AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Iraq's coming Breakup
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Wolf Blitzer is finally seeing the light of day here. Congratulations fellow: too bad Junior didn't see it before things started becoming violent years ago.

The longer one postpones the inevitable the more spectacular it will become.
[Image: csm_p10b.gif]

[Image: iraqi_oil_field_maps.jpg]?

Which side do you think will end up with most of the oil?
I feel bad we didn't listen to that mistreated prophet, Biden, who told us all this in a vision of the future. Thanks, Wolf Blitzer.

We have a major troop buildup in Kuwait still, just waiting for something like this to happen. It will be grandly interesting given we supplied weapons and training to thousands on each of the three sides.
The Sunnis will still come out ok in the end, because they have sheer ferocity, and history, on their side. All the Kurds have to do is just remain up there and stay out of the main fight between the other two groups.

As for oil, there is still a good deal of it untapped and in other places. All three sides should still come out with oil. But like typical Muslims, especially the Arabs, they will squander it as they always have. And once it is gone, they will revert to being dirt poor barbarians, instead of just barbarians.
I could give a shit less about one of the tens of different types of brown people America has decided to bomb or wage war on, I am just thinking how much of a goddamned waste it all was if the result is going to be a mess. Or if the whole democracy bullshit is going to fail miserably.

It sort of puts a hot poker in the eyes of all the Freedom Fries airheads, warhawks and crusaders for the 'Murrican Way to be spread all over the globe.

What a waste, that is all I can say.
Well, it wasn't a COMPLETE waste. We finally shut down Hussein's WMD program...
Wolf Blitzer's logic there is so bereft of intellect it's astonishing. I bet he has 10 degrees from Yale and Harvard in foreign affairs and such.

His opening logic is to compare Iraq, the oldest continuously organized entity on earth known to man with Yugoslavia, the shortest lived entity.

How many degrees did it take to reason like that? I have a degree in stupid and I'd have come off better than that.

Guys, just consider that instead of separating, each unit will want to control Iraq. It is a goldmine of oil, very likely exceeding even what Saudi Arabia has. You don't walk away from that, you fight to control it. Plus, their nationalism has deeper roots than ours, they are not a recent addition to the global polity.

A lot of Kurds live in Baghdad and that region, they are not interested in living in a separate, land locked Kurdistan ruled by men that make American cronyism look benevolent.

Kurds with brains could easily join the Sunni Arabs to dominate their collective region, the shia the south and the total protect the entire state from outsiders. Albania has done this for many centuries, they hate each other, they hate us worse.

A comparison with here would be like the "dominionist" type Christians, they don't want to separate and form their own version of an independent "Christian state in their image" where all the sins we can imagine would be outlawed, they want to run the USA.

Pat, they are nationalist I am sure. They may fight to control all of Iraq, but in the end, it will likely devolve into spheres of control. That is how it was after Saddam fell, and we're just now seeing the active face of it. These spheres of control may as well separate the country if no central gov't is going to exist.

The central authority will exist, but it will be in Tehran.

I think there is a whole lot more centrifugal force holding Iraq together than we think. My view is each side will seek to control the state instead of separation from it.

Separation would be a disaster for the Sunni as their region is bereft of oil, there are no natural geographic separation points, etc.

They're the ones who have lost out since we invaded and separation for them makes no logic, they'd starve if they did.

There are other reasons. Ultimately the central government will hold, IMO. They've had way bigger challenges than this and survived, check out the Mongol invasions.
Palladin Wrote:I think there is a whole lot more centrifugal force holding Iraq together than we think.

Namely, Iran.

It would be stupid for Iraq to break up, but there is no shortage of stupidity when emotions run high. Perhaps facing real alternatives will cool heads. Who knows.

Good politics would lead to tripartite accommodations, allowing each piece to engage in its own graft. But some oil money must therefore flow to the Sunnis.
A majority of the oil seems to be in the Basra area, which is Shiite-dominated. And just over the border is Shiite-dominated Iran, to back them up. Iraq could easily break up into east/west (Shiite/Sunni). The big question is what the Kurds could/would do (if they are even allowed to break off as an independent national entity). Despite being the majority, the Sunnis would probably not dare try to take over the Basra oil fields with Iran backing up the Basra Shiites. But the Sunnis might very well wage war against the Kurds to try to take over their oil fields. So that is where I would see the biggest chance for violence--in the north, Arab vs. Kurd. Such conflict has occurred repeatedly in the past. Saddam Hussein tried his hand at "ethnic cleansing," using chemical warfare.

Another complication is what Turkey might do, since they covet those Kurdish oil fields, too.
Palladin, it's even more stupid grade level to say that Yugoslavia broke up after the dead of Tito. But ok, we are not here to talk about the Balkans.

I agree with Palladin that all 3 groups will try to control the whole Iraq rather than split it up between "no oil"/"some oil"/"realy a lot of oil".
And no one will want to be dominated by Iran or have a pan-Iranian state as a neighbor.
And no one globaly will want to see Iran controling more than 50% of oil reserves.
So the pressure to keep Mesopotamia united are bigger than those to split it up.

Civil war is a possibility but I think these poeple are tired of wars. So it might be a dirt war instead.
Fredledingue, by "dirt war," you mean you think they might have an American style political campaign? S5
Let them eat cake.

Or dirt.

Or oil.

Whatever. Let them decide their fates, either through the ballot box or through car bombs. I could care less at this point.
(12-30-2011, 05:10 PM)ghoullio Wrote: [ -> ]Let them eat cake.

Or dirt.

Or oil.

Whatever. Let them decide their fates, either through the ballot box or through car bombs. I could care less at this point.

Well, I do care about the loss of life. But in truth, it is not up to us to tell them how to run their lives, or country. Let them decide their own fates, as long as it doesn't threaten us.

There was a massive bmb attack in Ghadad recently. 75 poeple died.
It seems the Iraqis are not abandonning the good traditions...
Zarkawi's ghost, most likely. I can't imagine Iran killing that many Shiites so it must be AQ again. When do we re-invade?
While all the humvees are still there, it may be time to reinvade again... S5
I can think of a few people here who would make excellent generals when we re-invade Iraq. Since they're already there, they can swing South and take out Iran on their way to their victory parades when they return home.

Anyone want to take bets on how long it will take before the death tolls in Iraq rival pre-2006 levels? 4 months? 6 Months?