originally by the neocons suddenly gains 'respectability' because it comes out of the mouth of a democrat. This plan is absolutely a loser. If you don't think that its the perfect way to draw the region into more chaos, death, and destruction then I don't know what's wrong with you.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=101862&d=29&m=9&y=2007Editorial: Carving Up Iraq
29 September 2007
The US Senate motion Thursday that Iraq be divided into three “federal” units for Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds gives practical shape to the principle of divide and rule, enshrined in the neocon “Project for the New American Century” that has underpinned everything that the Bush White House has done since the 9/11 attacks gave it the excuse to attack first Afghanistan and then Iraq.
<snip>
And leave it to the Democrats in the Senate to indulge the idea that America has any right to divvy up Iraq in the first place. This crass violation of the sovereignty of a country was put forward by leading Democrat Joe Biden, whose party is busy trying to figure out how to distance itself from a war that has become unpopular with American voters while at the same time maintaining a hawkish stance toward the global war on terror. Good luck.
<snip>
From an Iraqi point of view, division is anathema. Leaving aside the outrageous proposition that the future of Iraq should be decided in the US Congress and not by Iraqis, partition would tear apart the many mixed communities that still live together in harmony and take pride first and foremost in being Iraqis, not Shiites, Sunnis or Kurds. A partitioned Iraq would draw front lines along which hothead radicals from each community, often manipulated by cynical politicians, could confront each other sure that their rears was secure. Divided, no Iraqi community could resist outside interference. And no doubt Washington would underwrite the autonomy of each “statelet”, giving it the right to interfere as and whenever it wished just as it has done with the Palestinian elections.
Is it any wonder the Arab world finds an arrogant Senate vote on the destiny of Iraq unacceptable and utterly contemptible?
-MORE- Go read two paragraphs I took out. Wanted more than that article? Well, here's one that tells you what the people in that part of the world think about all this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This bad idea has been around for a long time...
Nov 27, 2003
Iraq: Three from one doesn't add up
By Nir Rosen
Iraq is "artificially and fatefully made whole from three distinct ethnic and sectarian communities", says Leslie Gelb in his November 25 New York Time article. Gelb - a former editor and columnist for the Times and president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations - advocates dismembering Iraq into three parts, a Kurdish north, a Sunni center and a Shi'ite south, in what he calls the "Three State Solution".
<snip>
Gelb believes that chopping Iraq up would "allow America to put most of its money and troops where they would do the most good quickly - with the Kurds and Shi'ites". This would force the "troublesome and domineering Sunnis, without oil or revenues, to moderate their ambitions or suffer the consequences". International law prohibits an occupying power from altering the structure of the occupied country, let alone dividing it up. This perhaps is not a good argument because international law was ignored throughout this conflict and continues to be flouted as the occupying powers impose their economic philosophies on Iraq.
<snip>
It is wrong to speak of an artificial "Sunni triangle". Iraqis do not divide their country into religious regions like this. It is also wrong to say that Sunnis dominated Iraq under Saddam. More accurate would be to say that members of Saddam's extended tribe, or of his hometown, dominated Iraq, to the exclusion of everyone else. Many Sunnis in the so called Sunni triangle resent the undue importance Saddam gave to Tikritis, for example. Iraq's Sunnis and Shi'ites are related by common history and often common tribal relations, since Iraq only became a majority Shi'ite state after Sunni tribes converted to Shi'itism in the 18th century. Even the most extreme Iraqi Shi'ites are Iraqi nationalists and view Iran with suspicion. Iraqi Shi'ites believe their country is the rightful leader of the Shi'ite world, since Shi'itism began in Iraq, most sacred Shi'ite sites are in Iraq and the Hawza, or the Shi'ite clerical academy of Najaf, thought dominated by Shi'ites until recently. Iran is a rival for them. Iraqi nationalism and unity were proven when all members of the IGC unanimously rejected the American proposal to introduce Turkish peacekeepers into the country.
<snip>
Kurdish leaders from all political parties have called for inclusion in the new Iraq, and while many may dream of an eventual Kurdish state, all recognize that it is quixotic at this juncture. There is only a light American presence in Kurdistan anyway, and it is not the reason troops are meeting resistance elsewhere. A Kurdistan without US troops is the greatest fear of most Kurds today who live under the ominous shadow of their Turkish, Iranian, and even Syrian neighbors. There is no clear border for Kurdistan. Kurds covet Mosul and Kirkuk, where many Arabs, Assyrians and Turkmen would violently oppose secession.
