Posted: 12/15/2011 9:30:36 AM EDT
| Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 |
|
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 It's gonna go back to the way it was when Saddam was alive - a nation full of thugs with the biggest and meanest thug becoming the boss. |
|
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 Sunnis and Shiites have been in civil war since saddam was overthrown. Nothin new there, hell it was like that both times I was in that shithole. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 It's gonna go back to the way it was when Saddam was alive - a nation full of thugs with the biggest and meanest thug becoming the boss. This as Dan states it....The normal way of life in the muslim world...the richest and or the richest and meanest futhermucker will assume leadership....This won't change just because Saddam got bagged and we showed them the light. 
|
|
I've associated with several Persians and Arabs over the years. Some have been very good friends.
But how fast they can turn into your mortal enemies from a good friend in unbelievable. One thing they respect is the fact you can and will whip their ass. But then you have to worry about them slipping up behind you with a knife. Iraq will deteriorate into a quagmire of random violence. We'll go back when it does. 
|
|
Quoted:
I've associated with several Persians and Arabs over the years. Some have been very good friends. But how fast they can turn into your mortal enemies from a good friend in unbelievable. One thing they respect is the fact you can and will whip their ass. But then you have to worry about them slipping up behind you with a knife. Iraq will deteriorate into a quagmire of random violence. We'll go back when it does. in 10 years when there's big money to be made again ramping up supplies/gear to the military; the G will surplus/give away what it conciders excess; then when the mil is at an all time low in equipment they'll send in the troops somewhere and supply/equipment production will ramp up in some promenant senator's state. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've associated with several Persians and Arabs over the years. Some have been very good friends. But how fast they can turn into your mortal enemies from a good friend in unbelievable. One thing they respect is the fact you can and will whip their ass. But then you have to worry about them slipping up behind you with a knife. Iraq will deteriorate into a quagmire of random violence. We'll go back when it does. in 10 years when there's big money to be made again ramping up supplies/gear to the military; the G will surplus/give away what it conciders excess; then when the mil is at an all time low in equipment they'll send in the troops somewhere and supply/equipment production will ramp up in some promenant senator's state. You know too much  Your little ankle biter dog will probably pay with his life when the G sends in the SWAT team for the 0300 no knock warrant service on you
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've associated with several Persians and Arabs over the years. Some have been very good friends. But how fast they can turn into your mortal enemies from a good friend in unbelievable. One thing they respect is the fact you can and will whip their ass. But then you have to worry about them slipping up behind you with a knife. Iraq will deteriorate into a quagmire of random violence. We'll go back when it does. in 10 years when there's big money to be made again ramping up supplies/gear to the military; the G will surplus/give away what it conciders excess; then when the mil is at an all time low in equipment they'll send in the troops somewhere and supply/equipment production will ramp up in some promenant senator's state. You know too much Your little ankle biter dog will probably pay with his life when the G sends in the SWAT team for the 0300 no knock warrant service on youthat's fine by me; the sonofabitch loves to eat cat shit anyway; even though he's a shitzu, he shouldn't love to eat cat shit 
as for the no knock warrent; I don't lock my doors anyway, so they can go ahead and come on in the house, just hope they wipe the mud off their feet first; I dislike sweeping. |
|
Quoted:
Iraq's civil war is over. He minority won. The question isn't will there be another civil war. The question is will IRAN invade Iraq once we leave. Already their , and the Dem o will sit back and do nothing when the shit hit the fan . 4500 dead and over 30,000 hurt , over this shit hole and if it goes south was that all for nothing , Hope not ? We will see . The Blood will be on your hands Obama  when people are beening killed in the streets on the news .
|
|
Quoted:
Iraq's civil war is over. He minority won. The question isn't will there be another civil war. The question is will IRAN invade Iraq once we leave. Since when did this happen? I can believe Iran has influence in Iraq, but I still see reports of car/suicide bombs, assasination attempts and the like. Mostly in Bagdad but they are still there. |
|
Its not really gonna suprise me if iran invades iraq once we have egressed out. Its probably just a question of when? If im not mistaking, though I probably am, iraq as a nation didnt exist in name till WWII, before that is was another land mass of iran.
