Should there be a Kurdish State? - Page 4

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 17:30

Does anyone have a map with said territory?

Ming · April 10, 2003, 17:37

Draw a line starting on the east in Halabja, move west to Kirkuk and then northwest to Mosul.

It seems like the Kurks are already in control of this area.

DinoDoc · April 10, 2003, 17:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming
And maybe Turkey would try to stop it, but I'm not sure the Americans will go to war with these current allies...

We don't have to. We just have to stand by and do nothing.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 17:41

Thanks Ming.

So there're about half the size of Syria in Northern Iraq.
I don't think it will not be viable unless of course there're problems with the trade.

Just the oil it will have will make it quite a comfy place economically I'd imagine.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 17:42

BTW the Kurds of Iraq really worship you. They have US flags flying along with theirs.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 17:46

with rocky

germanos · April 10, 2003, 17:46

Yes, the Kurdish state must be.

First of all, the Kurds allready have a hard fought state in northern Iraq since the dramatic end of their uprising against the Iraqi central government in 1991.
It will be unwise to try to turn that back, let alone difficult to achieve. The Kurds will not be very happy if they get screwed again by foreign powers, and rightly so.

The turks should keep their mouths shut. They would do wise to allow kurdish representation in their own parliament, but instead they have chosen over and over again to jail the members of parliament that were elected in their own elections. Furthermore they should drop their rediculous hostile and oppressive attitude to the Kurds. They don't even allow them to speak their own language, which is just examplatory of the repression the Kurds have to suffer in Turkey.

What exactly the legal solution should be is difficult to say, but I guess the road that led to an independent East Timor could be an example, or possibly Iraq should become a Union of States (yes like the US), which could result in both the territorial integrity of Iraq as well as self-governance of the kurds.

Ming · April 10, 2003, 17:47

The Kurd seem to be in total control of the area I have indicated. With US troops still in limited support of them, I don't think Turkey will want to attack... They actually have their state right now if they play their cards right. There are more than enough resources to make their state viable.

And the real funny part of this is, that they owe it all to Turkey. With Turkey not allowing the US to use their country to base operations into Northern Iraq, the US has only been able to put limited troops in place, and most of the fighting has been done on the ground by the Kurds... Granted, they got a lot of air support, but they are the ones currently in charge in these regions on the ground.

germanos · April 10, 2003, 18:00

The Kurds owe the lands they currently hard to a very large degree to their own struggle, in spite of the Turks

The autonomous region in northern Iraq has been de facto a independent state for over ten years now.
And it is economically viable, as they have proven in the very same period.
Did anybody here see the HUGE colums of oiltrucks that were lined up between the turkish and Iraqi/Kurdish borders just at the outset of this war when the borders were closed

? The columns of the 3rd Inf. dwarved in comparison.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:01

Kurds - USA: talking about love here

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:05

Kurds again... (where do they find all those US flags with all those things on them?!)

Japher · April 10, 2003, 18:05

One problem: If the Kurds take N. Iraq, and plan on sqwatting there with all that oil, how will the get it out? I amm sure they have the ability to draw the oil, but they have no sea lanes to transport the oil! This would surely lead them to another fight over a coastal are from which to conduct trade.

Ming · April 10, 2003, 18:05

Well... I guess I had my facts wrong. Mosul is not yet in Kurd hands. The remaining Iraqi forces are in the process of working out a surrender. So the Kurds will control it shortly, but are not yet in charge there.

Worthingtons · April 10, 2003, 18:13

The Turks ruthlessly invaded the great land of Cyprus - so a part of Turkey should be given to the Kurds as that's equality!!!. If the Turks dont like it then they give the rest of Cyprus back to the magnificent people of Cyprus , sure - it'd take 100 years for it 'catch up' technology wise but Cypriots should have thier land back.

