Iraq (1932-2014)
Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2014 1:54 pmIraq will never again be a single state. Now that Obama has approved using American military might to protect Erbil, there is no way kurdistan will ever become a part of Iraq again. The boundaries granted independence in 1932 are nothing but relics of history now. Iraq is dead and gone.
Now the real question is why is the US government continuing on with this fiction that Sunni and Shia Iraq will, despite all their genocidal intentions toward each other, continue to function as a single state. Why do we want a leader in Baghdad who is going to attempt the impossible and reconcile these two groups. The old system only worked because the Sunni's under Saddam subjugated half the country. If we all agree that won't be the future state of affairs, then why continue with this fiction that Iraq is a single country?
Give the kurds their kurdistan, with the provision that they incorporate the other religious minorities in the region and grant them autonomy. In return you get independence, Kirkuk, and america as a military and economic ally. Seems like a big win for them given their position just 15 years ago. Give the Shia the south, and Bagdad with it. I think if you played your cards right on this one you could win serious diplomatic and political concessions from Iran in return. f**k the Sunni's and f**k Assad. Sunni's can keep what's left of Iraq and whatever they can take from Assad's Syria. Other than that, they can do as they please provided they don't go out of their way to commit genocide or attack western soil.
This should be the official US policy. Right now, they doesn't seem to be a plan beyond don't let ISIS take Erbil. Despite this lack of a plan though, the clear line has been drawn. Iraq is dead. Kurdistan will be independent. How we sort out the rest of the region and deal with ISIS should reflect these two fundamental facts.
God Bless the United States of America
Now the real question is why is the US government continuing on with this fiction that Sunni and Shia Iraq will, despite all their genocidal intentions toward each other, continue to function as a single state. Why do we want a leader in Baghdad who is going to attempt the impossible and reconcile these two groups. The old system only worked because the Sunni's under Saddam subjugated half the country. If we all agree that won't be the future state of affairs, then why continue with this fiction that Iraq is a single country?
Give the kurds their kurdistan, with the provision that they incorporate the other religious minorities in the region and grant them autonomy. In return you get independence, Kirkuk, and america as a military and economic ally. Seems like a big win for them given their position just 15 years ago. Give the Shia the south, and Bagdad with it. I think if you played your cards right on this one you could win serious diplomatic and political concessions from Iran in return. f**k the Sunni's and f**k Assad. Sunni's can keep what's left of Iraq and whatever they can take from Assad's Syria. Other than that, they can do as they please provided they don't go out of their way to commit genocide or attack western soil.
This should be the official US policy. Right now, they doesn't seem to be a plan beyond don't let ISIS take Erbil. Despite this lack of a plan though, the clear line has been drawn. Iraq is dead. Kurdistan will be independent. How we sort out the rest of the region and deal with ISIS should reflect these two fundamental facts.
God Bless the United States of America