a coming iraq civil war?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jul 10, 2005.

  1. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #1
    long theorized by many, could rumors of a withdrawal be true and could iraq avoid plunging into civil war?

    link

    soon to be overwritten link

     
  2. iGary Guest

    iGary

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Randy's House
    #2
    There's such a long history of peace and love in this region that I can't imagine why anyone would think any of this. :rolleyes:
     
  3. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #3
    Isnt that the truth, these guys have been have been killing each other for centuries. Why we couldnt just Bomb Saddam with all the Billions in the war machine and the Lack of CIA is beyond me. This was George's and the Republicans oil war with democrats going along for the ride. This is what happens when America lets one of the G.D. Parties run everything! Govt out of control. So lets see i have to take off my shoes now when flying, Grandma gets strip searched, Mexicans & Terrorist freely roam into our country and Osama is still free.....................I will never vote Republican ever again!
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    How many regions of the world are there with histories of peace and love? Just curious.
     
  5. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #5
    My suspicion is that the Bush administration is trying desperately to do some form of "Iraq-ification" of the war, a version of Nixon's "Vietnamification" that was our face-saving maneuver to limp out of that mess and say that we didn't lose.

    The difference between Iraq and Vietnam is that Vietnam had a history of national identity long preceeding French colonization. Iraq does not -- quite to the contrary, it has a history (since post WWI British creation) of being internally divided and held together by brutual dictatorship. (In fact, it's my uderstanding that the history of dictatorship in the Iraq region long predates WWI as well, but I don't have a solid source for that.)

    Much like in Yugoslavia, the long-standing factionalism that has been suppressed by fear and violence will bubble up now that the lid of the pressure cooker has been removed.

    I am just afraid that we are waiting for the Iraq version of the Tet offensive -- a powerful, broad, co-ordinated attack on US installations (successful or not) that puts the lie to all the claims of progress that the Commander in Chief has been making.

    There is no question in my mind that Saddam should not have been in control of a nation. Equally unquestionable is that Bush has made a real hash of things by refusing to listen to those who had misgivings.
     
  6. zimv20 thread starter macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #6
    but to hold iraq together, is that level of brutality a necessity?
     
  7. xsedrinam macrumors 601

    xsedrinam

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    #7
    Uh, to quote Bill Paxton's line from Twister, "it's already here" ;)
    X
     
  8. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #8
    Which reminds me of this thread.

    Though for the life of me I can't figure out why...
     
  9. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #9
    See: Xerses and Darius (Persians), or the Abbasid caliphs (descendents of muhammed's uncle) or the Mongols, or the Ottoman Turks.

    Also see: Tiglathpileser, Ashurnasirpal, Ennatum, Sargon. Megalomania and personality-cults are nothing new.


    Widespread bloodshead and repression was frequent and often unprecedented in history. This stemmed both to mitigate underlying ethnic divisions, and because of them.

    Strangely, it is in no large part the relative sophistication, high-level of social development and political consciousness that makes Iraq so hard to govern, this of course, being coupled with ethnic and religious divisions, making the loads on the legitimacy of the State so great and complex.

    Yet is is this development, coupled with the fact that Iraq is the only ME state with abundant oil, water and large population and the promise of an Arab State powered by it's middle class ( and therefore modern )that has drawn in the Western Powers, both British and American.

    sorry for tangent...
     
  10. idea_hamster macrumors 65816

    idea_hamster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    Location:
    NYC, or thereabouts
    #10
    Well, I don't know. I suspect that it's difficult for people who have never had their national identity denied to understand the extent to which those who have will fight for it.

    Further, current trends are toward national self-identification. Why should Iraq continue to trundle on as a national amalgum, continually convulsed by internal strife when the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites would prefer self-rule?

    While the quick answer seems to be that it shouldn't, that ignores two countervailing points:
    1. Other countries have interests in this -- to what extent is that important? (E.g., Turkey is concerned that an independent Kurdistan would act to destabilize the Kurdish region in their country, which has suffered some insurgency as it is.)

    2. The question presupposes it's own accuracy. Specifically, it assumes that an Iraqi identity cannot take root and act as a cohesive bond among the three major groups currently at odds.

    Can't say I'm sure of the outcome, but if people refuse/insist on a certain national identity, it is difficult for remote governments to coerce them into accepting an alternative.
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    Which is why I was hoping iGary could shed some light on parts of the world that have not had a brutal history.
     
  12. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #12
    Monaco?

    Andorra?
     
  13. dejo Moderator

    dejo

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Location:
    The Centennial State
    #13
    Greenland?

    Antarctica?
     
  14. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    Cyrus the Great would be a better role model, perhaps. A Kurd, he conquered Persia and all of Asia Minor, liberated the Jews from Babylon and wrote the first ever Charter of Human Rights, based on the requirements of holding together a nation of diverse races. One of my all-time favourite historical characters.
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    Oh hey, Greenland makes it one more than the one's I was able to think of. True though, AFAIK.
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    Nope. The Sagas tell of serious trouble in Greenland around the 1400s. Looks like we're stuck with Antarctica.
     
  17. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #17
    Why, have you dug up some dirt on Monaco and Andorra?
     
  18. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #18
    Well, no, actually. Try as I may, I can't find anything on those two since the 13th century. Good calls.
    ;)
     

Share This Page