Comments on: Winning Iraq From Kurdistan?

By: Tom around the web (Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog)

Tom around the web (Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog) — Wed, 16 May 2007 17:12:26 +0000

[...] + Outside the Beltway linked The far-too-successful nation-building that is Kurdistan. + And referenced Tom in his article for the The New Individualist (Ayn Rand alert! ;-) + MountainRunner linked Give Mia some credit. + Say Anything linked The far-too-successful nation-building that is Kurdistan. + Falsafa, Njaro, Mawazo, na Vako Zangu (how's your Swahili?) linked My prediction on Africa Command coming true a bit faster than I expected. + ShrinkWrapped linked More on Robb. + Pacific Empire linked Connectivity at the price of content control. + Siberian.Ws reviewed (?) PNM. + Baudrillard's Bastard linked The future of politics is all about who gets access to technology. + Face Journal-Picayune reviewed 'The State of the World' article. + Ethan Zuckerman of WorldChanging linked the Pop!Tech talk. + Our 21st Century Challenge mentioned PNM. [...]

By: UK Political Blog Feeds

UK Political Blog Feeds — Wed, 09 May 2007 08:42:02 +0000

[...] But the truth is nothing much really has changed and isn Are We Overselling Iraqi Kurdistan? [ 07-May-07 8:28pm ] [ T ] [ G ] [ N ] [ L ] Author: Dave Schuler via OTBI know, basically, nothing about Iraqi Kurdistan. I honestly doubt that Tom Barnett knows a great deal more.I do know that the English language Iraqi Kurdish blogosphere is moribund. Its last gasps were complaints about suppression of press freedom in Iraqi Kurdistan. And I also know that there?s a different narrative about what?s going there than the one you?ve probably been hearing. In this contrasting narrative Iraqi Kurdistan is not a burgeoning democracy but a highly traditional, clannish place in which, like in much of the rest of Iraq, tribal interests are highly influential if not dominant, characterizing the two ?political parties? in Iraqi Kurdistan as actually tribes, each led by its traditional tribal leader.I?ve been trying for some time to identify and buttonhole someone who actually has legitimate knowledge and expertise on Iraqi Kurdistan, particularly Kurdish politics, without much luck. Any suggestions?I?m concerned that a major permanent U. S. military presence in Iraqi Kurdistan would tend to destabilize Turkey, not a particularly positive development. It would, however, put pressure on both Iran and Syria, which IMO would be a positive development.Tags: Iraq Conflict Commentary : Walking on a tightrope [ 07-May-07 7:13pm ] [ T ] [ G ] [ N ] [ L ] Musharraf : Walking on a tightrope by Dr. Ghayur AyubCommentary on the France Elects Sarkozy: Will Things Change? [ 07-May-07 7:00pm ] [ T ] [ G ] [ N ] [ L ] via More Violence in France [ 07-May-07 6:50pm ] [ T ] [ G ] [ N ] [ L ] Mainstream media apparently have better things to report, because there?s almost nothing on the wires about the disturbances in France. Luckily we have the blogosphere, and No Pasaran is on top of the news as the ?youths? begin ratcheting up the violence and Islamic leaders issue threats: L.A. Times Comes Around on Iraq: Day 1466 [ 07-May-07 6:45pm ] [ T ] [ G ] [ N ] [ L ] Author: Meteor Bladesvia Dailykos:Just a few months ago, Los Angeles Times's editorialists were backing Mister Bush's splurge of blood and bucks in Iraq, arguing that it would be foolish not to try one more time to turn the disastrous American occupation of that country into something ... less disastrous. Today, they gave up. Some excerpts:Bring them home [...]

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 07 May 2007 17:20:16 +0000

On the contrary, the US has been there since 1991.

Protecting them from an external threat. The military is GOOD at this. But it is the ethnic uniformity, plus military protection, that has led to success in most of Kurdistan.

But, as Michael Totten reports from Kirkuk, the Kurds have just as many problems with the Arabs and Turkmen as we see between the Sunni and Shia in Baghdad.

Forced partition in these mixed areas seems like the only alternative to civil war.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Mon, 07 May 2007 17:09:00 +0000

It may be that a major reason the Kurds are doing so well is that the US is not there.

On the contrary, the US has been there since 1991.

By: spencer

spencer — Mon, 07 May 2007 16:01:30 +0000

Do you have any evidence the Kurds would want us there any more than the rest of Iraq does?

It may be that a major reason the Kurds are doing so well is that the US is not there.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 07 May 2007 15:09:30 +0000

Certainly not my first choice, given that withdrawal from the so-called Green Zone would be seen as a defeat.

I'm curious, short of absolute stability and complete eradication of all terrorism activities by any group, when would you consider leaving the Green Zone (or Iraq all together) not a defeat? For you guys (Right/Republicans), is there any withdraw situation that you would consider a non-defeat, that is even remotely possible in reality? I'm not trying to start a flame-war or anything here (really, I'm not), but I have yet to be told by a war supporter of any "victory" scenario short of turning Iraq into Kansas.