Michael Brunner:
Granted, which is why I said “polls are polls are polls,” and if you want to disbelieve the conclusions of the poll you’re more than welcome to (I, for one, would like to have access to the particulars), but I think the proper thing to do would be to counter it with specifics on an opposing poll…what you provided isn’t informative in the least. I’m not saying this to be purposefully contrary; I’d love to see and examine some other data, I just don’t think what you posted does that.
Rob Staeger:
You have no interest in looking at or discussing this rationally, so I won’t get in the way of your hyperbolic spewing anymore. Cheers.
Interesting that ArizonaTeach points out that the only time that the only times there were changes in that particular district was under Clinton and the salaries there have risen so much.
I, myself, speaking for Philadelphia and the surrounding area…between my wife and myself we’ve had seven different jobs since Bush got into office. All were the result of downsizing and/or compnay shutdowns. In fact, that’s part of what made me decide to finally start Nightblade Productions. This line of reasoning reminds me of one of the women I work with, whp swears by Bush beacuse she’s making so much more money than under Clinton. Now, granted, under Clinton she was working at Pizza Hut and since right after Bush was elected she’s been working in a TV station, but THAT couldn’t have anything to do with it?
And as far as the “Bush is stupid” theme? I wouldn’t call him stupid. Although finding out how to pronounce words word go a LONG way toward alleviating the burden of that label, and getting better grades than someone doesn’t necessarily make you more intelligent.(Remund me sometime to tell you the story of the art professo who,when told to cook a twenty pound turkey twenty minutes a pound,wrote the number 20 20 times.) No, the label I would use on Bush is unwise. As in lacking in wisdom. Something that might come in handy when you’re, y’know, leader of the free world.
I think it’s one of those crazy things that people want to believe when they talk about how any President has been “good” or “bad” for the economy, in any but the most general sense. The economy is bigger than any one man.
Do the same people who claimed that Bush was responsible for the shaky economy of a few years back now believe that he is equally responsible for the better than expected economic growth of today? The low unemployment? Low inflation? Job creation? Does anyone think that if Kerry had been elected any of the statistics would be even 1/10 of 1 percent different? (I suspect that some would be lauding the economic good news and saying something to the effect that “Boy, it didn’t take long for things to get better once Smirky McHitlerchimp got the big heave-ho!”)
Economically my family has had ups and downs during the last 6 years. None of which is due to anything other than our own choices, good and bad. Lately it’s been more ups than downs, possibly dueRat refers to.
Smirky McHitlerchimp?! That’s freakin’ hilarious! Seriously! If it wasn’t for the fact that Dubya is so much easier to say, that would be my new nickname for Bush! Well, except for the Hitler part, that’s just not accurate. How about Smirky McChimp?
ArizonaTeach: You’re right. I wasn’t being rational, and I apologize.
The thing is, I’m deeply ashamed that he’s my president. I think he’s the worst one we’ve ever had, and I think he’s brought great shame to the country. I pray that the next one, whoever he is, can start rebuilding the nation from the mess Bush has made of it.
I don’t know how smart he is. But I do feel that the direction he’s taken the country is a horrible mistake. It’s a road that I feel a wiser man (as Rat puts it) wouldn’t have traveled.
Sometimes I express that with reason and logic; other times I just go for snark.
So again, sorry.
Jeeze Rob, where ya been? There’s Smirky McChimp, Mummbles McHitlerburton, Junior McChimperor, El Smirko Stumbleoso, Furious George McPretzlechoker, Snippy McPresidentevil, The Simianator, GeorgeMcflightsuitlyinglipsIdon’tknowwhatthehelliswrongwithhalfthecountrywhowouldvoteforthislyinglippedmoronIcan’tbelievkerryisn’tpresidentwherethehellaremymeds
You have to read more blogs 🙂
Jeeze Rob, where ya been?
I prefer Chimp in Chief, myself. 🙂
Rob?
Okay, now you’re Bill Mullichimp. 😉
Furious George McPretzlechoker?
