Why don't they just split up Iraq into three countries?

[Quixote1818]

I know this subject has been brought up many times but I want to bring it up again. I have heard politicians say how disappointing it would be if a Civil war lead to Iraq splitting up and I am always left scratching my head thinking, "what would be wrong with that?"


In my opinion Iraq has no business being one country at this point in time and if it could be sectioned off giving everyone a least a some part of the Oil reserves a deal could maybe be worked out. Right now the fight is over power in the government and because the US is involved with the government. I say bring all three parties together, figure out who gets what and hopefully they can reach an agreement without blowing each other up.

I could be completely wrong and they might come to blows over the drawing of the borders but I think it's worth a shot just to see what happens.

[FormerDittoHead]

1. Now don't go reading my mind again!

I've kind of wondered this ever since it was apparent they weren't going to be "greeting us as liberators"...

[arcane1]

2. weren't the current borders drawn up by the British?

I could be wrong :shrug:

[Quixote1818]

3. I believe so. nt

[muntrv]

4. Exactly.

Iraq was a creation by the Europeans after WWI and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, I believe. Certainly they should create a Khurdistan.

[arcane1]

7. I tried to find a map online, and found this sick shit:

[democracyindanger]

5. Oil

If the country were divided up between the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis, based on current population distribution the Sunnis would end up with an area devoid of oil, the Shiites would have the piece with lots of older oil fields, and the Kurds would end up with the oil-rich north.

Also, there's no way Turkey would permit an independent Kurdistan.

[Quixote1818]

12. I still think the borders could be drawn up in a way that would

give everyone a piece of the Oil. All they would have to do is cut a sliver of real estate perhaps 50 miles wide from the Sunni triangle and have it widen up like an hour glass where the oil is. It's possible that an island of Sunni land could be set aside in the Oil rich area. People just need to think outside of the box and come up with a creative solution.

[democracyindanger]

14. Even if you could get

the Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis to buy in, there is no possible way that Turkey would permit the Kurds to have their own country. No way, no how.

[Quixote1818]

16. Would it be possible to keep the Kurds under Shiite and Sunni rule?

See if the a deal could be worked out to split the country into two country's with the Kurds on perhaps Sunni land?

[democracyindanger]

20. Would kinda defeat the purpose, wouldn't it?

The Kurds don't want to be under anyone's rule--they've even gone as far as initiating their own oil-exploration deal without telling anyone (since quashed).

[Quixote1818]

23. The purpose is to bring peace

If they can work out a deal and the Kurds would not bring violence then I am all for it. We have Indian Reservation here in the US and we aren't blowing each other up.

[democracyindanger]

27. US reservations were a crime to begin with

and there was some violence when Native Americans were first forced onto them. But even putting that aside, Native Americans didn't sit on billions of dollars of wealth to build their own standing army, as well as fund guerillas, nor did they have a powerful nation like, say, Russia, to turn to for help.

[Quixote1818]

30. Good points

I still wonder if our agreement with Turkey would have any standing if Iraq voted to split up. We can't tell Iraq what to do and if they chose to split up then in my opinion our agreement with Turkey would be void of any legal standing.

[Odin2005]

21. If they try to invade the Turks can kiss thier EU hopes goodbye.

[democracyindanger]

25. Possible scenario

An independent Kurdistan is established. Kurdish seperatists in Turkey, strengthen with an actual slab of land to call home, begin agitating to join the new country. Turkey cracks down. Extremists react with violence. Turkey starts tossing around the "terrorist" word and with circumstantial evidence, accuses Kurdistan of being behind it--which would probably be true, because if I was Kurdistan, newly minted and fat with oil money, one of the first things on my mind would be to reclaim the part of Turkey that all Kurds see as their land.

Turkey takes their case--that Kurdistan threatens their country--to NATO. NATO is based on the tenet that all member nations will come to the aid of another member that is attacked. Now it's not just Turkish troops that patrol the border--it's NATO troops. Tensions increase. The entire Kurdish region of Turkey becomes a NATO-occupied zone.

What does this have to do with the EU? If the price of membership to the EU is the chance of losing control--to one degree or another--of a chunk of land, I doubt the Turks would be willing to pay it. You're right that they could kiss EU membership goodbye, but that won't be reason enough for Turkey to not do everything in its power to block the creation of a Kurdistan.

[chelsea0011]

6. Who's "they"? Are you suggesting all these parties could come together

and equally divide a country where oil is not equally divided throughout the country?

[tatertop]

8. For one thing, NO ONE wants the Kurds to have their own country

Except the Kurds.
Secondly, Bush will take ALL the oil
for Buscho as soon as this becomes possible.
That's why the fourteen PERMANENT US bases
were/will be built.
Bush has no interest whatever in a
Democratic Iraq.
While there are many other reasons that a 3 way split will never happen, those two are enough to make it impossible.

[chelsea0011]

13. Especially Turkey who would claim the land for themselves.

[tatertop]

17. Kurds + Oil Revenue = Dreams of a Wider Kurdistan

The Turks would never allow it.
No one would help the Kurds. They stand alone.

[SmokingJacket]

9. Well, that should be up to them, shouldn't it? nt

[physioex]

10. Bit Simplistic....

What about the oil? What about the ports? How are goods and services to be transported?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Quixote1818]

19. Then how about splitting it into two countries?

The Kurds would then perhaps sit on land run by the country in the North (perhaps Sunni owned). We could continue to protect the Kurds. Borders could be drawn up in creative ways or perhaps even allowing islands of real estate.