Then again, I didnt do well on Geographical History for Marines 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 It's gonna go back to the way it was when Saddam was alive - a nation full of thugs with the biggest and meanest thug becoming the boss. Nope Dan your dead wrong on that one. love him or hate him. Sadam was the Marshal Tito of the Middle East and kept Kurds, Shia and Sunni playing nicely with one another even though he had to crack some eggs to make that omelet. What you are going to see is a tribal civil war that Iran will be deciding who the victor is on. In the end the Shia will run the country totally and genocide will end up ensuing with Iraq being a satellite state of Iran. |
|
Iraq is just like the Balkans. Although they could be brutal, as long as the Russians kept their foot on their necks there was not much trouble. As soon as the Russians pulled out the civil war started. It will be the same way in Iraq. There is no longer a Sadam Hussein to forcefully control the groups. As soon as we leave, the struggle for control will begin.
The different tribal and religious factions all want to be the ones in power. When they perceive a common threat, they may work together. As soon as the perceived common threat is gone they fight between themselves and jockey for power. Iran already has a representative in place in Iraq. Muqtada Al-Sadr has a large following and sought safety in Iran when things got rough for him in Iraq. Iran will certainly call in the markers for that. Al-Sadr still has his well armed Mahdi Militia and will seek a major position in control of the country. All in All, the place will be the same crap hole it was before. The only difference will be the names of the guys calling the shots. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 It's gonna go back to the way it was when Saddam was alive - a nation full of thugs with the biggest and meanest thug becoming the boss. Nope Dan your dead wrong on that one. love him or hate him. Sadam was the Marshal Tito of the Middle East and kept Kurds, Shia and Sunni playing nicely with one another even though he had to crack some eggs to make that omelet. What you are going to see is a tribal civil war that Iran will be deciding who the victor is on. In the end the Shia will run the country totally and genocide will end up ensuing with Iraq being a satellite state of Iran. Saddam was a Sunni.
The biggest and most ruthless turd in a nation full of turds will surface and run the place. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 It's gonna go back to the way it was when Saddam was alive - a nation full of thugs with the biggest and meanest thug becoming the boss. Nope Dan your dead wrong on that one. love him or hate him. Sadam was the Marshal Tito of the Middle East and kept Kurds, Shia and Sunni playing nicely with one another even though he had to crack some eggs to make that omelet. What you are going to see is a tribal civil war that Iran will be deciding who the victor is on. In the end the Shia will run the country totally and genocide will end up ensuing with Iraq being a satellite state of Iran. Saddam was a Sunni.
The biggest and most ruthless turd in a nation full of turds will surface and run the place. This... You will never see peace of any kind in that part of the world until their is a disaster/war so immense that is totally breaks down their society and provides an opportunity for real change. We may see the disaster/war in our time but not the recovery. I never meet anyone over there with any level of power that would not have cut my throat (literally or figuratively) given the chance. Everyone else is so used to being beat down they are broken. All I care about is that we eliminate our dependence on middle eastern oil. We are financing our own destruction. |
|
Well...I tried not to enter this discussion because such discussions usually go nowhere. But I can't help myself. Listen to us. Do we really think Saddam made the trains run on time or that he was somehow good for Iraq? Nonsense. Do we really think the Iraqis have no vision or hope for their own nation? Nonsense. I personally see very little of what has been stated above that is supported by history or fact.
