The future of Iraq?

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
I know, I know... Another thread on Iraq. Lock it if you like.... Anyway, with the rash of recent civil disturbance, can there be any outcome other than all out civil war in that "country"? (I put country in quotes because it's only one by decree and not be any nationalistic or ethnic connections.)



Many were saying before the war (myself included) that the only reason Iraq stays together is because of the iron fist Saddam used to rule. Now that he's gone, there's a void left. Shittes don't like Sunnis. Sunnis don't like Kurds. Kurds don't like Shittes. It's inevitable, really. But what's going to happen to it? Are the UN going to go in - only after making the US eat plenty of crow - to help police it? Is the US going to be entrenched in a long drawn out struggle that they WILL eventually give up on?



Thoughts? Put them here, if the thread isn't redundant and not locked...



-t



ps - I find it funny that every explosion has "possible links to al-Qaeda", but none are ever corroborated. The US trying to spin this ill-advised occupation? I think so....

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    This is where we're going. This fscking sucks. Bush can bite my ass.
  • Reply 2 of 16
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    This is where we're going. This fscking sucks. Bush can bite my ass.



    Senator Byrd. A man with balls. Good for him. I hope he gets to be on the short list of cabinet members if a democrat wins election next year.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    thttht Posts: 4,087member
    I propose splitting Iraq into 3 countries along ethnic lines and evenly split up the resources evenly among them.
  • Reply 4 of 16
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Yea those Klans men are great





    "civil disturbance" wtf are you kidding. Can there be another outcome? Not in your limited mind. Once again another anti-Bushite finds a reason to be anti-Bush. Flim at 11
  • Reply 5 of 16
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    Yea those Klans men are great





    "civil disturbance" wtf are you kidding. Can there be another outcome? Not in your limited mind. Once again another anti-Bushite finds a reason to be anti-Bush. Flim at 11




    Scott, could you possibly refrain from the insults and respond to the question? If you disagree, what do you see happening?
  • Reply 6 of 16
    aquafireaquafire Posts: 2,758member
    Future of Iraq ?



    They will all become French speaking Bidet slurpers.
  • Reply 7 of 16
    sammi josammi jo Posts: 4,634member
    This will sound strange, but Iraq needs a "benevolent dictator" to regain stability. Not a total brute like Saddam, but someone who is forcible enough to bring all the warring parties to heel, reintegrate the nation, and get that oil flowing again to get the economy rolling. Iraqis will *never* accept a westerner like Bremer, or whomever else gets landed that unenviable task should (Bremer) get fired.



    Right now there a number of parties in Iraq who don't get on one iota, all jockeying for power. Stuck in the middle are American and UK troops who are being killed (1 to 2 a day) and injured (10 a day). Mercenaries are pouring in across the borders from all over the place to bolster the resistance to the occupation, including possible al'qaida terrorists from Saudi Arabia. Iraq used to have one of the largest armies in the region, with a huge quantity of conventional weaponry; resistance fighters have said there's enough explosives, small arms and ammunition to last "decades". As long as US and British troops are there, they are targets, and each day, more and more angry people are being recruited to fire at them.



    The ongoing (no end in sight) war in Iraq is costing $4billion a month, not counting the huge cost of rebuilding the damage to Iraq's infrastructure caused by the bombing ($$ for Halliburton, WorldCom, KBR etc), The deficit is approaching $0.5 TRILLION this year. The US is now asking for UN assistance: even that may not be a great move in the eyes of those who view the UN as the party that imposed the sanctions for so many years which decimated their economy and resulted in the death of 1.5 million Iraqis. The bomb at their HQ was perhaps a warning sign...ie *get out now*. Also, the number of US troops in Iraq may have to be reduced..because of troublespots erupting elsewhere. Look whats now happening in Afghanistan: the Taliban and al qaida are regrouping, and US troops are now being attacked there on a daily basis.



    We are now caught between a rock and a very hard place. Nobody there wants us there. Terrorism is now flourishing and it is getting worse by the week. Let us all hope that we have a drastic regime change here, in order to implement a sensible foreign policy in the mid east, ie one which doesn't endanger our national security by poking a stick into a hornets nest and expecting the hornets not to sting us. Lets all hope we don't get a repeat of 9-11 on account of this lunacy.



    Future for Iraq? Chaos, bloodshed. Perhaps Iraq may devolve into separate entities....



    I remember watching CNN one afternoon about 2 weeks before the war started. Comedian Janeane Garofalo was being interviewed, and her predictions were spot on target, by far the most accurate of all the pundits I heard. Trust a comedian to get it right.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    smirclesmircle Posts: 1,035member
    The next massive bomb blast, the next high-profile political murder there, Bush will call in the UN (under american command, of course) to stabilize the situation and "get some of our kids home".