That’s a stone riot.
Couple of thoughts:
My favorite nickname is Chimpy McFlightsuit.
I have to agree with Bill on the economy issue, while the game of politics dictates that the president gets the credit for the good times and the blame for the bad, the truth is, the health of the economy of the country as a whole has more to do with cyclical periods and various other factors that are far beyond the ability of whoever is currently sitting in the Oval House to control. When you get down to the economic health of individual communities, the presidency becomes even less relevent.
Both sides the play the economic card when it suits them. It’s wrong, but that’s part of the game.
As for Bush’s intelligence, I know it’s fun to joke about it, but in all honesty, I don’t think he’s stupid so much as intellectually lazy. He isn’t interested in any information that doesn’t support his preconceived notions, so he surrounds himself with yes-men who tell him what he wants to hear instead of the truth.
Polls go up and they go down. Whether 30, 40, 50, or 60% of Iraqis want us out, the fact remains that there is a sizable portion of the population is unhappy with the current situation and that is going to be a continuing problem for us. Honestly, I don’t see a good option for us at this point. If we “stay the course”, we’re just going to keep getting bogged down. If we pull out, that will just make the inevitable civil war and radical Shi’ite theocracy takover occur all the sooner.
Bill Mullichimp
Probably an improvement over what my students call me.
If we pull out, that will just make the inevitable civil war and radical Shi’ite theocracy takover occur all the sooner.
Well if it’s inevitable the only sane thing is to pull out now–what gain would there be in putting it off?
Personally, I think that neither is inevitable and, indeed, becoming less and less likely. Whether we will be politically able to stick it out long enough to achieve that and whether or not the cost is worth the effort are other questions entirely.
And it may not be entirely in our hands. If the lunatics running Iran decide to attempt to finish the job Hitler started, the question of Iraq will seem small potatoes.
Well, Bill, with the Shi’ites already reviving Sharia law in their region, I can’t see it’s becoming less likely at this point.
Perhaps someone, someday, will be able to bring the Sunnis, Shi’ites and Kurds together into a single, stable and just democracy. But so far, I haven’t seen anyone within Bush’s camp that is capable of that level of diplomacy.
Time will tell.
what gain would there be in putting it off?
Well, that’s the question I’ve been asking for awhile now. 🙂
Um, why is it so important to keep Iraq one country? With such divisive populations, why not split it up? There are many more countries with predominantly homogenous populations than heterogenous ones. Maybe the first step is to set up three democracies instead of one, and when they become stable, then talk about reconciliation and reunification.
Jason,
Yeah, right. And who lives where? Who gets the oil? Who gets whatever they get? Half the crap in that part of the world was created because outsiders came in, took over, carved up the countries when they left and made new countries with new “kings”/leaders that never existed before. Why not do it again in mini form?
Not one of the better exit ideas.
Ah, I see. So the status quo is the only way to go – it’s much better to keep the original artificially-created Western country all one piece then to explore other options that might lead to a more naturally evolving stability in the region. Of course, there is the fact that the U.S. had to pretty much guarantee Turkey at the outset of the war that there would be no independent Kurdish state as a result of the war. As far as the resources go, yeah, there’s always going to be an issue about that, too. Maybe the question is what did Iraq look like before it became Iraq, and would there be any possibility of going back to that?
Um, why is it so important to keep Iraq one country? With such divisive populations, why not split it up?
Well, that’s how Iraq was, before colonial England and France screwed everything up, among others.
You have the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis.
The situation is basically this:
The Shiites seem poised to ally with Iran and are the majority in the country.
The Sunnis are the former Baathists, and regardless of what happens, are going to fear retribution by the Shiites.
I can’t even recall which of these two groups would control the oil.
The Kurds have no real resources in the north, and Turkey does not want them to have indepdence, because over the last several decades they’ve had tons of Kurdish refugees, and that could create another situation like with Kashmir (Pakistan/India fighting over the border) or that problematic area in southern Russia, the name of which escapes me at the moment.
