[sceptic]

can someone explain what winning in Iraq is, I could have sworn we only went in to depose Saddam and elect a democracy in a country that does not want a democracy nor do its neighbours, seesm to, me we should pull out and let them get on with it, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, they got on with it before we invaded and they had a leader, he may have beeen perceived as a lunatic by us, but at the end of the day, maybe all he did , was to treat the opposite factions in exactly the same way they would have treated him and his faction.

I think we should stop interfering in these affairs and let them remain as they are, is a democracy where, we are in danger of raping and pillaging our planet of its natural resources really what we should be encouraging, we should get our own houses in order before we decide we have a God given right to interfere in everyones elses way if life.

For those that think no man should suffer at the hands of another, I think all that idealogical way of thinking is not relevant, has there ever been a time when man does not fight man ? I think the answer is no, do get out of Iraq and give it back to Saddam Hussain, I doubt the next leader of Iraq will be any more noble than Saddam

How about sorry we screwed up, here is your country back, by the way we have taken loads of your oil (cos that is what this is all about, otherwise we would be in Dakhur) to finance our jolly little jaunt, I could have swore our armies were to defend us

[cherdano]

hrothgar, on Oct 29 2006, 09:03 PM, said:

Part of the reason that some of us are so bitter about the whole Iraq invasion is that we don't have any good choices left.

Plus the fact that the current developments were not exactly unpredictable. Even in the US media there were realistic pre-war articles anticipating terrorism and ethnic/confessional fighting within Iraq.

[EricK]

pbleighton, on Oct 30 2006, 12:59 AM, said:

"I just ask people if they want to win in Iraq? Is winning possible by any reasonable definition? I get the impression sometimes that for many the answer is no to both these questions."

Well, having asked twice and not received an answer, I give up, and accept that you don't have a strategy for "winning"

Now I ask, do you have a definition of "winning"?

If you give me your definition, I will tell you if I think it's possible, how, and by when.

Peter

Maybe this quote from War Games is apt:

Quote

Joshua: A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

[helene_t]

I discussed Richard's population exchange with a Turkish friend of mine (maybe I should say that she's rather nationalistic in her views).

She got quite upset about it. For her, Turkey is the geographical entity of Anatolia+Trakia, and the people who live there, whether they are Turkish moslems, Turkish christians, Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, Arabs, Azeras etc. She sees no conflict between Kurdish and Turkish people, just some political intrigues of a few idiots.

That conversation made me wonder what the attitude of Turkey (the Turkish politicial, as well as the Turkish people) would be towards such a project. Also, what (if anything) are the bonds between Turkish-speaking minorities in Iraq and Turks in Turkey? Are they a threatened minority that would have any specials reason to leave Iraq (other than the obvious fact that everybody would like to leave Iraq)?

Turkey's Iraq policy has been about two themes:
1) Showing solidarity with the West, probably hoping for some rewards in the form of better prospects for Turkey's integration in EU.
2) Trying to avoind the establishment of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq.

The latter is undersstandable. Iraqi Kurdistan has oil, which means money to finance terrorism in Turkey.

I think a population exchange program between Iraq and the U.S. would be far better. An Iraqi diaspora in the U.S. will soon get integrated and feel American, so their ties with Iraq will improve the relation between the two countries. And maybe an American diaspora in Iraq would be able to establish a nucleus of modernity in the middle east, that could have a positive impact in the rest of Iraq and beyond. Something like 100 clones of the American university in Beyrout.

Na, I'm dreaming. Just pull out and use a small fraction of the money you save to give every Iraqi an I-Pod.

[hrothgar]

helene_t, on Oct 30 2006, 10:50 AM, said:

I discussed Richard's population exchange with a Turkish friend of mine (maybe I should say that she's rather nationalistic in her views).

She got quite upset about it. For her, Turkey is the geographical entity of Anatolia+Trakia, and the people who live there, whether they are Turkish moslems, Turkish christians, Kurds, Armenians, Greeks, Arabs, Azeras etc. She sees no conflict between Kurdish and Turkish people, just some political intrigues of a few idiots.

Talking politics with Turks can be tricky...

1. Insulting "Turkishness" or Attaturk is a criminal offense.
2. You can't have any kind of reason discussion about the Armenians.
3. Parts of Turkish government refuses to admit that Kurds exist as a separate ethnic group. (Traditionally, Kurds were classified as "Mountain Turks" or, more recently as "Eastern Turks)

However, despite some skepticism on the part of the Turkish government, it seems pretty clear that the Kurds do consider themselves a separate and distinct people.

I'd be quite interested if you asked your friend a followup question: How does she feel about the formation of an independent Kurdish nation state in Northern Iraq? (My guess is that she would be equally upset about this). Personally, I'd argue that you can't have it both ways:

If the ethnic Kurds in Turkey are all happily integrated into Turkish society, than the emergence of Kurdistan should not pose any significant threat to Turkey. (Personally, I think that the Iraqi Kurds will have far too much to worry about without worrying about provoking the Turkish military)

If, on the other hand, she believes that the emergence of Kurdistan will stir up the PKK or other terrorist groups, this certainly suggests that there are some Kurds living in Turkey who would prefer to live in "Kurdistan". I argue that a voluntary population exchange is a much better way to address this problem than bombings.

I will also note that the founding years of the Turkish Republic were marked with massive involuntary populations exchanges between Turkey and Greece. Turkey and Greece have had a rough relationship ever since, but at least this put an end to the open warfare that took place during the 1920s.

[hrothgar]

helene_t, on Oct 30 2006, 10:50 AM, said:

That conversation made me wonder what the attitude of Turkey (the Turkish politicial, as well as the Turkish people) would be towards such a project. Also, what (if anything) are the bonds between Turkish-speaking minorities in Iraq and Turks in Turkey? Are they a threatened minority that would have any specials reason to leave Iraq (other than the obvious fact that everybody would like to leave Iraq)?

I think that you're (broadly) correct in your assessment

1. Turkey is opposed to the establishment of an independent Kurdish state
2. Turkey VERY much wants to be admitted into the EU

As for ethnic minorities in Iraq: The most significant issue is going to be the city of Kirkuk. There's a LOT of argument about the etnic makeup of Kirkuk. Historically, the city has a very large population of Turks and Turkmen. Sadaam Hussein encouraged large scale immigration to Kirkuk by Sunni arabs. More recently, the Kurds have been making claims on the city. The combination of lots of population flux with large oil deposits can't be good. If there is going to be a flash point, it will probably be here.

[Al_U_Card]

I truly admire the American people and the consistancy of their desire to right wrongs (perceived or otherwise) and "win". This is the only way that humanity will triumph over it's baser nature and elements.....meanwhile, the serpent's head (remember that the Texas motto is "Don't tread on me") is biting deep into the veins of american life. Defang the creature before it's venom poisons the world...