if the kurds manage to control kirkuk, the sunnis will have no control over oil whatsoever. the majority of the problems in iraq relate to disaffected sunnis, and kirkuk in kurdish hands will further strengthen their feelings. there they'll be, in some of the worst parts of iraq, with no political voice, no oil for wealth/power, and al qaeda exploiting their plight. as for the kurds, i question just how much they really do care about keeping iraq whole. seems to me that they want their power and could care less what happens to the rest of the country.
as for sadr, he seemed to be a problem a couple months ago, but he seems pretty tame nowadays. however, he commands a sizeable force, and i don't believe his political ambitions have died.
Quote:
|
It is unclear how many are simply nationalist. How many will lay down their arms or even switch sides when the infidel occupier finally leaves the country? The longer we stay the greater the justification that the insurgents will have to continue fighting. Once the infidel is gone, the insurgents may lose traction.
|
there is mass unemployment in iraq, and horrible humanitarian situations (energy, water, etc.).. many of those who have taken to battle, imo, have done so because there is nothing else for them (in their view). the situation is similar to the civil war in afghanistan, where poverty fueled continual warfare.
the "wild card" as i see it is what happens when we leave? right now the sunnis attack anyone seen aiding the occupiers - this list includes humanitarian workers unaffiliated with our government or the iraqi regime we're propping up. will these people stop once we leave? i doubt it. seems to me that they will simply seek out new targets, and since we will still be part of the picture, they will continue to claim to be fighting against the infidel (and its collaborators). maybe this won't constitute a civil war in some peoples' minds, but it does to me, because it will be one internal group versus another.