Well given I argued for a three state federation long before the Americans pulled out, it would be hard to argue for something different!

I also argued against dismantling the Iraqi defense force or the entire government!

The government could have simply been expunged of the problematic elements. And just asked the public service to just do what a public service does best?

However that's history and can't be changed although learnt from!

And the first lesson simply has to be a more inclusive less bombastic government.

Even so, the Sunnis confront a far more immediate problem for them, and that is the involvement in the conflict of Iran; which can only ever compound their current problems!

Moreover and given their history; they don't do peace very well or even something as rational as throwing in with their Kurdish neighbors; as a counterbalance to Shiite control?

And wholeheartedly, rather than some placating tokenism to gain some very temporary advantage!

It has to be all or nothing; or just hand the place to Iran! Understand?

I mean, what will they gain if their traditional homeland becomes the home base of Isis!

They and the Shiite now have a common and deadly enemy which would destroy them both, and which should therefore be defeated by them fighting shoulder to shoulder as brothers in arms; and for nothing less than their simple survival.

And as Iraqi brothers fighting a common and incredibly deadly foe, form that comradrie that will make them more trusting of the other and a way to open the door to an essential three state federation!

With the war won they still need to work out how to win the peace, and that is best achieved if they continue to stand shoulder to shoulder against all comers, who would seek to take any part of a larger Iraq away from any part of this or that ethnic community!

Who before they are Shiite, Sunni or Kurd, are Iraqi!
Rhrosty.

I agree with the sentiment, but I pity the bugger that has to draw the boundaries.

Shadow Minister.
Not an easy task to be sure, but essential nonetheless. And best achieved by locking the chief ministers in a room and not letting them out until they'd nutted out a workable solution and final boundaries they could all live with!

And preferably before anyone got too full in the face!
Rhrosty.

I agree with this article of the way the Sunnis view
Isis and a new sunni state.

Spot on I think.
The Sunnis were dispossessed of a country that was
controlled by Saddam and his army. A sunni run state.

The danger of America tryng to set up a democracy with two
tribes with such huge equal numbers was always doomed to fail
I thought before America even invaded.

DEmocracy fails, at the point where one tribe outnumbers the other
and can automatically assume power even at the ballet box.
We are seeing this kind of civil war in Ukraine at the moment.

I think America should support a Sunni state but then of course
Iran will be their enemy. but what else is new. Also some of
the ISIS followers would have an epiletic fit before they would
do a deal with America.

The trouble is also, that Isis supporters are committing terrorist
acts on the homesoil of America and it's allies.
Which causes hostility in the Western civilian populations.

Its a difficult situation, one I think America and its allies
should allow to be played out and settled by the Arabs themselves.

We should fight the terrorists and harmdoers on our homesoil
with every means at our disposal but pull out of the middle
East and let them fight it out. Ban all immigration from there
until enemy agents are no longer threatening us, and cancel
passports of those who are caught.

That's my view of the situation and this article agrees with
that thinking to a big extent.

There you are, I agree with this Muslim article writer, usually I
am on the other side.

Rhosty,

The populations are so intermingled that that is unlikely to work.

Well given Quebec has a fair mix of english speaking Canadians, I'm not sure your as always negative view is the right one S.M, and particularly given it still remains untried!

And while there's intermingling, and intermarriage, as is the case in the Ukraine, some level of real autonomy might well solve currently intractable difference; and in many areas.

Currently the Shiite are in the majority in the south, the Sunnis are the most numerous in the middle, and the Kurds more or less control the north.

The only other real solution, interminable war and a nation endlessly divided and ripe plucking for entities just like a barbaric ISIS!

We've always had experts who invariably knew all the reasons something wouldn't work/shouldn't be tried, and if we listened to them S.M, we'd still be living in caves and running our food down with a stone tied on a stick!?

And judging on the continual flow of countervailing garbage flowing fulsomely from St Petersburg, nothing would be tried, but particularly that settles down and area rich in exportable oil, and able to be produced and profitably exported at well below Russian production costs!

Or just provide true economic independence free of the almost continual interference/imputation of those with a massive vested interest in continuing/endless unrest!
Rhrosty.

The closest example is the separation of British East India into India and Pakistan. Millions died moving, and 3 wars were subsequently fought over the boundaries.

You see I have never burnt the Koran bible catholic Torah but when I read these books Allah ,Jesus and johvah appeared .nail marks appeared on my hands when I was very sick and I recovered .you iraqi science and religion both work . I prayed to Saint Paul in
Malta as the Maltese have faith and work hard hard