Cheers
Matt

germanos · April 10, 2003, 18:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher
One problem: If the Kurds take N. Iraq, and plan on sqwatting there with all that oil, how will the get it out? I amm sure they have the ability to draw the oil, but they have no sea lanes to transport the oil! This would surely lead them to another fight over a coastal are from which to conduct trade.

Japher,
there are other ways of getting your oil to its destination without fighting a war...

It's called...TRADE...

Imran Siddiqui · April 10, 2003, 18:17

Rothy, the only problem is that the Turkish Cypriots may have something to say about that.

And I'd like to see you take Kurdish lands from Turkey

.

Pekka · April 10, 2003, 18:17

I'm all for it. Kurds need their own place like the rest of us, that really is theirs. I don't support taking lands from Turkey though, since it would cost great instability which would be unnecessary there, like they don't have enough problems. But it'll happen sooner or later, so better sooner.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:18

BTW every Kurd seems to be fighting... Everyone...

From young

to old

Ming · April 10, 2003, 18:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And I'd like to see you take Kurdish lands from Turkey

.

I agree... that just isn't going to happen. But I think the Kurds might settle for Northern Iraq... And it's going to drive the Turks absolutely crazy....

Japher · April 10, 2003, 18:19

Quote:

Japher,
there are other ways of getting your oil to its destination without fighting a war...

It's called...TRADE...

I understand that, but I don't think that it would be a far fetched notion that war will occur because of the future Kurdistan being landlocked and sitting on a goldmine.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Rothy, the only problem is that the Turkish Cypriots may have something to say about that.

Actually they said it loud... but noone listened to them.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher

I understand that, but I don't think that it would be a far fetched notion that war will occur because of the future Kurdistan being landlocked and sitting on a goldmine.

A port is not "salvation" if you can't protect it militarily too. And since you can't have sea trade while having your frigates firing at the enemy (needs to be some kind of calm) it is almost the same as not having a port. If you have good relations with even one neighboring country which has a port, you're ok.

Worthingtons · April 10, 2003, 18:23

Quite correct Imran.... but it would make better viewing on TV than the formality that was Iraq.

Japher · April 10, 2003, 18:25

ALOT of Ifs there... I'm not saying that the Kurds have a hard time getting a long with their neighbors... oh, yeah, wait... that is exactly what I am saying. And why not the neighbors are all the same way too; proud.

Pekka · April 10, 2003, 18:27

I'm also all for them getting N. Iraq lands, not Turkey lands. And if Turkey has something to complain about it, be my guest. I think their opinion should not be deciding factor. But no lands from Turkey. Then it would be too complicated and bloody.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:27

they're quite proud

but it has been doing fine so far economically wise.

Shi Huangdi · April 10, 2003, 18:34

No, the Kurds should not be able to secede. Shias are already a majority in Iraq as is, we need as many non shias as possible to counteract that.

Bereta_Eder · April 10, 2003, 18:35

That doesn't make any sense.

germanos · April 10, 2003, 18:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Japher

I understand that, but I don't think that it would be a far fetched notion that war will occur because of the future Kurdistan being landlocked and sitting on a goldmine.

You could be right there, but I don't see why it will be the Kurds fighting for a port. It is more likely that they will be attacked for the oil they will posses.

It is such a shame that you put down the rights of the kurds for self-governance, be it a state or other form of self-governance by saying they will start a fight with their neighbours for a port.

And in fact the oil from northern Iraq has been finding its way to the worlds markets for the past 12 years via land-routes in Turkey and Syria, so I don't see why it could not continue. And there are pipelines as well, but now blocked through the UN sanctions.

Kurdish self-governance

germanos · April 10, 2003, 18:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
No, the Kurds should not be able to secede. Shias are already a majority in Iraq as is, we need as many non shias as possible to counteract that.

Devide and Rule

Operation "Iraqi Freedom" is allready roaring its ugly head...

Way to go Shi, Iraq is not liberated yet, and allready you are starting to point at the next group of people that needs to be targeted and be excluded from their own choices.