:A huge majority of turks were against it and to everyone's surprise the
:representatives voted that transit down. Usually their security council
verrides votes they don't like.

Why they decided to break it is irrelevant. They made an agreement
and then tried to hold us up for more money is what actually happened.
They didn't deliver on their side of the agreement, so they don't get
the money and they shouldn't get the guarantee about not forming an
independent Kurdish state that was part of that deal.

To you it seems that turks didn't accept the transition of troops because
they tried to blackmail more money, to me it seems that turks didn't accept
the transition of troops even when they were offered a very large heap of
money.

: : Create a Shia state in the south. They will have oil and much
farmland.
: :
: :Current Shiia clergy makes Iran look like a ally of USA.
: :Most propably sunni muslim states wouldn't like another shiia muslim
state
: :besides Iran at all.
:
: Then you're not going to have democracy, since the overwhelming
: majority of the people in that region (and in Iraq generally, if you
: keep it together) are Shiia Muslim.
:
emocracy in Iraq is on kinda shaky ground anyways, specially after that
:moderate Shiia leader died in a bombstrike.

So what are you proposing instead? I think it makes sense to break
the thing up into three regions, since it sort of naturally wants to
be three regions anyway. The 'nation' of Iraq is a relatively recent
invention.

Most of the nations are relatively recent inventions with large minorities
that are sometimes more or less hostile towards each other. It seems that
wealth is the requirement for stable conditions in a state and between
states.

:For kurds the democracy might work and actually for sunnis too if they
get
ver the loss of their position as the leader of Iraq. But that is not
:enough if the majority (Shiias) vote for Islamic republic.
:
emocracy doesn't fit for people who believe in fairy tales it seems.

Democracy doesn't fit when there are significant minorities who are in
vociferous and violent disagreement with the majority. You have to
put together some sort of 'power sharing' deal in those cases, where
things are not really democratic, except on a local level.

Those don't work very well, either. There is geography for a single
Cyprus. There is long historical precedent for Lebanon. There is
neither of those things for a single nation of Iraq.

But chopping up countries does not automatically result in success as
Vietnam and Korea's can prove. On the other hand it might work in other
places for example dividing Israel and Palestine might be a really good
idea.

: :And what if the result is 1 country in conflict with Turkey, 1 country
in
: :conflict with all the other muslim countries besides Iran and 1 that
is just
: :bitter for all the power it lost?
:
: As opposed to some 'power sharing' balancing act like those which were
: attempted in Cyprus (Greeks/Turks) and Lebanon (Christian/Moslem).
: We've seen how well those work.
:
:One way or another it isn't going to be easy.

True. But do you have any suggestions, or just critiques? The latter
is easy. The former is somewhat more difficult.

Well while USA is in a spending spree it could shower Iraq with all kinda
goodies and turn them into couch potatoes