It's certainly not up to us, it's up to those in Iraq regardless of how difficult it might be. Perhaps they won't like the idea but perhaps they would love it! Personally I just think trying to have the Hatfield's and McCoys run one Government makes about as much sense as putting red ants and black ants together to form one ant pile. Red ants and Black ants do much better running their own ant piles. Then again, I don't claim to have a corner on the truth but I think this is worth more debate than it's getting.

Just a thought.

PS. Also, it's not up to Turkey what Iraq wants to do. If Iraq decides they want to be split up then in my opinion any agreement between the US and Turkey is void of any meaning.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

29. He's just asking a question...

Don't use Obama's name if you're gonna be rude.

Educate, don't insult. :)

[bluerum]

35. Prior to WWI Iraq WAS part of Turkey, or Turkey's precursor.

Since then it has be an ongoing struggle for the west to maintain enough control over Iraq to keep the oil flowing. And don't be disingenuous enough to say that oil is not what its about. Who ever controls the oil has us by our oily piston rods if you know what I mean. I think that the religious/political/sectarian violence is an artifact of the history in the middle east and will continue even if they somehow establish a stable political system and government.

Until we figure out how to sustain ourselves with alternative energy, it won't matter where you draw the borders or who is in charge in Iraq. There will be a struggle for power and control over the oil.

Now the Saudi's maintain some semblance of law and order with very strict rule and a dictatorship. But its a dictatorship that we "get along with". If it was not, would we have to invade to secure oil resources - er - I mean remove the cruel dictator?

[Quixote1818]

36. Very Intelligent Post

I think you are 100% correct.

[davekriss]

37. I see you continue to pose as "Senator Obama"

This poster admitted in a longer thread a short while back that he/she is "not really Obama". It's the only time, since I joined here in early 2002, I ever hit the alert button. I think it is wrong for someone to post on a public forum posing as a public figure in this way, misleading others into thinking that this is (in this case) Obama himself and the thoughts expressed are his. THEY ARE NOT.

I've stated to this individual before that he/she should desist from fraudulently posing as the real Senator Obama and I've asked the administrators to stop this, but I see the fake continues to post.

Look at this archived thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2101759#2102652

Look at posts #183 and #254, from which I quote:

cliss: 183. I noticed the "senator" has been carrying on for a long time and nobody has challenged him on his authenticity. So I'll be the one to do it. Are you the REAL Senator Obama? If not, you better skeedaddle quick because you are a 100% impostor.

The (fake) Senator Obama's reply: 254. No I'm not... And I've never seen a high level party operative of any stripe post openly in a an uncontrolled jungle like this. As for the rest of it, you're entitled to your opinions about the real guy. But I have an opinion too. You're the reason we're losing, not the reason we will win. Obama

Note that, while I disagree with much of what this person posts, they are offered in the spirit of reasonable discussion. I have no problems with content. But I am fiercely opposed to posing as a Senator on a public forum, laying down disinformation for the unwary in this way.

[Sydnie]

Because not all areas of Iraq have oil

someone would be left with no income. It won't work, unfortunately.

[Quixote1818]

26. Their are creative ways to section off real estate

The United States is not connected to Alaska and it's still part of our country. Islands of real estate could be created to split the Oil fields into fair sections. All people need to do is start thinking outside of the box.

[Dhampir Kampf]

15. If they're fighting as one country..

...what do you think they'll do as three separate countries?

More fighting over border lines, and even IF the oil was divided equally, they'll still fight saying they deserve more. And it won't be, "militias" anymore, but armies of nations. Nationalism would grow, uniting all within the new countries making it worse.

[Disturbed]

22. Not gonna happen but..

just for convo sake, what would Turkey do if the Kurds declared an Independent State and the US/UK were fine with that?

[librechik]

18. 2 reasons--oil and intermarriage

one region has most of the oil--how do they split it up without cheating one or two of the regions?

and 2--they have not stayed separate as tribes but have intermarried, and the population couldn't easily split up; they are too intermixed.

and add in Turkeyu'd fear of an independent Kurdish state on its border, and you have Trouble.

[cynatnite]

32. I read a while back that oil was the number one reason...

and Turkey came into a close second. They do not want to see a Kurdish state at all. There is a lot of animosity from what I've heard.

[msongs]

24. saddam's SUNNI section would have no oil - they might...protest nt

[Just Me]

28. Because three countries would be harder for the junta to manage than one.

:shrug:

I'd guess Iraqis PREFER a united country for a number of reasons: resources, power of unification, possibility of the stability they HAD (even if imperfect) as a sectarian unit, maintaining ties with families across the region, among others.

[entanglement]

31. Whatever it is, I believe the Iraqi people should decide

(though it's next to impossible to hold a referendum now as things stand)
Force anything on them and you sow the seeds for more trouble in the future.

[Quixote1818]

33. I agree with you

I am just suggesting the idea be put on the table for debate between a parties in Iraq.

[Malikshah]

34. Why bring it up again?

If it's been brought up numerous times ....

Isn't it just like chewing over stale vomit?

The legacy of the creation of the Modern Middle East by outsiders--however malignant--is not so easily swept aside. The "cure" can easily kill.

"They might come to blows over the drawing of the borders"-- Big understatement.
"...it's worth a shot..." So blithely playing draughts with millions of lives is different than what's going on now in what way?

One thing to ponder.

Northern Iraq-- since 1991 relatively autonomous--majority is Kurdish (oil out the wazoo)

"Historic Kurdistan"...hmmmm one would have to take bits out of Iran, Turkey, Syria, and Iraq to name some.......hmmmm


In the end-- the "why not let it split up" is denying the responsibility of our role in the hell that is the country.


There. Done playing.