Should there be a Kurdish State? - Page 2

Japher · April 10, 2003, 12:15

Not my place to say... However, if they do get their own country there will be a lot of problems, and if they don't there will still be a lot of problems. I am just glad I am not the one to decide.

chequita guevara · April 10, 2003, 12:19

Yes, they should have their own state, with the capital in Diyarbakir.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 12:34

why are we having our freedom and serbs and albanians and bulgarians and israel and egypt and everyone but not the kurds?

tsnot fair man

Al'Kimiya · April 10, 2003, 12:40

every ethnicity should have one country, and one only, and forcefully moved there

Ubergeek · April 10, 2003, 12:42

No, Paiktis, it isn't fair. No question about it. So what? Life, as the saying goes, is not fair. The world is not fair. Some people have more burdens to carry than others, and some peoples end up getting trampled on. That's just the way it is, and there's absolutely nothing anybody can do about it.

Examining the situation, we see that the Kurds are divided up among three different countries, each of which are more powerful than any proposed Kurdistan and none of which are inclined to allow an independent Kurdistan to exist. The only way for an independent Kurdistan to exist for any appreciable length of time is for foreign troops -- and a lot of them -- to be posted there indefinitely to keep all the sides apart. Think about it in personal terms: how many Greek soldiers would you be willing to see die and how much Greek treasure would you be willing to see spent in that pursuit?

It isn't fair at all.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 12:43

forced relocation of populations between greece and turkey

ah the memeoris

Urban Ranger · April 10, 2003, 12:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Al'Kimiya
every ethnicity should have one country, and one only, and forcefully moved there

I agree.

Since Usian, Australian, New Zealander, and Canadian are not ethicities, we move them all back to the UK.

More land for everybody else.

gsmoove23 · April 10, 2003, 12:46

Give me a break, no they don't deserve a state. Why, so they can persecute the Turks within their borders, or the arabs or shiites.

orange · April 10, 2003, 12:46

yes, but if this is the case, they should relinquish their claim to any areas of Turkey. Kurdistan should be Northern Iraq...and should not include parts of Turkey or Iran.

GePap · April 10, 2003, 12:51

If I remember correctly, this admin. has stated that the Territorial integrty of Iraq is sacrosant. That means, no Kurdish state in Iraq. No Kurdish state in Iraq, none in Turkey and certainly none in Iran or Syria.

Seems simple enough.

chequita guevara · April 10, 2003, 12:52

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
yes, but if this is the case, they should relinquish their claim to any areas of Turkey. Kurdistan should be Northern Iraq...and should not include parts of Turkey or Iran.

So they're only entitled to a sliver of their historical lands? The majority of Kurdistan is in Turkey

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 12:53

so they can not be burned pu by whatever petty regime rules irak turkey or iraq at any given time.

thats reason enough

who are u to say they dont deserve a state?

thats silly man

JCG · April 10, 2003, 12:54

Provided it doesn't make the region explode, of course.

GePap · April 10, 2003, 12:57

Quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22
so they can not be burned pu by whatever petty regime rules irak turkey or iraq at any given time.

thats reason enough

who are u to say they dont deserve a state?

thats silly man

I don;t think "nations" 'deserve' states. people deserve states that respect thier way of life, that is all they need.

Sava · April 10, 2003, 12:58

Yes, the Kurds deserve an independent state. They deserve to be free from Turkish oppression and if they want to grow their own democracy next to a free Iraq, I see no problems to this. I find it terribly hypocritical that many opponents of a free-Kurdish-state supported military action were against then-Yugoslavia when they tried to prevent secession of the historical Kosovo lands.

The Turkish atrocities against the Kurds were just as brutal as Saddams'. Yet they are a great bastion for freedom, democracy, and peace? Bullsh1t. Sure, Turkey is semi-democratic... if you're Turkish.

Ubergeek · April 10, 2003, 12:59

The question isn't even "Do they desrve a state" -- sure, in the abstract, they "deserve" a state as much as anybody else. The question is, or ought to be, "Is the world willing to pay the price necessary to give the Kurds and state and then spend the rest of forever defending it against the enemies who would destroy it at the first chance?" When you put these things in the context of the real world, with all the real world pressures and the history of the region, such cavalier propositions as "This or that ethnic group ought to have their own state" become infinitely less appealing.

gsmoove23 · April 10, 2003, 13:05

No group "deserves" a state. They deserve not to be oppressed by their government. You can put pressure on their respective governments or you can carve a new state and invest huge amounts only to find that they are oppressing some other group. There is no reason to assume that one course of action is more just then the other.

GePap · April 10, 2003, 13:05

Yeah, we know how ever state based on an ethnicity becomes a shinning model for democracy.....

Once turkey becomes a democracy that respects all it citizens, the problems of the Kurds are over. Their plight is not based on not having Kurdish leaders, but having leaders that oppress them. If they had a Kurdish dictator, they would really not be in any better position.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 13:07

sure they would

turkey kills them cause theyre kurds.

a kurdish leader would not do that.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 13:08

and want the right to speak kurdish, name their children with kurdish names, etc etc

not just for being kurds

Ubergeek · April 10, 2003, 13:08

No, a Kurdish dictator would slaughter the Turkomen because they're Turkomen and the Arabs because they're Arabs. Big improvement.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 13:09

there arent turkomen there

its a turkish fabrication to try and invade the place

GePap · April 10, 2003, 13:13

Of course a Kurdish leader would not ill Kurds cause they are kurds..they would kill them cause they are part of an opposition political group. We all know people don;t mind getting persecuted for their political beiefs, only for their ethnic identities.

Hey, if the Kurds get lucky, maybe a bunch of Colonels can take control?

Inverse Icarus · April 10, 2003, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Azazel
yes, The kurds deserve a state, and some of it should be taken from Turkey. That's in the ideal situation.

right, because that hasn't caused problems before.

i'd like to see what the Iraqi government gets cooked up into. maybe the Kurds will have a place there.

Ubergeek · April 10, 2003, 13:18

Well, Paitkis, all I can say to that is that your statement doesn't dovetail with anything else I have ever seen, heard, or read on the topic. Given that your statement is at odds with everything else out there right now, can you provide a source for your claim?