First, some perspective (mine, for whatever it is not worth) and facts: - Iraqis are Iraqi first, tribal second and religious third. They have had a secular tradition in governance since Iraq has had borders. They are nationalists first. That is why they ALL opposed such harebrained ideas like partitioning on the Biden model. Economically, they have to rely on each other as they have in teh past and will in the future. ETHNICITY vs BELIEF - Iraqis are composed ethnically of Arabs and Kurds. This is a ethnicity. It should not be confused with belief. - Iraqi Arabs are approx. 60% Shia, 30% Sunni and a mix of other beliefs to include Chaldean, Coptic and Syrian Christian. That is belief. It should not be confused with ethnicity. - Iraqi Kurds are mostly Sunni. - Translated, that equals the following: Iraqi Arabs may have tension with Iraqi Kurds but Sunni Arabs can generally force themselves to get along with Sunni Kurds; Arab Shia differ in belief with Arab Sunni but they all generally hate Persians (Iranians) even if some unite on Shia belief. Think Irish Catholic and English Catholic. Belief is no guarantee of national betrayal. GEOGRAPHY - Everyone lives on the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Can't divide the rivers. They flow north to south. Roads, utilities, oil pipelines and commerce flow with them. - Kurds are in the north and need their oil and goods to flow south. Ain't gonna drive them over the mountains into Turkey, their arch enemies. - Arab Sunnis need their oil and food to flow south as well to Baghdad and the Persian Gulf. - The southern Arab Shia need these things, too. Hence, a united Iraq economically. They know they can't stand alone. And, since they fought the Persians for the decade of the 1980s, they have little desire to obtain Iranian favor or currency. It is Western currency and influence they desire. GOVERNANCE - Prior to Saddam, Bakr and Qassim, Iraq had a British model system of government. Many British influenced administrative aspects continued even under the Baathists. The return to a parliament, Prime Minister, etc., is a natural ingrained desire of Iraqis. That is why they responded to it well through several election in the last 5 years. Each side will have their walk outs to make some political statement, but then again, so do many countries in Europe. Even Texas lawmakers had a walkout and hid in Oklahoma. But that hardly creates a civil war. It is political posturing. EDUCATION - Iraq has had and continues to have one of the most educated populations in the Middle East. They enjoy one of the largest university populations as well. This creates stability as these educated men and women seek their futures and fortunes. - Women enjoy great freedom in Iraq and have some of the most forward thinking attitudes about women participating in government, education and society. Iraq has always led in this way. This creates openness. MILITARY - Under Saddam, Iraq was powerful enough to attack every single neighbor except Syria, their Baathist ally. If they were powerful enough to defy the world and hold the US at bay for several years, they are more than capable of defending their own borders. During the Iran / Iraq war, Iran never made any kind of significant territorial gains, even with their larger army and population. - Since 2008, Iraq has successfully kept control of their government, society and economy with their own military defense forces and police. They currently enjoy record lows in violence. - Iraqis are intrinsically brave. Whatever we may feel about them through ignorance or prejudice, one cannot call them cowards. They took on long odds with great bravery against our powerful and sophisticated weaponry and soldiers. No other nation will offer them as great a challenge. Especially with our alliance and help. ECONOMY - In July of this year, Iraq was restored to the most favored trade nation status for the first time since the global sanctions against Saddam. - Iraq has repaid billions of US Dollars in war debts and continues to repay its other debts––something that cannot be said about our own nation. - Iraq exports food (think Tigris-Euphrates river valleys), oil, and mineral wealth at a rate far beyond its own needs. This creates incredible wealth for them in proportion to their population. With 25 million people and compared to other countries with the same resources and population, think Canada and Switzerland. Iraq has a very bright economic future that also bodes well for Western nations. Unlike radical countries with religious or unstable dictators, Iraq has all the talent to make use of their resources in a secular government and tradition. THE FUTURE - Since 1979, Iraq has been at war. They, far more than we, are ready to see that stop. - Unlike the 'Arab Spring' of religious zealots and Muslim Brotherhood-backed protests in other countries, Iraq is steadily stabilizing their country. Given the above, I don't buy the notion that these people don't care about themselves,the future, or that they are only going to kill each other. I also don't buy the nonsense that my service there was some waste and that we never should have gone. I would do it again in a heartbeat. We need to stop thinking of Iraq as the enemy of our country and start thinking of Iraq and its people as the allies they are. Think Germany and Japan. My two cents. Steve |
|
Regular122,
My experience differs on the nationality identification. I worked with hundreds of Iraqis daily for a year and they were Sunni, Shia, or Kurdish first. Everything centered around the tribe. When ever there was discontent with the national laws or they didn't like the national laws, they followed tribal laws. Example, if a Sunni killed a Sunni they were charged with murder. Sunni killed a Shia, no crime was committed. They also split themselves by tribe when on work details as they didn't want to work with the other tribe. And they all hated the Kurd who ran the local PX. I had to take special considerations with some Shia workers, to protect their identities, as Saddam's cousins lived right outside our wire and they were tracking who was coming to work for the US on a daily basis. Tribism (tribal descrimination) was rampant in the Bayji area. Tribal corruption was also rampant and wide spread. One of our terps was fired from the Kirkuk Police Department because he was arresting Sunni for trafficking guns and explosives. He was Shia and this didn't set well with the Sunni Chief of Police. Same deceipt is happening here in Bahrain. Shia are causing all the uprising and gov't protests but they run around waving Bahrain flags and touting they are Bahraini first, yet choose to ignore Bahraini laws. And there are no Sunni protesting against the gov't, just Shia. This is from first hand accounts and info I've been tracking on the high side. |
|
To me, it's a question of values and responses to different situations.