Craig wrote: “The Kurds have no real resources in the north, and Turkey does not want them to have indepdence…”
What I don’t get is why the Turks fear an independent Kurdish state…wouldn’t that get rid of most of the Kurds in Turkey that have given them trouble. I mean, it worked for the Europeans–having failed to get rid of their Jewish citizens via extermination they helped launch Israel and many of those who were still alive emigrated. Seems to me that having an independent (and much militarily weaker) Kurdistan on the border would be preferable to having an active terrorist organization in you own country trying to create the same.
And anyway, what do we owe the Turks, as far as Iraq goes? As I recall they weren’t very helpful, why should they have much sway now?
Your facts are incorrect. The Kurdish areas do have resources (oil) up north:
One fact is incorrect, and I’ll own up to it. But then, I did also say I didn’t know who controlled the oil.
What I don’t get is why the Turks fear an independent Kurdish state…wouldn’t that get rid of most of the Kurds in Turkey that have given them trouble.
I think the problem is that Turkey is not inclined to force these people to immigrate back to Iraq. And if they don’t, they could end up with the situation Russia has been dealing with in Chechnya (remembered it!) – where the people are of a different ethnicity (many of them are Muslim).
But Russia is too dámņ stubborn to just let them have their independence already, most likely for fear of other federal areas in the country wanting to do the same. Especially those around Chechnya.
Although, I’m not aware of the Kurds in Turkey making terror threats and attacking people like those in Chechnya have done. So, there’s some differences in the situations.
Btw, in reading that link, R Maheras, it sound as though they don’t have readily accessible oil (ie, existing rigs and whatnot), but that they need to build such facilities.
And, as the article also states, it sounds like like the rest of the country wants to prevent them from doing just that – getting their own oil.
Anyways, existing facilities is what I was getting at, and I found this comment:
“According to the Oil and Gas Journal, Iraq contains 115 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, the third largest in the world (behind Saudi Arabia and Canada), concentrated overwhelmingly (65 percent or more) in southern Iraq.”
It goes on to say that there may be twice that much still buried beneath parts of Iraq, but as it is yet unaccessed, I can’t say I’d call it a definitive resource for the Kurds.
you know my Respect for PAD and the people on the site goes down every time I read comments
you know my Respect for PAD and the people on the site goes down every time I read comments
Then don’t read comments. (Duh!)
🙂
lthough, I’m not aware of the Kurds in Turkey making terror threats and attacking people like those in Chechnya have done.
No surprise, it doesn’t get a lot of attention, but the PKK has been an active armed organization fighting for Kurdish independence within Turkey. The death totals from decades of fighting range from the low thousands to over 20,000 and the number of refugees from the fighting has been estimated as at least a half million. The PKK is ruthless and the Turkish government is not much better, if at all. (Interestingly, the Kurds of Iraq have no love for the PKK either and have defeated them in several major battles.).
you know my Respect for PAD and the people on the site goes down every time I read comments
We will have to bravely soldier on, knowing in our hearts that we get no respect from No Respect.
“So the status quo is the only way to go – it’s much better to keep the original artificially-created Western country all one piece then to explore other options that might lead to a more naturally evolving stability in the region.”
Not quite what I was saying. You have people in that part of the world who will fight over land because it was theirs back in the time of their grandfathers and isn’t now. Unless you went back and undid the entire Mid East and rebooted it back to pre-Western map makers then you won’t solve anything. And even then you would run into a brick wall dealing with the oil kings (ours and theirs) and the people who have come to see where they are at now as their home. Just repeating that same mistake on a smaller scale will, in my opinion, just cause you to end up with the same problem on a smaller scale with the people that do see Iraq, as it is now, as theirs. Plus, you have now made smaller, weaker states to be invaded by others later in the age old crusades to reclaim the homelands.
Think about what you’re talking about doing and how it would make you feel. What if I were to come into your state, redraw the maps and state that, to deal with problems caused by race issues, different faiths in one area and economic issues, I was going to uproot you, your friends and family and everybody else and move you all to the new homes created in the new mini states. The mini states will be grouped by race, faith and other factors I see fit. Oh, and you don’t have a say in the matter or where I put you.
And just because Iraq has had the crap bombed out of it and the people have lost so much in the last ten plus years doesn’t mean that much in this matter. If VA were to be leveled in a Iraq style war, I would still see it as my home (the place I was born on top of that) and want to be here for the rebuilding.
“Maybe the question is what did Iraq look like before it became Iraq, and would there be any possibility of going back to that?”
Only if we invaded a few other countries over there as well, booted their people out and created chaos on a grand scale.
Who said anything about forcible re-districting? It seems to me – and I’m not claiming to exactly be an expert on the area – what we’re doing now is forcibly trying to hold together three disparate groups in one nation. Has there been any consideration of allowing separate homelands and governments here, or was all of that precluded by the promise to Turkey? Or have all sides said that they wish to remain one nation, despite their conflicts?
As far as Bush’s intelligence or lack thereof, it seems pretty clear there’ll never be any kind of complete consensus about it. I do think most, if not all, could agree, though, that the perception of Bush’s intelligence can’t have been helped by the fact that this … vocally awkward … man immediately followed one of the most eloquent, naturally gifted public speakers to have ever held the office of president. Talk about a violent shift ….
Craig wrote: “Btw, in reading that link, R Maheras, it sound as though they don’t have readily accessible oil (ie, existing rigs and whatnot), but that they need to build such facilities.”
That link was just something recent that I popped up here to make a point. Actually, the Kurdish areas have existing oil facilities, and even if their oil resources were only 20 percent of Iraq’s known oil resources, that 20 percent is probably 100 percent more oil resources than lots of other countries have, and is of considerable value. Thus, to be accurate, your theory about the Kurds needs to be reevaluated taking the actual resource facts into consideration.
• 
Michael Brunner:
Granted, which is why I said “polls are polls are polls,” and if you want to disbelieve the conclusions of the poll you’re more than welcome to (I, for one, would like to have access to the particulars), but I think the proper thing to do would be to counter it with specifics on an opposing poll…what you provided isn’t informative in the least. I’m not saying this to be purposefully contrary; I’d love to see and examine some other data, I just don’t think what you posted does that.
Rob Staeger:
You have no interest in looking at or discussing this rationally, so I won’t get in the way of your hyperbolic spewing anymore. Cheers.
Interesting that ArizonaTeach points out that the only time that the only times there were changes in that particular district was under Clinton and the salaries there have risen so much.
I, myself, speaking for Philadelphia and the surrounding area…between my wife and myself we’ve had seven different jobs since Bush got into office. All were the result of downsizing and/or compnay shutdowns. In fact, that’s part of what made me decide to finally start Nightblade Productions. This line of reasoning reminds me of one of the women I work with, whp swears by Bush beacuse she’s making so much more money than under Clinton. Now, granted, under Clinton she was working at Pizza Hut and since right after Bush was elected she’s been working in a TV station, but THAT couldn’t have anything to do with it?
And as far as the “Bush is stupid” theme? I wouldn’t call him stupid. Although finding out how to pronounce words word go a LONG way toward alleviating the burden of that label, and getting better grades than someone doesn’t necessarily make you more intelligent.(Remund me sometime to tell you the story of the art professo who,when told to cook a twenty pound turkey twenty minutes a pound,wrote the number 20 20 times.) No, the label I would use on Bush is unwise. As in lacking in wisdom. Something that might come in handy when you’re, y’know, leader of the free world.
I think it’s one of those crazy things that people want to believe when they talk about how any President has been “good” or “bad” for the economy, in any but the most general sense. The economy is bigger than any one man.
Do the same people who claimed that Bush was responsible for the shaky economy of a few years back now believe that he is equally responsible for the better than expected economic growth of today? The low unemployment? Low inflation? Job creation? Does anyone think that if Kerry had been elected any of the statistics would be even 1/10 of 1 percent different? (I suspect that some would be lauding the economic good news and saying something to the effect that “Boy, it didn’t take long for things to get better once Smirky McHitlerchimp got the big heave-ho!”)
