Conquer Club

In the US Congress, there was an idea that it would be best to partition Iraq into three states based on predominant religion (basically spit up Iraq so they will stop fighting each other). What are your views on this?

My views are that we can't possibly reshape the political structure in Iraq. We don't live there, we don't know the history, and we can't possibly make this type of decision for the people there. And I agreed with the invasion of Iraq, and I agree with continuing the fight there now.

Serbia wrote:I agreed with the invasion of Iraq, and I agree with continuing the fight there now.

Then how is it you were allowed on CC?

I'll hold off on the poll for now, because I know a little of Iraq's history. But I also have to agree with him on us being there, we need to stabalize some more before we begin pulling out.

luns101 wrote:

Serbia wrote:I agreed with the invasion of Iraq, and I agree with continuing the fight there now.

Then how is it you were allowed on CC?

I lied on my entry form.

Serbia wrote:My views are that we can't possibly reshape the political structure in Iraq. We don't live there, we don't know the history, and we can't possibly make this type of decision for the people there. And I agreed with the invasion of Iraq, and I agree with continuing the fight there now.

out of curiosity, what do you believe should be the reason for the united states continuing to stay in Iraq.

im not saying we dont need to, but if shaping the political future of Iraq isnt part of it, then what is one of the main purposes?

We can HELP shape the landscape in Iraq, but we alone can not completely reshape the nation. Now that we're there, we naturally have to help the government figure things out and get it running again. Does this make any more sense?

But also, the main reason for being there is I believe we're involved in a global religious war, that we are really unwilling participants in. Radical Muslims have declared war on the Western culture, of which we're the symbol. So I'd rather fight on their turf, than have them gear up for another 9/11 here in the USA or Europe (or anywhere else).

... Sadly, I believe we are doomed to failure in Iraq, unless something very big changes.

... The war, everything even remotely associated with it has become so politicized that real efforts to kick arse and win seem quite remote.

... I blame the media. Not any particular bias (though bias certainly does exist). It's just that every little thing is selecteively televised to Americans... Does anybody think another Dresden could happen today? No way. Hiroshima? Forget it.

... (of course such bombings are not relevant to this war, but I think the jist of my opinion is clear enough).

...

Serbia wrote:We can HELP shape the landscape in Iraq, but we alone can not completely reshape the nation. Now that we're there, we naturally have to help the government figure things out and get it running again. Does this make any more sense?

But also, the main reason for being there is I believe we're involved in a global religious war, that we are really unwilling participants in. Radical Muslims have declared war on the Western culture, of which we're the symbol. So I'd rather fight on their turf, than have them gear up for another 9/11 here in the USA or Europe (or anywhere else).

i dont necesarily agree, but thanks for clarifying.

Anytime, GT. I just think it's elitest of us to think we can force something upon a people with a different culture than we have, and expect them to just accept it.

Serbia wrote:Anytime, GT. I just think it's elitest of us to think we can force something upon a people with a different culture than we have, and expect them to just accept it.

... It worked on the Japanese.

...

Nobunaga wrote:

Serbia wrote:Anytime, GT. I just think it's elitest of us to think we can force something upon a people with a different culture than we have, and expect them to just accept it.

... It worked on the Japanese.

...

So did 2 A-bombs. But I don't think we will be doing that kind of a thing for awhile.

Nobunaga wrote:

Serbia wrote:Anytime, GT. I just think it's elitest of us to think we can force something upon a people with a different culture than we have, and expect them to just accept it.

... It worked on the Japanese.

...

Good point.

frogger4 wrote:In the US Congress, there was an idea that it would be best to partition Iraq into three states based on predominant religion (basically spit up Iraq so they will stop fighting each other). What are your views on this?

This would be comparable to England in the 1860s looking at America and partition it off into 2 seperate countries based on their views on slavery. A: It wouldn't work, at all. and B: it would be utterly ridiculous.


I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with all the stupid shit Serbia just spewed out except for one part: It is very elitest to think we have or should be allowed to force something upon another country with a different culture than us. For the US to even consider taking this sort of action is perposterous, downright silly, and very sad.

riggable wrote:I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with all the stupid shit Serbia just spewed out except for one part: It is very elitest to think we have or should be allowed to force something upon another country with a different culture than us. For the US to even consider taking this sort of action is perposterous, downright silly, and very sad.

Yeah, this is more like the CC I've grown accustomed to.

luns101 wrote:

riggable wrote:I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with all the stupid shit Serbia just spewed out except for one part: It is very elitest to think we have or should be allowed to force something upon another country with a different culture than us. For the US to even consider taking this sort of action is perposterous, downright silly, and very sad.

Yeah, this is more like the CC I've grown accustomed to.

I agree with him what are you saying?