-MORE-
Do you think you or Joe knows better than the people in that region what will work? Isn't that how we got where we are today?? But hell, go ahead and float some tired old unworkable idea and call it a plan. Fan the fires of this mess and call it a solution.
_________________________________________________________________________
Mar 9, 2006
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HC09Ak01.htmlBlaming the victims as Iraq disintegrates
By Stephen Zunes
The sectarian violence which has swept across Iraq following last month's terrorist bombing of the Shi'ite Golden Mosque in Samarra is yet another example of the tragic consequences of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq. Until the 2003 US invasion and occupation, Iraq had maintained a longstanding history of secularism and a strong national identity among its Arab population despite its sectarian differences.
Not only has the United States failed to bring a functional democracy to Iraq, neither US forces nor the US-backed Iraqi government in Baghdad have been able to provide the Iraqi peoplewith basic security. This has led many ordinary citizens to turn to extremist sectarian groups for protection, further undermining the Bush administration's insistence that US forces must remain in Iraq in order to prevent a civil war.
Top analysts in the Central Intelligence Agency and State Department, as well as large numbers of Middle East experts, warned that a US invasion of Iraq could result in a violent ethnic and sectarian conflict. Even some of the war's intellectual architects acknowledged as much: in a 1997 paper, prior to becoming major figures in the Bush foreign policy team, David Wurmser, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith predicted that a post-Saddam Iraq would likely be "ripped apart" by sectarianism and other cleavages but called on the US to "expedite" such a collapse anyway.
<snip>
Still, there is little question that actions by US occupation troops over the past three years - such as the torture of detainees, the hair-trigger response at checkpoints, the liberal use of force in heavily-populated civilian neighborhoods and the targeted assassinations of suspected insurgent leaders - have contributed to the climate of impunity exhibited by forces of the Iraqi government.
<snip>
Even the young firebrand Shi'ite cleric Muqtada emphasized to his followers, "It was not the Sunnis who attacked the shrine ... but rather the occupation
and Ba'athists." He called on his followers not to attack Sunni mosques and ordered his Mehdi Army to "protect both Shi'ite and Sunni shrines". He went on to say, "My message to the Iraqi people is to stand united and bonded, and not to fall into the Western trap. The West is trying to divide the Iraqi people." In a later interview, Muqtada claimed, "We say that the occupiers are responsible for such crises ... there is only one enemy. The occupier."
Similarly, Sunnis were quick to express their solidarity with Shi'ites in a series of demonstrations in Samarra and elsewhere. Anti-American signs and slogans permeated these marches. Indeed, there is a widespread belief that it was the US, not fellow Muslims or Iraqis, which bears responsibility for the tragedy.
-MORE-
Four damn paragraphs was just too few. This article deserves serious reading. This criminal idea was born in the mind of the corrupt Neocons who brought us the war in Iraq in the first place...
________________________________________________________________________
Hunt Oil Skirts Baghdad, Signs Deal with Kurds
<snip>
Hunt Oil Co. has struck a deal to explore for oil in Iraq's semiautonomous Kurdish region, signaling a new willingness by some large Western companies to bypass the fractious government in Baghdad and deal directly with regional authorities in the war-torn country.
The regional government of Kurdistan and Dallas-based Hunt said over the weekend they had agreed to jointly explore for oil in the Kurdish enclave. Hunt, a closely held family concern with a reputation for risk taking, will operate the project, the two sides said.
The deal is a victory for Kurdish officials, who have been trying to attract large, well-known oil companies to the region for years. It bolsters their claim to autonomy in issues such as natural-resource policy, thereby strengthening their hand in sometimes-testy relations with Baghdad.
<snip>
The region currently contributes a very small percentage of the country's overall oil production, but Kurdish officials say they believe it holds large stores of untapped reserves. It's impossible to quantify the region's prospects, but many oil companies -- big and small -- have expressed interest in one day exploring there.
<snip>
The spokeswoman said Hunt determined that conditions were right to sign the deal, after the regional law was passed. "They have a new petroleum law which is transparent and which calls for immediate work in the region," she said in response to emailed questions. The Kurdish regional government "provided all of the necessary processes to begin work and we were ready to go."