Economically my family has had ups and downs during the last 6 years. None of which is due to anything other than our own choices, good and bad. Lately it’s been more ups than downs, possibly dueRat refers to.
Smirky McHitlerchimp?! That’s freakin’ hilarious! Seriously! If it wasn’t for the fact that Dubya is so much easier to say, that would be my new nickname for Bush! Well, except for the Hitler part, that’s just not accurate. How about Smirky McChimp?
ArizonaTeach: You’re right. I wasn’t being rational, and I apologize.
The thing is, I’m deeply ashamed that he’s my president. I think he’s the worst one we’ve ever had, and I think he’s brought great shame to the country. I pray that the next one, whoever he is, can start rebuilding the nation from the mess Bush has made of it.
I don’t know how smart he is. But I do feel that the direction he’s taken the country is a horrible mistake. It’s a road that I feel a wiser man (as Rat puts it) wouldn’t have traveled.
Sometimes I express that with reason and logic; other times I just go for snark.
So again, sorry.
Jeeze Rob, where ya been? There’s Smirky McChimp, Mummbles McHitlerburton, Junior McChimperor, El Smirko Stumbleoso, Furious George McPretzlechoker, Snippy McPresidentevil, The Simianator, GeorgeMcflightsuitlyinglipsIdon’tknowwhatthehelliswrongwithhalfthecountrywhowouldvoteforthislyinglippedmoronIcan’tbelievkerryisn’tpresidentwherethehellaremymeds
You have to read more blogs 🙂
Jeeze Rob, where ya been?
I prefer Chimp in Chief, myself. 🙂
Rob?
Okay, now you’re Bill Mullichimp. 😉
Furious George McPretzlechoker?
That’s a stone riot.
Couple of thoughts:
My favorite nickname is Chimpy McFlightsuit.
I have to agree with Bill on the economy issue, while the game of politics dictates that the president gets the credit for the good times and the blame for the bad, the truth is, the health of the economy of the country as a whole has more to do with cyclical periods and various other factors that are far beyond the ability of whoever is currently sitting in the Oval House to control. When you get down to the economic health of individual communities, the presidency becomes even less relevent.
Both sides the play the economic card when it suits them. It’s wrong, but that’s part of the game.
As for Bush’s intelligence, I know it’s fun to joke about it, but in all honesty, I don’t think he’s stupid so much as intellectually lazy. He isn’t interested in any information that doesn’t support his preconceived notions, so he surrounds himself with yes-men who tell him what he wants to hear instead of the truth.
Polls go up and they go down. Whether 30, 40, 50, or 60% of Iraqis want us out, the fact remains that there is a sizable portion of the population is unhappy with the current situation and that is going to be a continuing problem for us. Honestly, I don’t see a good option for us at this point. If we “stay the course”, we’re just going to keep getting bogged down. If we pull out, that will just make the inevitable civil war and radical Shi’ite theocracy takover occur all the sooner.
Bill Mullichimp
Probably an improvement over what my students call me.
If we pull out, that will just make the inevitable civil war and radical Shi’ite theocracy takover occur all the sooner.
Well if it’s inevitable the only sane thing is to pull out now–what gain would there be in putting it off?
Personally, I think that neither is inevitable and, indeed, becoming less and less likely. Whether we will be politically able to stick it out long enough to achieve that and whether or not the cost is worth the effort are other questions entirely.
And it may not be entirely in our hands. If the lunatics running Iran decide to attempt to finish the job Hitler started, the question of Iraq will seem small potatoes.
Well, Bill, with the Shi’ites already reviving Sharia law in their region, I can’t see it’s becoming less likely at this point.
Perhaps someone, someday, will be able to bring the Sunnis, Shi’ites and Kurds together into a single, stable and just democracy. But so far, I haven’t seen anyone within Bush’s camp that is capable of that level of diplomacy.
