk like it is a possability. FUTILE buddy. Foolish and nothing more than a product of more OPPOSE W mentality.