Should Iraq be partitioned?

[Vampyrelord]

There are 3 main groups in Iraq, the Sunnis, the Shi'ites and the Kurds. The Kurds want their own nation, whilst Sunni and Shia militias battle for control of the country, especially the capital. The question is, should Iraq be broken up?

Iraq was created when the despised Ottoman empire was broken up by the victorious Allies at the end of the Great War. Several countries were formed this way, and different peoples found themselves sharing one country. Understandably, they do not always get along.

Much of the violence in Iraq is perpetuated by the Sunnis, many of whom are angry at losing control of the country (after all, Saddam was a Sunni). Sunnis are a minority in Iraq and the main Sunni region is to the west, whilst he Kurds are in the North.

If Iraq is partitioned, I imagine an independant Kurdistan would be formed in the North, which would doubtless attract lots of Kurdish immigrants from Turkey. The Shi'ites in the South and East would probably keep the capital and the oil and the name Iraq. The Sunnis in the West would be the real losers of this, as they would get a small patch of territory with nothing of real value.

Personally, I think the partition of Iraq is very likely and is probably the only solution to the crisis. Through their own actions, the citizens of Iraq have chosen partition. Doubtless partitioning the country will be a bloody and bitter affair, but it is fairly obvious that the Iraqis are incapable of living together.

[athenaofstarlite]

The other option is the partition of Iraq into 3 sections still under one weaker federal power. This way oil and wealth could be distributed fairly and everyone would be pleased, with less rebellion from the minorities. I believe this proposition was made by Senator Joe Biden of Delaware.

[Rukongai]

either way i think we should just leave them alone because in the end they're going to get into a war and either destroy each other or one's going to conquer them all and i don't want America getting into the middle of that crap because it would cost us 100's of millions of dollars.

[Muja]

Sunnis, the Shi'ites and the Kurds there is no difference between them just maybe that Sunnis, the Shi'ites pray different which I know off. What questions me. What is realy happening over there. Most journals don't want to delivery the truth but the most valuale news to them.

You won't be able to know whats going on there, until you go there by your self. However, 3 sections of iraq. I doubt that many of iraqs would like the idear.

The US goverment isn't leaving Iraq anytime soon, as we know Bush ain;t planning that.

[Vampyrelord]

Sunnis, the Shi'ites and the Kurds there is no difference between them just maybe that Sunnis, the Shi'ites pray different which I know off. What questions me. What is realy happening over there. Most journals don't want to delivery the truth but the most valuale news to them.
You won't be able to know whats going on there, until you go there by your self. However, 3 sections of iraq. I doubt that many of iraqs would like the idear.
The US goverment isn't leaving Iraq anytime soon, as we know Bush ain;t planning that.

1) The differences between Sunnis and Shi'ites are small, but significant. Significant enough for them to hate each other anyway. You may not "know of" any differences, but 100+ people die in Iraq every day because of the sectarian violence caused by these differences. (cf Northern Ireland, tensions between Catholics and Protestants)
2) Kurds are ethnically different to the other Iraqis and want their own country. They hate the Sunnis because Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons against a Kurdish village. The Shi'ites hate the Sunnis because Saddam was a Sunni and oppressed them. The Sunnis are angry that the new government is predominantly Shi'ite, reflecting the demographics of Iraq.
3) Bush is probably not planning leaving, but the rest of his government is. It's just a matter of time until they throw in the towel, most likely by the end of this new year.

[Que Sera Sera]

I think that Iraq is better off separated because it would cause less deaths(for a time) and in that time they could settle their differences. But first the nuclear weapons should be destroyed to prevent more "Village Attacks".

First the power-hungry idoits should separate their country by a border or wall. Anyone who passes the wall maybe killed. (posting guards on border)

[Delta]

I think that Iraq is better off separated because it would cause less deaths(for a time) and in that time they could settle their differences. But first the nuclear weapons should be destroyed to prevent more "Village Attacks".

What nuclear weapons? The ones we claimed to be there for an excuse to go to war?

[Que Sera Sera]

I think they ACTUALLY have nuclear weapons because:P
1: They might use reverse phycology(spelt wrong)
2: they are terrorist what do you exepct? cookie and teddy bears?(sorry)

[Delta]

I think they ACTUALLY have nuclear weapons because:P
1: They might use reverse phycology(spelt wrong)
2: they are terrorist what do you exepct? cookie and teddy bears?(sorry)

Reverse psychology? On who? They said they didn't have any themselves. And no I dont expect teddy bears from terrorists,but the materials needed to create nuclear weapons are extremely hard to acquire.

[Kalashnikov]

The partitioning will only cause trouble for the sunnis. Since most of the country is actually shi'ite.
But hey - if this is what the sunni people want, then let the country be partitioned.

I never meet sunni people in iraq whenever i go there. They are a minority in iraq. I do meet kurds though. The shia people and the kurds dont really mind each other if you ask me.

[Vampyrelord]

They never fought each other until US army invaded Iraq

Because Saddam was in complete control, obviously. When the US took out Saddam and disbanded the Iraqi army all these sectarian tensions overflowed into an endless cycle of violence.

@ Shinigami Sakura:

1) There were no Nuclear weapons, Saddam did not have the technology or resources to make them.

2) They were not "terrorists". Saddam was the leader of a secular (non religous) government which had no links to terrorist groups whatsoever.

[Nuada]

No, I don't think Iraq should, be partitioned. The main reason is that I can see it becoming just like the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. Who going to get what and they shouldn't be here, and that not fair. Then the United States will have to figure which group to support. Then everyone will be upset because we are choosing sides and they don't think we should choose that group to support.
If Iraq choose to partition the United States should pull out and stop supporting Iraq. In the end the partition will end up causing more problems then solving. The Iraq people need to decide what direction their country needs to go in. If it is something that the America people can't agree with then we just don't agree; because not everyones opion on democracy is the same. If they really want democracy and peace then they will have to fight for it, because no one else can do it for them and it is something that is not easy to win or maintain. Even the United States had a hard time setting up the new goverment and not everyone agree with it and people still don't.
I think America did their job and we can't support them anymore, until they are ready for it or we just support them no matter if we agree with what they consider is democracy.

[Rukongai]

like i said either if we split them up or keep them together you know that they are all going to get into a war with each other put a third option called leave them alone and watch it play out.

[Tokoyami]

Because Saddam was in complete control, obviously. When the US took out Saddam and disbanded the Iraqi army all these sectarian tensions overflowed into an endless cycle of violence.

@ Shinigami Sakura:

1) There were no Nuclear weapons, Saddam did not have the technology or resources to make them.

2) They were not "terrorists". Saddam was the leader of a secular (non religous) government which had no links to terrorist groups whatsoever.

We were lookin WMDs, weps of mass destruction, not just nukes.

I have a friend, robert, he really....well i gues u could say, Pro-military. He's aiming to join the military and attend west point, he's been training and doin all this stuff for it for years. He knows the recruiters that come to my school and everything.

He told me that he gets emails about the progress in iraq. He told me that he has gotten emails stating that they have found evidence of WMDs or parts of WMDs.

Thats all i kno about that tho.