Time will tell.
what gain would there be in putting it off?
Well, that’s the question I’ve been asking for awhile now. 🙂
Um, why is it so important to keep Iraq one country? With such divisive populations, why not split it up? There are many more countries with predominantly homogenous populations than heterogenous ones. Maybe the first step is to set up three democracies instead of one, and when they become stable, then talk about reconciliation and reunification.
Jason,
Yeah, right. And who lives where? Who gets the oil? Who gets whatever they get? Half the crap in that part of the world was created because outsiders came in, took over, carved up the countries when they left and made new countries with new “kings”/leaders that never existed before. Why not do it again in mini form?
Not one of the better exit ideas.
Ah, I see. So the status quo is the only way to go – it’s much better to keep the original artificially-created Western country all one piece then to explore other options that might lead to a more naturally evolving stability in the region. Of course, there is the fact that the U.S. had to pretty much guarantee Turkey at the outset of the war that there would be no independent Kurdish state as a result of the war. As far as the resources go, yeah, there’s always going to be an issue about that, too. Maybe the question is what did Iraq look like before it became Iraq, and would there be any possibility of going back to that?
Um, why is it so important to keep Iraq one country? With such divisive populations, why not split it up?
Well, that’s how Iraq was, before colonial England and France screwed everything up, among others.
You have the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis.
The situation is basically this:
The Shiites seem poised to ally with Iran and are the majority in the country.
The Sunnis are the former Baathists, and regardless of what happens, are going to fear retribution by the Shiites.
I can’t even recall which of these two groups would control the oil.
The Kurds have no real resources in the north, and Turkey does not want them to have indepdence, because over the last several decades they’ve had tons of Kurdish refugees, and that could create another situation like with Kashmir (Pakistan/India fighting over the border) or that problematic area in southern Russia, the name of which escapes me at the moment.
Craig wrote: “The Kurds have no real resources in the north, and Turkey does not want them to have indepdence…”
Your facts are incorrect. The Kurdish areas do have resources (oil) up north: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-oildeal1dec01,0,4057840.story?coll=la-home-headlines
What I don’t get is why the Turks fear an independent Kurdish state…wouldn’t that get rid of most of the Kurds in Turkey that have given them trouble. I mean, it worked for the Europeans–having failed to get rid of their Jewish citizens via extermination they helped launch Israel and many of those who were still alive emigrated. Seems to me that having an independent (and much militarily weaker) Kurdistan on the border would be preferable to having an active terrorist organization in you own country trying to create the same.
And anyway, what do we owe the Turks, as far as Iraq goes? As I recall they weren’t very helpful, why should they have much sway now?
Your facts are incorrect. The Kurdish areas do have resources (oil) up north:
One fact is incorrect, and I’ll own up to it. But then, I did also say I didn’t know who controlled the oil.
What I don’t get is why the Turks fear an independent Kurdish state…wouldn’t that get rid of most of the Kurds in Turkey that have given them trouble.
I think the problem is that Turkey is not inclined to force these people to immigrate back to Iraq. And if they don’t, they could end up with the situation Russia has been dealing with in Chechnya (remembered it!) – where the people are of a different ethnicity (many of them are Muslim).
But Russia is too dámņ stubborn to just let them have their independence already, most likely for fear of other federal areas in the country wanting to do the same. Especially those around Chechnya.
Although, I’m not aware of the Kurds in Turkey making terror threats and attacking people like those in Chechnya have done. So, there’s some differences in the situations.
Btw, in reading that link, R Maheras, it sound as though they don’t have readily accessible oil (ie, existing rigs and whatnot), but that they need to build such facilities.
And, as the article also states, it sounds like like the rest of the country wants to prevent them from doing just that – getting their own oil.
Anyways, existing facilities is what I was getting at, and I found this comment:
“According to the Oil and Gas Journal, Iraq contains 115 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, the third largest in the world (behind Saudi Arabia and Canada), concentrated overwhelmingly (65 percent or more) in southern Iraq.”
