Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: discostu
There aren't the dozens of warring factions in Iraq

I concur with nearly all of your other comments in this thread, but I'm not as sanquine as you are on this score. There is a good chance that Kurds and Shiites, for instance, will be at each other's throats. There is an even better chance that Kurds (maybe even in some combination with Shiites and even Sunnis) will try to screw over the Turkmen. If this happens Turkey, I think, will not stand by this time (even though they have in the past when ethnic turks were being slaughtered). They might well intervene unilaterally in ways that could weaken our coalition. Then we have to be careful that the Turks, and even more so Iraqi Muslims, are giving the Armenian Christians a fair shake. Etc, etc, etc...

In sum I fear we will have to nanny it up in Iraq for some significant period of time. It will be worth it though, and in our interest. Not just for the sake of Iraq, but for catalyzing favorable change elsewhere in the region.

43 posted on 01/03/2003 9:36:28 PM PST by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: Stultis
Well it ain't all sunshine and daisies, but it's not like Afghanistan, that place is like a combo of LA during the height of the youth gangs and the Bay Area during the height of outlaw bikers. Iraq has 3 or 4 factions that don't like each other, Afghanistan has actual dozens of tribes and sects and juntas and whatever other labels they give themselves that only seem to stop killing each other when some outsider volunteers to be a common enemy (there's a reason the Northern Alliance got that name, if I remember right they alone represented over a dozen groups). None of the places we'll be going are happy fun spots, but for a middle eastern shithole Iraq is pretty mellow and straight forward.

But we have to keep the eye on the prize too, contrary to what Eurotrash like to insist America doesn't have a history of long occupations, we hang out long enough to get a stable government (usually a parliamentary system, I've never figured that one out) in place and leave. We occupy, but never for long, that's just not how we do things. If that was how we did things most of France, Germany, Italy and Northern Africa would be America.
44 posted on 01/03/2003 9:54:56 PM PST by discostu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: Stultis
I agree. We must occupy Iraq. I am afraid that the admin is not planning on doing that. Some in the admin have said that we must but not Bush. It looks like Powell is winning the argument. That means not occupying Iraq.
46 posted on 01/04/2003 12:09:59 PM PST by stalin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson