What now in Iraq?

[The Duke]

I say we need to start over with a transfer plan.  The Iraqi constitution is a dud and will never work.  The Governing Council is a bunch of dopes.

We need to pick a guy, just one guy, name him the interim president, and make him the Iraqi face of the occupation.  It worked in Afghanistan with Karzai, it can work in Iraq.  Adnan Pachachi would be a good choice.

Everyone in Iraq is worried about who might win an election.  The Sunnis think the Shi'ites will win and come after them as revenge.  the Shi'ites think the Sunnis will win and come after them like they have been doing for 80 years.  The Kurds figure they can always break away if they really have to, so they tend to be quiet.  Once people see someone in charge, they will realize that the the reality of post-Saddam Iraq does not have to fulfill the negative fantasies.

Get a new constitution, start over, put a definable Iraqi face on this thing.

[The Duke]

I also have an idea to keep the Shi'ites from dominating the government.  Obviously, if left to their own devices, the Iraqis will end up with three ethnic based parties and a bunch of small weak ideological parties that have no support base.  How to fix this?

Only allow two parties to compete in elections.  Keep third parties off the ballot.  Set up one party that is a nationalist, capitalist party that supports secular government.  These guys will be strong in the Sunni areas and would be dominated by exiles like Adnan Pachachi and Ahmad Chalabi, and domestic business leaders like Naseer al-Chadeeri.

The Second party would be a socialist party that is equally pro-US as the rightwing party.  The Kurds like Masoud barzani and Jalal Talabani would naturally dominate any broad based socialist party.

One party would dominate in Sunni (like Republicans in the south and west) areas and one in Kurdish (like Democrats on the west coast and northeast) areas.  The Shi'ites then, would be the swing voters (like our midwest and rustbelt) that determine the winner of each election, but would never totally dominate the electorate.

[English]

You may think I'm crazy but Iraq is too divided and it's recent history has been far too ugly for it ever to be a viable entity. I fear the place is going to descend into catastrophic civil war. Either it should be split into separate states (Kurd, Turkish, Sunni & Shi'a) or it should be allowed to return to dictatorship. Democracy simply won't work. Democracies evolve over many years/decades, they simply can't be enforced where there isn't a will.

[Sibboleth]

I'm in favour of an Independent Kurdistan.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

as am I - though Turkey would freak.

[Sibboleth]

as am I - though Turkey would freak.

Ataturk's ghost...

[Gustaf]

I favour an indepedent Kurdistan as well.

JohnDFord,

If you prohibit anti-American parties from running, which seems to be what you're imokying, you'll get a ton of trouble.

[angus]

excellent question.  

option 2 is best.

be ready to underwrite this with blood and money till we're all very old.  English is exactly right.  It is a losing game no matter what.  But, as the tightwad Korean store owner a couple of blocks away always says, "You blake dat ting, you bought dat ting."

[© Tweed the Younger]

Pro-Us Dictator.

[Michael Z]

You may think I'm crazy but Iraq is too divided and it's recent history has been far too ugly for it ever to be a viable entity. I fear the place is going to descend into catastrophic civil war. Either it should be split into separate states (Kurd, Turkish, Sunni & Shi'a) or it should be allowed to return to dictatorship. Democracy simply won't work. Democracies evolve over many years/decades, they simply can't be enforced where there isn't a will.

It was clear from the start to everyone but the Bush administration (whose naivety and short-sightedness never ceases to amaze me) that Iraq would be extremely hard to keep together. It was basically created out of nowhere by the British after the fall of the Ottoman Empire for no reason other than it looked nice on the map. Whoever thought it was a good idea to put Kurds, Sunnis and Shi'a into one nation and not expect decades of conflict must have been off their tree.

Anyway, in my view we should work towards transferring UN rule in Iraq, as an interim phase before installing a fully fledged democracy.

[opebo]

Alas, there was no nuclear or genocidal option - which I think would really be the most popular one.

I voted for a dictator, because maybe we could get him to kill and torture our enemies there if we're unable to do it.

[dunn]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

[opebo]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

[dunn]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I sure hope you will not be in charge of that red button

[Michael Z]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I'll let you know that part of my grandfather's family was wiped out in Dresden.

[opebo]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I'll let you know that part of my grandfather's family was wiped out in Dresden.

As were many.. it was contributory to winning the war.

[Gustaf]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I'll let you know that part of my grandfather's family was wiped out in Dresden.

As were many.. it was contributory to winning the war.

Yeah, if Dresden hadn't been wiped out the war could NEVER have been won. [/end sarcasm]

[Michael Z]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I'll let you know that part of my grandfather's family was wiped out in Dresden.

As were many.. it was contributory to winning the war.

Perhaps, but this doesn't explain why you would gleefully talk about my ancestors being burned alive.

Besides, it obviously didn't occur to you that maybe you should just apologise for making such an insensitive remark.

[agcatter]

You libs and all your apologies.  Sheesh.  Give it a rest.

[opebo]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I'll let you know that part of my grandfather's family was wiped out in Dresden.

As were many.. it was contributory to winning the war.

Perhaps, but this doesn't explain why you would gleefully talk about my ancestors being burned alive.

Besides, it obviously didn't occur to you that maybe you should just apologise for making such an insensitive remark.

WWII involved a lot more than insensitivity, it involved intelligent use of genocide to win the war.  I'm advocating the same now.  But on a personal level, though I'm glad Dresden was firebombed, I'm sorry to hear your relatives happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Were they participating in Naziism?

[Michael Z]

you guys are nuke-maniacs - don't you see it can destroy the WORLD

No, I don't see how a few nukes in the Middle East would destroy the world.  But I wouldn't mind fire-bombing.. burning people alive a'la Dresden makes a good impression.

I'll let you know that part of my grandfather's family was wiped out in Dresden.

As were many.. it was contributory to winning the war.

Perhaps, but this doesn't explain why you would gleefully talk about my ancestors being burned alive.

Besides, it obviously didn't occur to you that maybe you should just apologise for making such an insensitive remark.

WWII involved a lot more than insensitivity, it involved intelligent use of genocide to win the war.  I'm advocating the same now.  But on a personal level, though I'm glad Dresden was firebombed, I'm sorry to hear your relatives happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Thanks, I know you weren't directly trying to offend me or anything.

Were they participating in Naziism?

I've no idea if I'm honest. I guess it could be argued that most people participated simply by doing nothing to stop the evils of Hitler... though I know for a fact that my grandfather was a staunch communist, which probably makes him just as bad in your eyes (lol, just kidding). He didn't have an easy life, at one point he was attacked with crowbars and suffered slight brain damage. But then his beliefs did save his life during Russian imprisonment (he was indeed sent to Russia), so I guess the story has an ironic happy ending of sorts.

[MasterJedi]

We've got to stay the course. If we change the  timetable the whole of Iraq will rise up against us.(besides the Kurds)

We also have to watch out for the iminant war with the Shiite's soon.

Back it with military force and the government will stand!

[Chiahead]

I hope nobody was serious when voting for begging the UN for help...I would rather cover myself in honey and play football with a bees nest!