The other Iraq

**Farnan** · May 13, 2006, 10:15 AM

http://www.theotheriraq.com/relationship.html

Though it is obviously pro-Kurd this site shows a part of Iraq you don't hear about much in the West and shows the fallacy of the argument that Islam is incompatible with democracy.

**gigagaia** · May 13, 2006, 10:25 AM

I'd say that you are right. There is a good side to Iraq, and that democracy is compatible with any culture.
What I would caution you on, is getting caught up in the fact that there are good points to the Iraqi occupation and thus lose sight of the many more problems that you are facing, which is what the US adminsitration has been doing for some time now. By all means, build on achievments. But remember that Iraq is still a hell-hole that needs more work and effort than it is currently getting, and probably an entirely different approach than what is being taken right now.

That being said, I suggest, Farnan, that you also check out the BBC website as well BBC. They provide both sides of the story, showing good and bad sides.

**Tiwaz** · May 15, 2006, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by gigagaia

I'd say that you are right. There is a good side to Iraq, and that democracy is compatible with any culture.

Not exactly true. While democracy can be made work in any culture, since democracy is form of goverment and not part of culture as such, it can be modified to work anywhere. By same idea you could say that communism is compatible with any culture.

What situation in kurdish areas shows is that democracy is easily implemented in area of very homogenous ethnic background, at least when there is definite interest in remaining unified.

Kurds do not fight with each other because they have enemies outside their own ethnic group. Thus they are more likely to settle things between themselves through negotiation as all human groups do when put under threat by "outsiders". On whole Iraq, however, this is not true as heterogenous ethnic groups are very strongly at odds, not to mention unstability of whole nation due to this tension, and thus democracy is not exactly viable method of governance.

**gigagaia** · May 15, 2006, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by Tiwaz

Not exactly true. While democracy can be made work in any culture, since democracy is form of goverment and not part of culture as such, it can be modified to work anywhere. By same idea you could say that communism is compatible with any culture.

Perhaps you can, but communism necessitates a more cultural shift that democracy does, as it encompasses different sorts of economic and social values. Democracy is purely a political system which could be said to be consistent with any culture's values, depending on how they are read, and is no more western than dictatorships. (Amartya Sen's words, not mine...)
http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/jod/10.3sen.html.
Saying that democracy is incompatible with Islam is just glossing over the real problems that democracy needs to be fostered from within, not imposed from without, that's all that point was.

**Erik** · May 14, 2006, 07:51 AM

I can't watch the video.

But by the fact they use the word "Kurdistan" I know what way they are aiming.
And that's NOT a good way if you want peace and stability in the region, not at this point at least.
Don't get me wrong: I wish the best for the Kurdish people, but the Kurdish question is very complicated and their indipendance wil spark a range of other problems.
For one thing this means civil war.
For another it wil means Turkey and Iran wil get involved.

**Farnan** · May 14, 2006, 10:32 AM

No, Iraqi Kurdistan is the name of the region of Kurds in Iraq....

**Erik** · May 14, 2006, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Farnan

No, Iraqi Kurdistan is the name of the region of Kurds in Iraq....

So they aren't seperatists?
That's good but I should still point out the obvious bias on that site because it's sponsored (and possible even owned) by a Kurdish investment group.
In other words: it's in their interest to make "Kurdistan" look stable and peacefull so investors wil send them more money.

Notice how much their site looks like http://www.kurdistancorporation.com/
They even use the same background graphics! (grey with black lines)

Their goals:

KDC Mission Statement:
To promote, facilitate and establish business and investment opportunities in the Kurdistan Region in Iraq.

**Farnan** · May 14, 2006, 02:41 PM

I can tell that they're biased, but if you look through the bias you can see some basic facts that show it is a stable area, such as the lack of coalition causaulties and that there are only 200 coalition soldiers in the northern part of Iraq. If you wade through the bias you can find some good information.

**Evariste** · May 14, 2006, 03:10 PM

Excellent video Farnan. That's what the media will never show, the good side of the War for Iraqi Freedom. Sometimes people forget that Iraq is a quasi-stable country that has the rare, piecemeal calm area.

**Erik** · May 14, 2006, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by Farnan

I can tell that they're biased, but if you look through the bias you can see some basic facts that show it is a stable area, such as the lack of coalition causaulties and that there are only 200 coalition soldiers in the northern part of Iraq. If you wade through the bias you can find some good information.

Yes, I agree the North is doing pretty good.
But only 200 coalition soldiers? realy?
I wil try to get the video working in a different browser.
Anybody else have problems seeing it in FireFox?

edit: no luck in IE either, it just opens VLC and nothing happens.

Originally Posted by Evariste

Excellent video Farnan. That's what the media will never show, the good side of the War for Iraqi Freedom. Sometimes people forget that Iraq is a quasi-stable country that has the rare, piecemeal calm area.

Wasn't the North already this stable and peacefull before the war?

**Blaven** · May 14, 2006, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Erik

Wasn't the North already this stable and peacefull before the war?

Wasn't the rest of Iraq peaceful and stable before the war? What's your point?

**Richard the Lionheart** · May 14, 2006, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Blaven

Wasn't the rest of Iraq peaceful and stable before the war? What's your point?

No not really. All of Iraq was constantly terrorized by Sadaam Hussein.

**Erik** · May 14, 2006, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Blaven

Wasn't the rest of Iraq peaceful and stable before the war? What's your point?

The point is: Saddam already lost control over the North long before the war started.
And the rest of Iraq was much more peacefull and stable before the war than it is today.
So no part of Iraq has actually benefitted from the war.

**Hansa** · May 14, 2006, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by Blaven

Wasn't the rest of Iraq peaceful and stable before the war? What's your point?

I think he means that Saddam had already lost all control over most of the Kurdish areas in Iraq, and that the kurds where governing themselves (relatively) peacfully and effectively way before the invasion of 2003. Anyway the Kurdish question is a very complicated one, and is not easily solved, they want to create an independent kurdistan, the Iraqis,Turkish, Iranians etc, will not let them. A completely free kurdistan on the Iraqi side of the border will just create problems elsewhere, at least in the current geopolitical situation.

**Erik** · May 14, 2006, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Hansa

I think he means that Saddam had already lost all control over most of the Kurdish areas in Iraq, and that the kurds where governing themselves (relatively) peacfully and effectively way before the invasion of 2003.

Exactly.

**Blaven** · May 14, 2006, 03:24 PM

H & G: Were bombs going off all the time on the sides of roads? Could the average Iraqi walk to the local market without fear of being blown up?

Iraq wasn't exactly a nice place to raise your family under Saddam, but it was stable.

Erik: So northen Iraq wasn't under Saddam's control? I was under the impression he ran a tight ship (in other words, controlled the whole country).