Hey guys. I was thinking about Iraq Study Group Report, which was welcomed by Prime Ministers, Tony Blair and John Howard, however was rejected by the Bush Administration. Bush chose to enlarge US troops rather than withdraw them like Baker-Hamilton commission suggested. I would personally tend to the strategy of withdrawal, however by securing that Iran, which is extremely hostile against the West and Israel, would not take over the control of the Middle Eastern matters. There would be nothing worse than that. By the way, the solution Obama promotes is clearly wrong. The U.S. cannot just withdraw the troops and leave a big black hole behind them. It would harm U.S. interest in the Middle East and worldwide, (and generally the interests of the Western civilization as a whole). I think that the immediate result of a sudden withdrawal would be another terrorist attack on the U.S. soil, this time with weapons of mass destruction (see recent reports by EastWest Institute: http://www.ewi.info/tempPDF/tn7.pdf and Chatham House http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/pdf/researc...s/CBRN0207.pdf) In my opinion the solution would be a withdrawal (eventually we will have to unless McCain becomes the next President) however through strengthening the position in the region of Turkey, which is US ally and which presently endeavors to join the European Union. It can be done in the way it is described in this research: http://www.europeancourier.org/27.htm Talking briefly: Iraq should be partitioned in two parts: Iraqi Kurdistan and the rest. Then the Iraqi Kurdistan should be joined to Turkey which would expand to include that territory. Turkey would be transformed into a federal state (like the United States) and would contain the heartland Turkey and the Kurdistan. The Kurdistan would be a part of the federation. It would have enormous impact on Iran and Syria (the biggest terrorist supporters), because they have huge Kurdish minorities within their territories. As a result of the creation of Kurdistan within federal Turkey, Iranian and Syrian Kurds would demand the same thing within Iran or Syria or might start secessionist movements. That would cause Iran and Syria to focus on their international affairs rather than on disturbing situation in Iraq. Turkey would become regional superpower and would overshadow Iran; moreover because the Kurdish issue would be resolved satisfactory, Turkey would meet human rights requirements of the Council of Europe and would be able to join the European Union. Turkey would become the role model of democracy in the Middle East (Iraq will never be such a one even if Bush remained in power for the next two terms) and would gain control over the Kurdistan within their borders. Therefore there would be no new Kurdish-Turkish conflict.

I think there has to be a staged withdrawal at some stage and that Middle East forces should be responsible for their own security, but do not think that it will be possible to any large degree for the forseeable.

An Iraq left to itself at the moment would implode and take the rest of the mis east with it.

I think a diplomatic solution, recruiting the support and participation of 'friendly' nations in the region is the only solution that will have any long term benefits. Getting a UN peacekeeping force with most of the ground troops made up of middle east Nations could be one solution, but one that is at danger from the Sunni/Shia conflict.

US/Coalition forces could remain nearby to act as a check to the system, but I really think that we have to push for a mainly diplomatic solution, and if that includes Iran, Syria etc then so be it.



That's the biggest problem with what you propose. Turkey has been 'in conflict' with the Kurds for decades and neither side is likely to accept a state within Turkey called Kurdistan. I would need some more convincing that this is possible and that it would actually be in our interest for Turkey to control it.

"A Kurdish state formed from Iraqi Kurdistan is also doubtful. Turkey would see such a country as a threat to her security. The creation of such a state would start a secessionist movement in Turkish Kurdistan. The federalization of Iraq would have the same effect. Consequently the Turks have insisted that the oil-rich Kirkuk region not be included in Kurdish territory in an Iraqi federation. Kirkuk and its oil would strengthen the Kurdish state and add to its attractiveness as a role model for Kurds beyond Iraq. Turkish Kurds would demand autonomy from Ankara, in fact federalizing Turkey. From there it would only be a step to uniting the Kurdistans of Iraq and Turkey into a single country."

I think that the idea of creating and supporting a Kurdish state in the region could be a very good one as it could 'focus the attention' of Syria and Iran as they would face stregnthened succession movements to join the new Kurdistan.

Would it not be useful if the new Kurdish state looked to the coalition for support and allowed coalition forces to set up military bases in the region - less need for Saudi bases and a hell of a good launching point for Iran, Iraq and Syria if the multinational peace keeping force don't play ball.

A Kurdish state would require the support of Turkey, but if the US/EU was to base military power in Kurdistan and tell the Turks to accept it or front up I think you would find the US military threat and EU economic threat would soon put them in line.

The US then has a friendly state grateful for its existence to help provide a stable military presence in the region. Iran and Syria are 'destablised' and the area of Iraq that is left to 'international' forces to monitor is smaller, the oil rich areas of Kurdistan are friendly to the US/Coalition as they depend on it for support.

Problem could be the creation of another 'artificial' state (in the eyes of some others) in the region. Israel and Kurdistan could then become the focus for a future generation of terrorists - another example of Arab lands being stolen by the West to give to people who have no right being there.

It could face an invasion by Syria/Iran looking to protect their own 'Kurdish' areas, but that could be a good one all round as they would both have to put up or shut up. A risky move, but one that could force some mid east soul searching and create another friendly, stable democracy in the region.