Their social morels are not the same as ours. I don't pretend to know the tribal and/or ethnic issues of Iraq. All I can say is those from the Middle East are far more prone to over reacting to a perceived insult than the typically naive American. And they have no qualms about swindling or hoodwinking someone in a business deal. My perspective comes from first hand interaction with those born in the Middle East. From the pitch of a soccer field to drinking establishments to business dealings. Make no mistake, the clan/tribal influences exist in other nations to an extent those not raised with them in the US with WILL NEVER understand how much they affect our dealings with them. That extends from Iraq to Ghana, from Turkey to the Philippines. If it came between what is right or wrong even by their own religious standards, clans and tribes will come first. You think there is are tribal ties between Saddam Hussein or Iraq and King Hussein of Jordan? Or that Saudi Arabia is named after a sea, desert, or plain? It's named after the ruling family that will probably never be overthrown. They aren't holding power in Saudi Arabia because they believe in democracy. Our standards and values aren't believed in by the Arabs or any Middle Easterners. To even think they will some day ain't gonna happen IMHO. |
|
Quoted:
To me, it's a question of values and responses to different situations. Their social morels are not the same as ours. I don't pretend to know the tribal and/or ethnic issues of Iraq. All I can say is those from the Middle East are far more prone to over reacting to a perceived insult than the typically naive American. And they have no qualms about swindling or hoodwinking someone in a business deal. My perspective comes from first hand interaction with those born in the Middle East. From the pitch of a soccer field to drinking establishments to business dealings. Make no mistake, the clan/tribal influences exist in other nations to an extent those not raised with them in the US with WILL NEVER understand how much they affect our dealings with them. That extends from Iraq to Ghana, from Turkey to the Philippines. If it came between what is right or wrong even by their own religious standards, clans and tribes will come first. You think there is are tribal ties between Saddam Hussein or Iraq and King Hussein of Jordan? Or that Saudi Arabia is named after a sea, desert, or plain? It's named after the ruling family that will probably never be overthrown. They aren't holding power in Saudi Arabia because they believe in democracy. Our standards and values aren't believed in by the Arabs or any Middle Easterners. To even think they will some day ain't gonna happen IMHO. I experienced this first hand In both Bahrain and Saudi... |
|
A bit off topic but something that really stuck with me....
In 1991, I was on my way out of Bahrain. We stayed at a compound in Manama used for US military transitioning in and out of the area.. We stayed a night or two before our flight.... That place is a story in and of it's self... While there I saw 5-6 people doing grounds maintenance. One was supervising and the others would do the work. The supervisor would tell them exactly what to do, cut this, move that, etc.. They didn't do anything unless told and did it exactly as told. I was able to talk to one of them that spoke broken English. They were working their way to the US. They were all from Pakistan. They would bribe their way out of\into a country, work for a while and save up more money and do it again. I got the idea they had been up to this for years.. So anytime I hear someone talk down about this country and about how things here suck and they are owed something I invite them to go change places with someone like that.... I hope they made it... |
|
Steve, I gotta admit, my experience is closer to tangochaser. Both times I was in iraq, when we interogated someone for whatever reason we could seldomly tell if the "ali bobba" they were ratting out was an insurgent, muj or a tribe member/rival tribe member they owed money to, unless we had a good terp and sadly the only good terp we had was my first deployment. Im seeing our experiences as legit, but I also see our experiences following what General Mattis (USMC) dubbed as the "Three block war". Im sure your familiar with that term sir?