    This of course will only encourage the ultra-radicals there to take on the foreign forces. Some time down the road, the UN forces will have to admit they cannot stabilize a country that is breaking apart - no doubt the neocons the US will cry out loud about the UNs "ineptitude", silently skewing the reasons for all the flying shit. And the Iraqis for being "undemocratic by nature".



    Over all the blaming, Iraq is likely going to be forgotten, the western and russian oil companies bribing officials there to be allowed to loot its riches. Shiite and sunnite warlords dividing up the country, crushing the little civil liberties people had there, some madman introducing the sharia and the turks establishing a cordon sanitaire in the kurdish part of Iraq, conveniently robbing, looting and plundering the oil wells there.



    Why do I see the future that black? Because Iraq is next to Iran with its highly viral ideology, is a multi-ethnic country (we know since the demise of the USSR and Yugoslaviw how bad those manage change) and some of the factions have ties to palestinian rebel forces, kurdish partisan groups and maybe even al Quaida. This is a situation that is highly instable. Toppling Saddam was the one missing action to tip it all over.



    The only thing I hope is that our (the euro) politicians have enough cojones to kick Bush's butt when (not if) he asks for blue helmets .
  • Reply 9 of 16
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    First uneducated reaction.



    Send in 300.000 soldiers

    send in 500.000 workers

    Build up a modern electricit grid

    Make the oil wells work

    Make the water system work

    Make the police and military work again (rehire most of the old employed)

    Start up schools, hospital etc.

    Hire every Iraqi and their mother in those sectors and reeducate (yeah I know bad choice of words) them to take care of the system

    Put in place a governmental system that is primary effective, secondary as democratic as the primary goal allows and make a plan for how it becomes a real democracy (set a time table for elections).



    WIthdraw in 1 year leaving a small UN force behind.



    Really don´t care if its under UN or US as long as it works (which it doesn´t do now).



    Expensive? As hell. But cheaper on the long run.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    aquafireaquafire Posts: 2,758member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Anders

    First uneducated reaction.



    Send in 300.000 soldiers

    send in 500.000 workers

    Build up a modern electricit grid

    Make the oil wells work

    Make the water system work

    Make the police and military work again (rehire most of the old employed)

    Start up schools, hospital etc.

    Hire every Iraqi and their mother in those sectors and reeducate (yeah I know bad choice of words) them to take care of the system

    Put in place a governmental system that is primary effective, secondary as democratic as the primary goal allows and make a plan for how it becomes a real democracy (set a time table for elections).



    WIthdraw in 1 year leaving a small UN force behind.



    Really don´t care if its under UN or US as long as it works (which it doesn´t do now).



    Expensive? As hell. But cheaper on the long run.




    And who is going to pay for this grand plan ?
  • Reply 11 of 16
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    It is quite likely that the shiites, with support from Iran will eventually sieze some kind of control.
  • Reply 12 of 16
    aquafireaquafire Posts: 2,758member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by New

    It is quite likely that the shiites, with support from Iran will eventually sieze some kind of control.



    And the Sunni's will counter and the Kurds will want autonomy and Turkey will over react.....
  • Reply 13 of 16
    torifiletorifile Posts: 4,024member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    Yea those Klans men are great





    "civil disturbance" wtf are you kidding. Can there be another outcome? Not in your limited mind. Once again another anti-Bushite finds a reason to be anti-Bush. Flim at 11




    Where are all the pro-war people? Surely someone sees a better outlook than these? Scott?? SDW? Come on, you've got at least ONE intelligent reaction between ALL of you.
  • Reply 14 of 16
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aquafire

    And the Sunni's will counter and the Kurds will want autonomy and Turkey will over react.....



    To think that the country will plunge into total chaos is naive. There is an underlying clan-based powerstructure intact in iraq. With Saddam gone, and the shiits being in such a majority (60% shiit to 20% sunni), we might get a shift in leadership at the top.

    We're not looking at total chaos here, but more likely a long-lasting, low-intesity conflict between the rivaling groups. With the US chaught in the middle.

    It costed the british thousands of soldiers to unify iraq during the 1930's. And that was with arab support.
  • Reply 15 of 16
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Personally I think there's as much chaos as there is becuase the Shiites are the only ones with enough organization and control to run the country, but Bush would never let them take control. So, we're basically stuck keeping them out of power while trying to make the patchwork of clans come together in support of a central power. It's not a clear or good situation.



    Ultimately we'll leave a Karzai-like official in control, keep him alive long enough for us to back out. And ultimately when he's assassinated, or the country just dissipates around him, we can stand back and say "Well, when we left things were in good shape. It's not our fault it's fallen apart now." Just like Afghanistan.
  • Reply 16 of 16
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
Sign In or Register to comment.