Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/30/05 02:37 PM, BeFell wrote: If Iraq were to be divided turkey would attack the Kurds. They have told us as much on several occasions.

1/30/05 Massoud Barzani said:
"...An independent Kurdish state will be formed, but I do not know the exact time...A referendum will be conducted to show the public demand."

It's too bad for you, Hammurabi, but we are going to teach people tolerance. This will not be an oppressive democracy because the world is watching. Oppression occurrs when people turn a blind eye. That wont happen now. Not when the entire world is looking on, holding its breath (figuratively) for the outcome.

Secondary Note: Black people (only the original two generations are African-American) had a bad ride. However, those problems have almost been completely cleared up, and only a backlash from the removal of the oppression is left to clean up (intolerance within the minority, hate groups in the majority like KKK, damage to the Southern economy from the Civil War).

At 1/30/05 11:19 PM, Draconias wrote: It's too bad for you, Hammurabi, but we are going to teach people tolerance. This will not be an oppressive democracy because the world is watching. Oppression occurrs when people turn a blind eye. That wont happen now. Not when the entire world is looking on, holding its breath (figuratively) for the outcome.

That is the idealized outlook of the situation, but I don't think that the situation will end up that idyllic. Hopefully, the three cultural groups will cooperate very nicely, but I have serious doubts about the response of the Sunnis to this election. Perhaps they are afraid that their rights will not be protected under the new Iraqi democracy, or perhaps they are just desparately trying to hold on to their former power. In any case, what if Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani gets elected? Woah! You know there is going to be trouble from the Sunnis in that case.

At 1/30/05 02:29 PM, King_Hammurabi wrote: dividing it into three nations: Sunnistan, Shiastan, and Kurdistan.

Dam westerners, stop trying to devide us!

At 1/31/05 09:56 AM, darklad wrote: Dam westerners, stop trying to devide us!

I feel that dividing Iraq into three nations is in the best interests of both the Middle East and the United States. To show a parralel to the Iraq situation, look at Israel and Palestine. Palestine has not yet been given its independence. In other words, neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis have carried out the two state solution. That is why the Palestinians and the Israelis are still killing eachother. Balkanization of the Middle East may not be the idyllic solution, but it might be the only practical solution. Believe me when I say that I am concerned about the interests of all Middle Easterners.

i will simply state, no it's not, no further needed explanation

At 1/31/05 10:39 AM, darklad wrote: i will simply state, no it's not, no further needed explanation

I'm afraid that more explanation is needed. Why do you think that a three state solution for Iraq is a bad idea? I certainly see more benefits than detriments, and it also seems to be the only practical solution. The Sunnis will not accept democracy in the least, because they are afraid that they will be oppressed by the other cultural groups that form the majority. The Shi'ites want democracy and freedom after several years of living under an oppressive Sunni dictatorship. The Kurds want an independent nation called "Kurdistan". These are three irreconcilable interests that cannot be satisfied with anything short of dividing Iraq into three separate nations. A united Iraq is doomed to fail, since it will never be truly united. A nation that is composed of cultural groups that are mutually hostile and that each have conflicting and irreconcilable interests can never achieve stability without dividing itself into separate nations.

At 1/31/05 12:43 PM, King_Hammurabi wrote:
I'm afraid that more explanation is needed. Why do you think that a three state solution for Iraq is a bad idea? I certainly see more benefits than detriments, and it also seems to be the only practical solution. The Sunnis will not accept democracy in the least, because they are afraid that they will be oppressed by the other cultural groups that form the majority. The Shi'ites want democracy and freedom after several years of living under an oppressive Sunni dictatorship. The Kurds want an independent nation called "Kurdistan". These are three irreconcilable interests that cannot be satisfied with anything short of dividing Iraq into three separate nations. A united Iraq is doomed to fail, since it will never be truly united. A nation that is composed of cultural groups that are mutually hostile and that each have conflicting and irreconcilable interests can never achieve stability without dividing itself into separate nations.

Because people don't want to devide themself up, well execpt the kurds, but even if they allow them a country turkey will attack, they have threatened syria in the past, all the attacks you see, they aren't one suicide bomber, unless your media lied or something, why? because no muslim in his right mind would ever attack another unless their faith convertated or something, an outer force, like isreal, im not pointing fingers i'm just assuming is trying to make a civil war for it's own interest, and the people aren't buying it okay? there isn't a difference between a sinia and a shiite, they just thought that our prophets sucseser should have been ali, thats all, same religion, same book exactly and same prophet, and btw im a sinia, and i have a friend thats shiite, but we attended he same religion class called islam relegion, and studied the same believes

At 1/31/05 10:33 AM, King_Hammurabi wrote: Palestine has not yet been given its independence. In other words, neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis have carried out the two state solution. That is why the Palestinians and the Israelis are still killing eachother.

That doesn't apply, since the Palestinians don't simply want their own state, they want Israel. You think they haven't tried to make a compromise? Both sides want Jerusalem, and it won't do for them to split it.

In the Iraq situation, I don't think splitting it would be very helpful. What happens is that in each of the resulting nations, the majority would rule far more than in a unified Iraq. For example, we put the Sunni's in their own nation, the Shi'ites get supressed. We give the Shi'ites their own state and the Sunni's get choked out. What makes a democracy great is that it pits differing opinions against each other until a reasonable compromise is made. Democracy is a moderating force, that's what the US goal for Iraq is.

At 1/31/05 01:47 PM, Gunter45 wrote:
That doesn't apply, since the Palestinians don't simply want their own state, they want Israel. You think they haven't tried to make a compromise? Both sides want Jerusalem, and it won't do for them to split it.

ya and israel doesn't wan't all of palestine either right? thats why their building settelments and taking lands

In the Iraq situation, I don't think splitting it would be very helpful. What happens is that in each of the resulting nations, the majority would rule far more than in a unified Iraq. For example, we put the Sunni's in their own nation, the Shi'ites get supressed. We give the Shi'ites their own state and the Sunni's get choked out. What makes a democracy great is that it pits differing opinions against each other until a reasonable compromise is made. Democracy is a moderating force, that's what the US goal for Iraq is.

look i already said it, saddam was a bad example but it doesn't matter what sect rules it's the same thing, and ya sure thats what the us gaols are

Sad thing, is I was listening to a conservative talk show on the radio <my radio station I normally listen to went out for about 30 minutes due to technical difficulties> and the guy was bitching because the secretary of state during the President Clinton administration <forgot his/her name sorry> said that she felt that the Sunnis may get the raw end of the deal in this election. And he was bitching that since the Sunnis were the ruling faction they deserve to be oppressed by the majority for a while to know how it feels.

It kind of disgusted me since, well, not all Sunnis are Baathists, and not all of them are oppresive either. And I do understand that not all conservatives feel that way, so in no way bashing the conservatives, saying they all want to oppress the minority in Iraq. Just this one guy irritated me.

But then again a friend of his told him he shouldn't go to an area because they were having an Athiest meeting there, and he couldn't believe that there were enough Athiests in TN to actually hold a meeting.