It's unclear whether other big Western firms will feel as comfortable moving into Kurdistan. As a privately held company, Hunt doesn't have to answer to public shareholders and is nimbler than its larger competitors in the industry. But its foothold in Iraq may make other deals with big companies more likely, especially if officials in Baghdad's central government don't raise too much of a fuss about being bypassed this time around.
-MORE-
Oh hell no, the Kurds don't have access to oil.
_________________________________________________________________________
Wonder if the other Middle Eastern governments love this plan like you do?
http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/iraq/?id=22374
US Senate for dividing Iraq on sectarian basis
US ally Turkey would oppose such an initiative, fearful of unrest among its Kurdish population, they say, adding that a partitioned Iraq would lead outside powers like Iran and Saudi Arabia to bolster rival ethnic militia.
<snip>
(Wonder if anyone here ever gave this any thought before?)
<snip>
The bipartisan Iraq Study Group, which delivered recommendations in December warned that dividing Iraq could trigger mass population flows, the collapse of the fragile Iraqi security forces and ethnic cleansing by strengthened militias.
-MORE-
____________________________________________________________________
Globalist Think Tanks Call For Balkanization Of Iraq
Long term agenda to divide and conquer presented as final solution
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, July 5, 2007
<snip>
A plan gaining traction in the Congress to separate Iraq into three autonomous territories directly mirrors long term globalist plans to "divide and conquer" in Iraq, an ongoing semi-covert project which has involved the intentional stoking of sectarian violence by occupying forces.
The authors, Edward P. Joseph of Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and Michael O'Hanlon, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, are hoping to draw the attention of George W. Bush administration policymakers, reports Iranian news wire Press TV.
The three main spheres proposed in the report would be Shia, Sunni and Kurdistan. Iraqi Kurds already control Kurdistan. The report also acknowledges that the plan also echoes long term Council on Foreign Relations balkanization mantra.
Such a plan is not new and has been ongoing as part of the 'Salvador Option' by the US in Iraq, which has been reported on and discussed from at least the beginning of 2005 onwards.
<snip>
Veteran journalist John Pilger wrote further about the Salvador Option in the New Statesman last year, shedding light on the origins of the plot:
"The real news, which is not reported in the CNN "mainstream", is that the Salvador Option has been invoked in Iraq. This is the campaign of terror by death squads armed and trained by the US, which attack Sunnis and Shias alike. The goal is the incitement of a real civil war and the break-up of Iraq, the original war aim of Bush's administration. The ministry of the interior in Baghdad, which is run by the CIA, directs the principal death squads. Their members are not exclusively Shia, as the myth goes. The most brutal are the Sunni-led Special Police Commandos, headed by former senior officers in Saddam's Ba'ath Party. This unit was formed and trained by CIA "counter-insurgency" experts, including veterans of the CIA's terror operations in central America in the 1980s, notably El Salvador."
<snip>
Murray suspects that as part of a "divide and conquer" strategy, the same strategy used by British forces in Iraq 85 years ago, Special forces are being used to intentionally foment civil war by training and equipping Kurdish Peshmerga fighters and Shiite militiamen, to target Sunni insurgents and their sympathizers.
"The evidence that the US directly contributed to the creation of the current civil war in Iraq by its own secretive security strategy is compelling." Murray continues.
He goes on to point out that US Congressman Denis Kucinich took up the issue in April of this year in a letter to Donald Rumsfeld requesting all records pertaining to the plan.
Kucinich weighed in on the matter, providing further evidence that the Salvador Option was being implemented, he wrote:
"About one year before the Newsweek report on the "Salvador Option," it was reported in the American Prospect magazine on January 1, 2004 that part of $3 billion of the $87 billion Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill to fund operations in Iraq, signed into law on November 6, 2003, was designated for the creation of a paramilitary unit manned by militiamen associated with former Iraqi exile groups. According to the Prospect article, experts predicted that creation of this paramilitary unit would "lead to a wave of extrajudicial killings, not only of armed rebels but of nationalists, other opponents of the U.S. occupation and thousands of civilian Baathists."
There have been a number of instances that have provided evidence pointing to the fact that the Salvador Option has been invoked in Iraq. In September 2005 British SAS were caught dressed in Arab garb and attempting to stage a terror attacks on Iraqi police. The soldiers were "rescued" by British troops using extreme force and a media blackout ensued.
-MORE-
_________________________________________________________________________
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
