Bush says dividing Iraq into separate regions would be a mistake

[kskiska]

President George W. Bush says he believes dividing Iraq into three separate regions — Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni — with a central government in Baghdad would be a mistake.

Iraqis did not vote for partition when they approved a new constitution and government, Bush said in Saturday's Wall Street Journal.

(snip)

Dismissing the possibility the top House Democrat, Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, could rise to House speaker if the Republican Party lost its majority, the president said, "That's not going to happen."

"I just don't believe it," the president was quoted as saying in the Journal. "I believe the Republicans will end up being — running the House and the Senate."

more…
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/09/09/america/NA_GEN_US_Bush_Interview.php

[grytpype]

1. Well heavens to betsy, we sure would want to make a mistake over there!

Just think of the consequences if a mistake of some sort were made in Iraq!

[aquart]

2. Okay, that's believing two impossible things before breakfast.

What are the other four?

[SKKY]

3. Unfortunately, that may be the only solution left, thanks to yours,

Rumsfelds, and Cheney's wonderful, insightful plan to execute the war on terror.

[AlamoDemoc]

4. the Kurds need a homeland Mr. president...you told them so, and encoured

The Kurds are highly populated on all-sides of the border; with Iraq, with Turkey, Iran, and Syria...you allowed the kurds to have a freedom....and you allowed Iraq to be a huge franchise cafe of all sides.

[dipsydoodle]

5. Given that it's got

sweet fuck all to do him why don't he just keep his nose out.

There's an old saying over here "Don't be a **** all of your life - give yourself a 10 second break".

[reprobate]

6. The problem with splitting Iraq three ways is that the Sunni

regions have no or little oil. Therefore the Shias and the Kurds will wind up with all the oil renenue and the Sunnis will have nothing to generate money with.

Nothing would encourage a civil war more than this.

[John Q. Citizen]

12. I think civil war and the break up of Iraq is exactly what the

neocons expect and have been working to achieve. They just can't come out and say it though.

[Ian David]

24. Can't the Sunis just learn to do telephone tech support?

"Hello, thank you for calling Dell Customer Service..."

[Human Torch]

7. And the LAST thing Junior would want to do is make a mistake...

...like, for instance, invading and occupying Iraq to take down a guy who had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Wow, what a mistake THAT would be. We really dodged a bullet on THAT one.

:silly:

[bluestateguy]

8. Well then I guess it won't happen

Because the real decisions about Iraq are being made in the West Wing of the White House.

[Donnachaidh]

9. well hell -- then Cheney and his pals will have to bribe MORE

people for longterm leases on the oil fields at a cent a gallon!

We wouldn't want THAT now, would we?:sarcasm:

[ananda]

10. umm, the whole mess is one huge Bush mistake!

If Iran does decide to divide up, BushInc will have no control over the matter.

I'd be laughing if this weren't so tragic... all those people dead; so much art,
culture, and infrastructure ruined; a once moderate people now in the grip
of the rigid fundies...

... oh wait, now I'm confused. This could be Texas, much of America I'm
describing. Ouch.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. I think the plan all along has been the eventual break up of Iraq. Why

would the coalition behave as it has if that wasn't the goal?

Remember when the Shia government caught those British special ops guys driving around Basura in a car rigged as a car bomb, and the British Army had to drive a tank into the jail to spring them out?

Why little to no reconstruction?

Why not enough troops to actually occupy and keep the peace?

A break up is exactly what the Coalition is working for.

[AlamoDemoc]

14. Good point...BTW, whatever happened to those Brit terrorists?

[John Q. Citizen]

18. Probably promoted, lol. I don't know though. They were busted out

then the story seems to have vanished.

[remfan]

28. It WAS the original plan pre-Bremer

They had 3 americans picked to be the interim heads of 3 districts (north, middle, south). Of course, the original-original plan was to be greeted with flowers and candy, pack up the majority of troops by September (draw down to about 40,000), be home by Thanksgiving 2003, and then marching towards Iran (and/or Syria) in time for the 2004 fall campaign.

Nothing that has happened with our Iraq "policy" since April-May 2003 had been planned for. The fact that Iraqis were actually FIGHTING BACK in the first 3 days took these fuckwits by surprise, and everything after has been nothing but trying to put a good PR face on each disaster as it happened.

[rodeodance]

13. well, gee mr. Bush--thre is such a thing as an amendment to a constitution

[krispos42]

16. He does not get that concept.

Like, say, the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 14th amendments to our Constitution, and looks like he might also be working on not getting the 16th and repealing the 22nd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_US_Constitution

[krispos42]

15. If Bush says it's a mistate, then it's the right thing to do

I mean, it's just that obvious, sadly. I mean, how else can I put it?

[John Q. Citizen]

19. Do you now believe bush? My take is he wants them to

break up, and he's lying when he says he doesn't.

It's not what they say. it's what they do that's the tip off.

[krispos42]

23. Reverse psychology? Or a double negative?

Hmmmm... his handlers might be starting to use that.

My personal opinion is that they want the oil in Iraq, but they want it later on. You see, the oil there has been less pumped than in other nations in the area. The Iran-Iraq War limited production, the invasion of Iraq and Desert Storm built on that, and the economic sanctions during the '90s kept production low. Also, Iraq is poorly explored for oil compared to other Middle Eastern nations.

So, if it takes a decade to bring Iraq up to speed, then that will occur after other MidEast oil sources have begun scraping the bottom of the barrel. So the people who are heavily invested in oil futures make out big time, contractors are happy, AND we get the oil flow once the rest of the MidEast is on the decline. Ta-Dah!

[John Q. Citizen]

25. Just straight up lying. bush can hardly say, "We want Iraq to break up

cause it's easier to manipulate small weak countries.

I don't think he's in a hurry to do this, necessarily. In fact he'd probably prefer a de facto breakup that still maintains an illusion that Iraq is still one country. Easier to maintain our vast military bases that way.

[Ezlivin]

17. What if we called them "states" and they were part of a union?

Perhaps that would work.

I seem to recall other democracies with a similar set-up.

[John Q. Citizen]

20. Yeah, and that led to civil war as I recall.....

[Ezlivin]

21. Really. The whole idea of a union of states just leads to more trouble

Next thing you know some freedom-loving asshat will be spouting off terms like "states rights" and "federal encroachments."

[VegasWolf]

22. Then clearly dividing Iraq is the correct thing to do. nt

[eccles12]

26. Bush said it? Now I know it's a good idea. He is always wrong. nt

[tabasco]

27. What ever happened to self-determination?

Why do the Iraqis need the USA to tell them what type of government to make?

After all, I thought we turned over "sovereignty" to them. :rofl: