<<We hear the term "Balkanization" frequently. The U.S. government has
stated that there will be no Balkanization of Iraq. However, U.S.
intervention in a solid and unified Yugoslavia of the 1980s
intentionally created the Balkanization of that area. Iraqization is
the logical extension of Balkanization, and it is occurring at a rapid
pace...>>
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=14539&s2=12
WHERE IS IRAQ?
Malcom Lagauche
August 12, 2005
Today, I had lunch with my Iraqi-American friend Tony. Naturally, the
subject of Iraq took up most of the conversation.
"You know what pisses me off the most?" Tony asked. Before I could
answer, he injected, "Today people are Shi'ite, Sunni, Kurd, Turkmen,
Chaldean, Assyrian. Nobody's an Iraqi. I grew up in Iraq and everybody
was an Iraqi then."
Tony then went on to describe the local Chaldean community in San
Diego. He basically breaks it down into two categories: the average
traitor; or the big traitor. The average traitors have accepted money
from the U.S. government to go to Iraq and translate. The big traitors
collaborate with the F.B.I.
Tony makes about $35,000 a year working up to 12 hours a day in his
own business. He has been offered an annual wage of $150,000 to go to
Iraq as a translator, but has refused. He says he would not be able to
live with himself if he accepted such employment. He then would be an
"average traitor."
I bring up this point because Iraq is falling apart quickly along
sectarian lines. On August 7, 2005, Al-Jazeera News ran an article
titled, "Iraq's Kurds to Insist on Federalism". Massoud Barzani is the
president of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish area. He held out little hope
that his people would be Iraqi. According to the article:
"We will not accept that Iraq's identity is Islamic," Barzani told the
autonomous Kurdistan parliament in Abril on Saturday. He also rejected
suggestions that Iraq be termed an Arab nation. "Let Arab Iraq be part
of the Arab nation — we are not," the Kurdish leader said.
Barzani's remarks drew criticism from the stooge Iraqi government.
Federalism will not work, they maintained. However, their message fell
upon deaf ears. On August 11, 2005, Al-Jazeera News published an
article called "Iraq Shia Leaders Call for Federal State." Same horse
dung, different group. The article stated:
Iraqi Shia leaders have called for a federal state of their own in the
south.
"Regarding federalism, we think that it is necessary to form one
entire region in the south," said Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of one
of the Shia Muslim parties in the Iraqi government.
Federalism was also favored by another Shia leader.
"Federalism has to be in all of Iraq. They are trying to prevent the
Shia from enjoying their own federalism," Hadi al-Amiri, head of the
Badr Brigades militia, told thousands of Shia gathered in the southern
city of Najaf.
This is quite a complicated scenario. The Kurds do not consider
themselves to be a part of an Arab country, a country that until March
2003 was considered the crown jewel of the Arab world. In addition,
the Kurds reject an Islamic government.
On the other hand, the Shia want an Islamic government. The
implications of varying cultures applying their own rules in a
supposed unified country are immense. Imagine a Kurd drinking a beer
at a local bar and then taking a few bottles with him when he went on
a trip to the south of Iraq. If he gets stopped in Najaf by a
policeman for a minor traffic violation and the cop sees the beer
bottles in the car, the Kurd will soon be sans cojones for possessing
alcohol.
I have read much about the federalism debate. A commonality is that
the word "Iraqi" is rarely, if ever seen. The Kurdish leaders and the
Shia leaders have openly stated that they are not interested in an
Iraqi agenda. So much for Bush's term "Operation Iraqi Freedom." There
are few Iraqis left in the south and north of Iraq.
There is one group, however, that has put Iraqi interests at the top
of its agenda: the Iraqi resistance. Instead of using the sectarian
term "Sunni," which many resistance members are, the word "Iraqi" is
always in the forefront.
The Kurds welcomed the U.S. invasion. They do not consider themselves
Arabs or want to be a part of an Arab country. Yet, they can now call
the shots that will dismember Iraq.
In the South, a major portion of the Shia leadership that has now come
forth is anything but Iraqi. They are Shia first and many spent years
in Iran, waiting for the day that Saddam was toppled. Their allegiance
definitely is not with Iraq.
We hear the term "Balkanization" frequently. The U.S. government has
stated that there will be no Balkanization of Iraq. However, U.S.
intervention in a solid and unified Yugoslavia of the 1980s
intentionally created the Balkanization of that area. Iraqization is
the logical extension of Balkanization, and it is occurring at a rapid
pace.
Someday, even the opponents of the Iraqi resistance will realize that
those who are fighting the U.S. occupation and their quisling allies
were the only true "Iraqis." The resisters are now pursuing their own
version of "Operation Iraqi Freedom."
Tony was right in his assessment of Iraqi expatriates living in the
San Diego area. It is only a reflection of what is going on today in
Iraq. Those in the stooge government are the big traitors, while those
who openly work with the occupiers as translators, cooks, policemen,
national guardsmen, and chauffeurs are the average traitors. They are
also the same people who have robbed Iraq of an Iraqi identity.
I find it quite curious that those who opposed Saddam Hussein now are
dismembering Iraq. This shows that they had no plan whatsoever for the
country, only the pursuit of their own selfish interests.
Before the illegal March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the country
represented much more than the sum of its different parts. It was Iraq
and Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athists made it worth fighting for.
Today, if you add up all its parts, Iraq represents much less than the
total of Iraq prior to March 2003.
:: Article nr. 14539 sent on 12-aug-2005 05:28 ECT
:: The address of this page is : www.uruknet.info?p=14539
:: The incoming address of this article is :
www.malcomlagauche.com/id1.html
stated that there will be no Balkanization of Iraq. However, U.S.
intervention in a solid and unified Yugoslavia of the 1980s
intentionally created the Balkanization of that area. Iraqization is
the logical extension of Balkanization, and it is occurring at a rapid
pace...>>
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=14539&s2=12
WHERE IS IRAQ?
Malcom Lagauche
August 12, 2005
Today, I had lunch with my Iraqi-American friend Tony. Naturally, the
subject of Iraq took up most of the conversation.
"You know what pisses me off the most?" Tony asked. Before I could
answer, he injected, "Today people are Shi'ite, Sunni, Kurd, Turkmen,
Chaldean, Assyrian. Nobody's an Iraqi. I grew up in Iraq and everybody
was an Iraqi then."
Tony then went on to describe the local Chaldean community in San
Diego. He basically breaks it down into two categories: the average
traitor; or the big traitor. The average traitors have accepted money
from the U.S. government to go to Iraq and translate. The big traitors
collaborate with the F.B.I.
Tony makes about $35,000 a year working up to 12 hours a day in his
own business. He has been offered an annual wage of $150,000 to go to
Iraq as a translator, but has refused. He says he would not be able to
live with himself if he accepted such employment. He then would be an
"average traitor."
I bring up this point because Iraq is falling apart quickly along
sectarian lines. On August 7, 2005, Al-Jazeera News ran an article
titled, "Iraq's Kurds to Insist on Federalism". Massoud Barzani is the
president of Iraq's autonomous Kurdish area. He held out little hope
that his people would be Iraqi. According to the article:
"We will not accept that Iraq's identity is Islamic," Barzani told the
autonomous Kurdistan parliament in Abril on Saturday. He also rejected
suggestions that Iraq be termed an Arab nation. "Let Arab Iraq be part
of the Arab nation — we are not," the Kurdish leader said.
Barzani's remarks drew criticism from the stooge Iraqi government.
Federalism will not work, they maintained. However, their message fell
upon deaf ears. On August 11, 2005, Al-Jazeera News published an
article called "Iraq Shia Leaders Call for Federal State." Same horse
dung, different group. The article stated:
Iraqi Shia leaders have called for a federal state of their own in the
south.
"Regarding federalism, we think that it is necessary to form one
entire region in the south," said Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of one
of the Shia Muslim parties in the Iraqi government.
Federalism was also favored by another Shia leader.
"Federalism has to be in all of Iraq. They are trying to prevent the
Shia from enjoying their own federalism," Hadi al-Amiri, head of the
Badr Brigades militia, told thousands of Shia gathered in the southern
city of Najaf.
This is quite a complicated scenario. The Kurds do not consider
themselves to be a part of an Arab country, a country that until March
2003 was considered the crown jewel of the Arab world. In addition,
the Kurds reject an Islamic government.
On the other hand, the Shia want an Islamic government. The
implications of varying cultures applying their own rules in a
supposed unified country are immense. Imagine a Kurd drinking a beer
at a local bar and then taking a few bottles with him when he went on
a trip to the south of Iraq. If he gets stopped in Najaf by a
policeman for a minor traffic violation and the cop sees the beer
bottles in the car, the Kurd will soon be sans cojones for possessing
alcohol.
I have read much about the federalism debate. A commonality is that
the word "Iraqi" is rarely, if ever seen. The Kurdish leaders and the
Shia leaders have openly stated that they are not interested in an
Iraqi agenda. So much for Bush's term "Operation Iraqi Freedom." There
are few Iraqis left in the south and north of Iraq.
There is one group, however, that has put Iraqi interests at the top
of its agenda: the Iraqi resistance. Instead of using the sectarian
term "Sunni," which many resistance members are, the word "Iraqi" is
always in the forefront.
The Kurds welcomed the U.S. invasion. They do not consider themselves
Arabs or want to be a part of an Arab country. Yet, they can now call
the shots that will dismember Iraq.
In the South, a major portion of the Shia leadership that has now come
forth is anything but Iraqi. They are Shia first and many spent years
in Iran, waiting for the day that Saddam was toppled. Their allegiance
definitely is not with Iraq.
We hear the term "Balkanization" frequently. The U.S. government has
stated that there will be no Balkanization of Iraq. However, U.S.
intervention in a solid and unified Yugoslavia of the 1980s
intentionally created the Balkanization of that area. Iraqization is
the logical extension of Balkanization, and it is occurring at a rapid
pace.
Someday, even the opponents of the Iraqi resistance will realize that
those who are fighting the U.S. occupation and their quisling allies
were the only true "Iraqis." The resisters are now pursuing their own
version of "Operation Iraqi Freedom."
Tony was right in his assessment of Iraqi expatriates living in the
San Diego area. It is only a reflection of what is going on today in
Iraq. Those in the stooge government are the big traitors, while those
who openly work with the occupiers as translators, cooks, policemen,
national guardsmen, and chauffeurs are the average traitors. They are
also the same people who have robbed Iraq of an Iraqi identity.
I find it quite curious that those who opposed Saddam Hussein now are
dismembering Iraq. This shows that they had no plan whatsoever for the
country, only the pursuit of their own selfish interests.
Before the illegal March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the country
represented much more than the sum of its different parts. It was Iraq
and Saddam Hussein and the Ba'athists made it worth fighting for.
Today, if you add up all its parts, Iraq represents much less than the
total of Iraq prior to March 2003.
:: Article nr. 14539 sent on 12-aug-2005 05:28 ECT
:: The address of this page is : www.uruknet.info?p=14539
:: The incoming address of this article is :
www.malcomlagauche.com/id1.html