My $0.02 also based on experience. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Pullling out at the end of the year , Big Mistake , with the Obama and Dem in power, we will sit back and watch the Civil War take place , Jan 2012 It's gonna go back to the way it was when Saddam was alive - a nation full of thugs with the biggest and meanest thug becoming the boss. Nope Dan your dead wrong on that one. love him or hate him. Sadam was the Marshal Tito of the Middle East and kept Kurds, Shia and Sunni playing nicely with one another even though he had to crack some eggs to make that omelet. What you are going to see is a tribal civil war that Iran will be deciding who the victor is on. In the end the Shia will run the country totally and genocide will end up ensuing with Iraq being a satellite state of Iran. Saddam was a Sunni.
The biggest and most ruthless turd in a nation full of turds will surface and run the place. I can't speak to your experience in that part of the world. I spent a decade of my life living there and working there. not as a soldier all the time either. Sadam was a Suuni he was also secular . The key word being secular. He kept Islam in check in Iraq. The Shia are a much larger threat to peace in the Middle East than any other tribe though the Wahabi are a close second. |
|
I won't dispute the deep rift between Arab and Kurd or Sunni, Shia and Chaldean. I also won't compare the virtues of Islamic culture to our own. I prefer ours of course.
I will stand by the historical perspective that Iraqis always seem to work it out and would rather fight the outsider first, especially the Persian. As to tribalism, it is more defined outside of Baghdad than within. Sadr, while worthy of a bullet, hardly represents the sentiments of all Shia. Most think of him as the opportunist he is unless living in the squalor of Sadr City. Given that Baghdad is 25% of the population, secularism will remain pretty strong. You must also take into account the political realities that Iraq's new government faces. Syria (Arab Sunni), Jordan (Arab Sunni), Saudi Arabia (Arab Sunni), and Kuwait (Arab Sunni) will have a great interest in both stability and fair treatment of the Arab Sunni minority within Iraq. All are favorable trading partners. Iran (Persian Shia) is a major competitor economically, politically and militarily. It is hard to imagine an alliance here given the other nations bordering Iraq. Turkey (mostly Indo-European Hanifite Sunni), will take the majority of Iraq's position on prohibiting Kurdish independence. And with Turkey being a NATO ally, we are bound by treaty to protect Turkey from attack which puts Kurdish PKK and independent groups at a decided disadvantage. So, we can speculate all we want on the Arab street, the Kurdish resistance, the Shia militant or the Persian invader, but the socio-economic realities will keep the present government pretty much on track. That is not mention the new beneficial engagement with the West on economic and political levels. I just do not see the civil war looming with the present situation. Could we fumble it? Sure. But Iraq still will have control of its own destiny. I just don't see them turning loose of the opportunity. Steve |
|
Quoted:
I won't dispute the deep rift between Arab and Kurd or Sunni, Shia and Chaldean. I also won't compare the virtues of Islamic culture to our own. I prefer ours of course. I will stand by the historical perspective that Iraqis always seem to work it out and would rather fight the outsider first, especially the Persian. As to tribalism, it is more defined outside of Baghdad than within. Sadr, while worthy of a bullet, hardly represents the sentiments of all Shia. Most think of him as the opportunist he is unless living in the squalor of Sadr City. Given that Baghdad is 25% of the population, secularism will remain pretty strong. You must also take into account the political realities that Iraq's new government faces. Syria (Arab Sunni), Jordan (Arab Sunni), Saudi Arabia (Arab Sunni), and Kuwait (Arab Sunni) will have a great interest in both stability and fair treatment of the Arab Sunni minority within Iraq. All are favorable trading partners. Iran (Persian Shia) is a major competitor economically, politically and militarily. It is hard to imagine an alliance here given the other nations bordering Iraq. Turkey (mostly Indo-European Hanifite Sunni), will take the majority of Iraq's position on prohibiting Kurdish independence. And with Turkey being a NATO ally, we are bound by treaty to protect Turkey from attack which puts Kurdish PKK and independent groups at a decided disadvantage. So, we can speculate all we want on the Arab street, the Kurdish resistance, the Shia militant or the Persian invader, but the socio-economic realities will keep the present government pretty much on track. That is not mention the new beneficial engagement with the West on economic and political levels. I just do not see the civil war looming with the present situation. Could we fumble it? Sure. But Iraq still will have control of its own destiny. I just don't see them turning loose of the opportunity. Steve Sir while i tend to lend a little more credit to opinions like yours versus others. If you never set foot in the country before the great unpleaseantness then it is hard to have any frame of context. Thats my belief and I will stand by it. Again Sadam was very much like a Marshal Tito. Ask anyone in the former Yugoslavia if they liked him ... They will all say hell no . But he was cohesive for the country and kept it united. I have no illusions about Iraqis , or Saudis, Or Syrians . For that matter any of them. However for anyone to think they understand or want the classical definition of democracy is fool hardy and absurd. Strife always ensues in that part of the world. Our best hope for lasting peace in the Middle East died the day we threw the Shah of Iran under the bus because Carter did not have the minerals to do what was right. |
|
Of course we are all prisoners of our own experience. I fought in the Balkans. I fought in Iraq. Never lived at either place prior to my excursions. Have studied military history all my life and have a masters degree in it. One thing I do know is that history is a pretty good predictor of future events. Iraq has a history of secular governance, reconciliation and maintaining their borders. I don't see that changing short of outside influence. Given their borders, I don't see any adjoining nation able to pull off the division of Iraq and I don't see Iraq dividing itself. Factions vying for control, perhaps. But none can prevail without outside help. Hence the summation that Iraq will stay together.
BTW, Tito's failure was not in his governance but in his establishing a succession to his ideas. He was not even Serb. He was Croatian and a national resistance folk hero. He believed in amalgamation into a Yugoslavian nation that others abandoned upon his death.. Completely different set of circumstances. |
|
Self rule for the Arab states is a relatively new thing since the break up of the Ottoman Empire right after WWI.
Iraq as a nation is way less than 100 years old. It has some growing to do but the limitations and success they will have will depend on it's people. And from what little I know of the Arabs, it's the biggest cut throat who will reach the top of the hill. And I mean literally a cut throat with no scruples i.e. Saddam Hussein. I don't think any democracy will last long over there. Time will tell. |
|
And here we go...!
Iraq Issues Arrest Warrant for Sunni Vice President http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/12/19/iraq-issues-arrest-warrant-for-sunni-vice-president/?test=latestnews |
|
Quoted:
And here we go...! Iraq Issues Arrest Warrant for Sunni Vice President http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/12/19/iraq-issues-arrest-warrant-for-sunni-vice-president/?test=latestnews There is a huge void now in Iraqi politics once the US troops left. The stability we provided is gone. The struggle for power will most likely get out of hand with sectarian violence and individual assassinations. It is very much like the collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 1980s. The stability they provided for their satellite states ended and places like Yugoslavia went nuts with massive violence. I only hope it does not go that way in Iraq. |
|
Quoted:
Of course we are all prisoners of our own experience. I fought in the Balkans. I fought in Iraq. Never lived at either place prior to my excursions. Have studied military history all my life and have a masters degree in it. One thing I do know is that history is a pretty good predictor of future events. Iraq has a history of secular governance, reconciliation and maintaining their borders. I don't see that changing short of outside influence. Given their borders, I don't see any adjoining nation able to pull off the division of Iraq and I don't see Iraq dividing itself. Factions vying for control, perhaps. But none can prevail without outside help. Hence the summation that Iraq will stay together. BTW, Tito's failure was not in his governance but in his establishing a succession to his ideas. He was not even Serb. He was Croatian and a national resistance folk hero. He believed in amalgamation into a Yugoslavian nation that others abandoned upon his death.. Completely different set of circumstances. Sir while i appreciate your experience , I was once a soldier myself. Military history is a very narrow field of view of the greater scope of things. War is as the old saying goes a failure of diplomacy. As fot Tito and Sadam you are partially correct in saying what you did , but you miss my point entirely, they were both cohesive elements in their respective nations for good or bad. Once they were gone it created a split. Im not for one side or the other it is just the way it is. Also historically the Persian influence in the Middle East has been one that has been both divivse and catalytic. As far back as written history records for that matter. As for the division of Iraq the Kurdish element alone makes that a genuine possibility as they have always wanted autonomy and are willing to go to war for it. |