It goes on to say that there may be twice that much still buried beneath parts of Iraq, but as it is yet unaccessed, I can’t say I’d call it a definitive resource for the Kurds.
you know my Respect for PAD and the people on the site goes down every time I read comments
you know my Respect for PAD and the people on the site goes down every time I read comments
Then don’t read comments. (Duh!)
🙂
lthough, I’m not aware of the Kurds in Turkey making terror threats and attacking people like those in Chechnya have done.
No surprise, it doesn’t get a lot of attention, but the PKK has been an active armed organization fighting for Kurdish independence within Turkey. The death totals from decades of fighting range from the low thousands to over 20,000 and the number of refugees from the fighting has been estimated as at least a half million. The PKK is ruthless and the Turkish government is not much better, if at all. (Interestingly, the Kurds of Iraq have no love for the PKK either and have defeated them in several major battles.).
you know my Respect for PAD and the people on the site goes down every time I read comments
We will have to bravely soldier on, knowing in our hearts that we get no respect from No Respect.
“So the status quo is the only way to go – it’s much better to keep the original artificially-created Western country all one piece then to explore other options that might lead to a more naturally evolving stability in the region.”
Not quite what I was saying. You have people in that part of the world who will fight over land because it was theirs back in the time of their grandfathers and isn’t now. Unless you went back and undid the entire Mid East and rebooted it back to pre-Western map makers then you won’t solve anything. And even then you would run into a brick wall dealing with the oil kings (ours and theirs) and the people who have come to see where they are at now as their home. Just repeating that same mistake on a smaller scale will, in my opinion, just cause you to end up with the same problem on a smaller scale with the people that do see Iraq, as it is now, as theirs. Plus, you have now made smaller, weaker states to be invaded by others later in the age old crusades to reclaim the homelands.
Think about what you’re talking about doing and how it would make you feel. What if I were to come into your state, redraw the maps and state that, to deal with problems caused by race issues, different faiths in one area and economic issues, I was going to uproot you, your friends and family and everybody else and move you all to the new homes created in the new mini states. The mini states will be grouped by race, faith and other factors I see fit. Oh, and you don’t have a say in the matter or where I put you.
And just because Iraq has had the crap bombed out of it and the people have lost so much in the last ten plus years doesn’t mean that much in this matter. If VA were to be leveled in a Iraq style war, I would still see it as my home (the place I was born on top of that) and want to be here for the rebuilding.
“Maybe the question is what did Iraq look like before it became Iraq, and would there be any possibility of going back to that?”
Only if we invaded a few other countries over there as well, booted their people out and created chaos on a grand scale.
Who said anything about forcible re-districting? It seems to me – and I’m not claiming to exactly be an expert on the area – what we’re doing now is forcibly trying to hold together three disparate groups in one nation. Has there been any consideration of allowing separate homelands and governments here, or was all of that precluded by the promise to Turkey? Or have all sides said that they wish to remain one nation, despite their conflicts?
As far as Bush’s intelligence or lack thereof, it seems pretty clear there’ll never be any kind of complete consensus about it. I do think most, if not all, could agree, though, that the perception of Bush’s intelligence can’t have been helped by the fact that this … vocally awkward … man immediately followed one of the most eloquent, naturally gifted public speakers to have ever held the office of president. Talk about a violent shift ….
Craig wrote: “Btw, in reading that link, R Maheras, it sound as though they don’t have readily accessible oil (ie, existing rigs and whatnot), but that they need to build such facilities.”
That link was just something recent that I popped up here to make a point. Actually, the Kurdish areas have existing oil facilities, and even if their oil resources were only 20 percent of Iraq’s known oil resources, that 20 percent is probably 100 percent more oil resources than lots of other countries have, and is of considerable value. Thus, to be accurate, your theory about the Kurds needs to be reevaluated taking the actual resource facts into consideration.
Yeah. Me too!!
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30656
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30466
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/30591
1Brilliant…also my headline of the last week…