First, the US should never have went into Iraq. It's kinda like the kid with his fingers in too many cookie jars, eventually one will snap shut and said kid will lose a finger. I'm extremely left wing with Marxist/Utopian Communist ideals, I'll spare you any more hoopla.

But, since we're already there, we can't just pull out and hope for the best (pun intended). The proverbial pot has been stirred, we can't just walk away and let in dissolve into further sectarian violence until some other dictator steps up to take the reigns that makes Saddam look like a lovable puppy dog. There's still enough Kurds left for a hell of a genocide run...

We've done enough damage already, the final step into destroying (another) nation is to segregate it. You think the Iraqis are pissed off at us now, wait till we bust their (key word, THEIR) country into a few chunks and start telling them who can live where based on their beliefs.

Solution? I don't f*cking know, what do I look like, a poli sci major? I just know that this isn't the right one.

Since this is apparently a random political debate thread....seems fitting enough.

When looking at American Foreign Policy, Is it realisitc feasible for the US to continue to support Isreal in the fashion that it currently does? Considering the major amount of resources that are required and the hostility that it causes among the arab neighbors in the region, at what point should the US consider cutting ties to a degree? Or, if the palestinans were to ever gain suffrage, should the US continuing supporting what would no longer be a Jewish state?

frogger4 wrote:In the US Congress, there was an idea that it would be best to partition Iraq into three states based on predominant religion (basically spit up Iraq so they will stop fighting each other). What are your views on this?

well, it was us who drew up the borders (with the French) and forced them all to live together in the first place.

luns101 wrote:

riggable wrote:I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with all the stupid shit Serbia just spewed out except for one part: It is very elitest to think we have or should be allowed to force something upon another country with a different culture than us. For the US to even consider taking this sort of action is perposterous, downright silly, and very sad.

Yeah, this is more like the CC I've grown accustomed to.

Simply reflecting the overall opinion Worldwide

got tonkaed wrote:Since this is apparently a random political debate thread....seems fitting enough.

When looking at American Foreign Policy, Is it realisitc feasible for the US to continue to support Isreal in the fashion that it currently does? Considering the major amount of resources that are required and the hostility that it causes among the arab neighbors in the region, at what point should the US consider cutting ties to a degree? Or, if the palestinans were to ever gain suffrage, should the US continuing supporting what would no longer be a Jewish state?

The US should NEVER cut ties with Israel. (It will always be a Jewish state)

frogger4 wrote:In the US Congress, there was an idea that it would be best to partition Iraq into three states based on predominant religion (basically spit up Iraq so they will stop fighting each other). What are your views on this?

Its an absurd idea. The religious distribution doesnt sit tidily geographically. Though the South is mainly Shia the West mainly Sunni and the North Kurdish, there is a significant mixing of ethnic groups in each region - what would these people do? Move from their ancestral homelands?

Though in saying this I do agree with the creation of an independent Kurdistan, created from territory in Northern Iraq and Southern Turkey.

sorry you should minus one vote from the yes column, i thought it was a pole as to whether a random political debate thread was a good idea, my mistake.

jay_a2j wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:Since this is apparently a random political debate thread....seems fitting enough.

When looking at American Foreign Policy, Is it realisitc feasible for the US to continue to support Isreal in the fashion that it currently does? Considering the major amount of resources that are required and the hostility that it causes among the arab neighbors in the region, at what point should the US consider cutting ties to a degree? Or, if the palestinans were to ever gain suffrage, should the US continuing supporting what would no longer be a Jewish state?

The US should NEVER cut ties with Israel. (It will always be a Jewish state)

i guess im just curious as to why it should never cut ties with isreal as thats probably the main perspective behind keeping teh alliance....

and i doubt it will always be a jewish state, especially if people are serious about the peace process (which they may not be truth be told)

flashleg8 wrote:

frogger4 wrote:In the US Congress, there was an idea that it would be best to partition Iraq into three states based on predominant religion (basically spit up Iraq so they will stop fighting each other). What are your views on this?

Its an absurd idea. The religious distribution doesnt sit tidily geographically. Though the South is mainly Shia the West mainly Sunni and the North Kurdish, there is a significant mixing of ethnic groups in each region - what would these people do? Move from their ancestral homelands?

Though in saying this I do agree with the creation of an independent Kurdistan, created from territory in Northern Iraq and Southern Turkey.

I agree with the first bit. It will turn into another India/Pakistan with thousands if not millions killed when running away to their religious country. Also, if they are made separate countries, the extremists will probably come out on top and this will lead to real wars, rather then underworld sectarian violence (which is actually improving, partially thanks to the surge).

As to creating a Kurdistan, I actually think that a country as such would be a good idea, but its just not feasible. Turkey is a useful ally of the west, and they are completely opposed to the idea and will not give up land, and to force them to do it will just increase the power of the extremists within the country.