The Kurdish miracle (60 Minutes)

[GiladS]

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2491526n

[NewsMan]

Interesting fact from this report is 0 US KIA in this region since start of the war.

[annihilation]

Interesting fact from this report is 0 US KIA in this region since start of the war.


Well thats the only place thats safe and is willing to work with the US. The rest of the country has gone the ****s and such I support favoring the kurds over the other two groups at this time being.

[exarmyguard]

Does that mean that there is something to be said about letting homogeonus (think I spelled that wrong) groups having their own country without outsiders to mess up the works? If thats the case, create ShiaLand and SunniLand out off whats left of Iraq and have the US beat feet.

[capixaba]

Does that mean that there is something to be said about letting homogeonus (think I spelled that wrong) groups having their own country without outsiders to mess up the works? If thats the case, create ShiaLand and SunniLand out off whats left of Iraq and have the US beat feet.

Interesting to see that today the Kurds are regarded as "good guys". After WW1 they were regarded as the destabilising influence in the region, and the two uprisings and nationalist movement there were put down by the Brits. The feeling being at the time was if they gained independence the rest of Mesopotamia would get the same idea, as at this point (1919 -1920) the Sunni and Shias were putting aside thier differences, and had a common nationalist cause. The Kurds have always been regarded as the incomers in the region (all be it they have been there a while now), and disliked by the countries they are settled in - hence the opposition to a common Kurdish state. The present day Kurds see the US as thier best chance of getting what they want.
It's interesting in studying this period of Iraqi history, how much of todays goings on and the West's present approach to the situation mirrors what happened almost 90 years ago with the Brits. Even before that the Turks had it divided up into three along the Kurds/north, Sunnis/middle, Shias/south to keep a handle on it. A few of our politicos would have done well to do a bit of reading up (or at least a Google search) before jumping in.

[annihilation]

Interesting to see that today the Kurds are regarded as "good guys". After WW1 they were regarded as the destabilising influence in the region, and the two uprisings and nationalist movement there were put down by the Brits. The feeling being at the time was if they gained independence the rest of Mesopotamia would get the same idea, as at this point (1919 -1920) the Sunni and Shias were putting aside thier differences, and had a common nationalist cause. The Kurds have always been regarded as the incomers in the region (all be it they have been there a while now), and disliked by the countries they are settled in - hence the opposition to a common Kurdish state. The present day Kurds see the US as thier best chance of getting what they want.
It's interesting in studying this period of Iraqi history, how much of todays goings on and the West's present approach to the situation mirrors what happened almost 90 years ago with the Brits. Even before that the Turks had it divided up into three along the Kurds/north, Sunnis/middle, Shias/south to keep a handle on it. A few of our politicos would have done well to do a bit of reading up (or at least a Google search) before jumping in.

It says something about how history repeats itself.

[capixaba]

The main thing against them now, to forming an independent Kurdistan is opposition from Turkey and Iran - not wishing to let go of their (Kurdish)territories. The Kurds today can't go back and re write history and it would be the best thing for them now to get full independence(from the three surrounding countries). I don't think it would really damage either of these countries to "lose control" of these areas to form a new country, and if it allowed the people there to live in peace,in a stable place at least something good would come of it!
As well as that it just serves to highlight the fact that all these countries have relativly recent artificial borders, pencilled on the map by outsiders with thier own interests, over the top of centuries old tribal/ethnic/religious areas. Right after the war the Brits were fully intending drawing a line round that whole area of the Middle East, calling it "Transjordan" and keeping the lot (and especially the oil under it!) for themselves. The whole mess there has been simmering away ever since just waiting for someone to poke a stick in it!