Will Iraq's power-sharing agreement provide stable government?

Who can say? the Coalition Gov in the UK is working (sort of) and other countries manage quite well with similar arranegment.

It would be good if all members of the Iraq'i parliament respected each other, and tried to work together for the good of Iraq.

Let us hope!

Will Iraq's power-sharing agreement provide stable government?

I'm not sure if it matters whether the government is stable or not if they can't stop the people bombing eachother.

By the way , one of the things that came out of the Wikileaks release was that since the formation of the new era non-Sadam government, thousands of Iraqis have been tortured by government institutions, hundreds more have been executed or are just missing.

So its starting to look as though the claims from Bush & Blair about Iraqis being safer now than they were under Sadam is also, at best an exageration, and at worse, a complete croc.

If you're in a coalition and you're comfortable, you know it's not a broad enough coalition.

It`s possible to form a stable government if all factions are represented and their concerns and interests are taken up. My concern is that, like Northern Ireland, if these are not met you will find breakaway factions ready to destabilise the government. It`s crucial that historical hatreds are forgotten and that all factions feel involved in the process of taking Iraq forward.

Will Iraq's power-sharing agreement provide stable government?

Lets hope so, lets hope that despite all of Bush & Blair’s lying, cheating & money making scams that this country and its people can find some real peace.

Iraq is an artificially created country, divided into three 'tribes'; the Kurds in the north, the Sunnis roughly in the middle and the Shias mainly in the south. In these circumstances, only an autocracy will work, and the ruling elite will be drawn from the autocrat's 'tribe'. That is the way things are in the region. Democracy, as we know it, is an alien concept and our big mistake was in believing that it was possible to create a democracy in Iraq in the first place. The 'invasion' was an error of judgement of colossal proportions and the 'winner' is the Islamic Republic of Iran. Thank you Blair!

In 1. At 09:58am on 11 Nov 2010, Spinonthis wrote:

Who can say? the Coalition Gov in the UK is working (sort of) and other countries manage quite well with similar arranegment.

The most obvious difference is that the UK is not under military occupation by a foreign country. That is the "elephant in the room" when it comes to any Iraqi government.

Well 'power sharing' does not appear to work in the UK so do not expect success in Iraq..........

Hopefully their priority will be sending our troops home.

As to what else they do, that's their business, not mone.

"Will Iraq's power sharing provide stable government'? is the HYS question.

I feel uncomfortable as a contributor as our family demonstrated against the war. We are not religious, but have a spiritual belief in a higher being, and standards that we don't require religions to teach us.

However, we are also sensitive to the complexity of Iraq, and other cultures who have a religion/tribal/cultural distaste of separate aspects of Islam?

So, ultimately, various off-shoots of Islam have to resolve those differences?

A clumsy analogy would be the historical wars, death and destruction through British history, in Britain, between Christian Catholics and Christian Protestants? Indeed, in certain areas of Britain those religious and tribals wars continue? Unfortunately, those chasms are less to do with religion, but more about gang culture, in all areas.

DID YOU JUST SEE THAT WHOLE SQUADRON OF PINK ELEPHANTS FLY BY? IF YOU SWALLOW THAT YOU WILL SWALLOW ANYTHING.GIVE IT 12 MONTHS AND THEY WILL ALL BE AT EACH OTHERS THROATS AND ROBBING EACH OTHER BLIND AS THEY HAVE ALWAYS DONE.THEY WILL THEN JOIN WITH MANY OTHER CONTRIES IN THE GREAT GAME OF "HOLDING THEIR HANDS OUT" FOR AS MUCH AID AS THEY CAN GET OUT OF US IN THE WEST. WAKE UP BBC AND SMELL THE COFFEE!

That depends on whether the Iraqi Coalition government is answerable to the Iraqi people or to the US and UK governments and interests! If there to appease the US then it will be the same as an Iraq under Saddam, who too was answerable to US for many years until he decided not to be, result illeagal war and thousands murdered!

At 10:40am on 11 Nov 2010, corncobuk wrote:
"It`s possible to form a stable government if all factions are represented and their concerns and interests are taken up. My concern is that, like Northern Ireland, if these are not met you will find breakaway factions ready to destabilise the government. It`s crucial that historical hatreds are forgotten and that all factions feel involved in the process of taking Iraq forward."

Could you please state exactly which factions you feel are not represented in the Northern Ireland Assembly? It seems to me that every faction in the six counties is represented and given the problems faced by the people...not the factions...of the last thirty years, given the short time in which it has existed and given that to a considerable degree it is made up of people who were in armed conflict with each other, the NI Assembly is working extremely well.

As to the actions of the "breakaway groups" in Northern Ireland, I would not be so quick to assume that their motivations and aspirations are of a pure, political nature.

As to Iraq, no-one could have reasonably predicted the kind of horror that would sweep into the power-vacuum created by the fall of Saddam's regime, but I believe that the only way forward is coalition government that must be seen to be acting with fairness to all the people of Iraq.

Iran should stop meddeling in the affairs of Iraq, and it should stop trying to take over the region. The Iraqis clrealy voted for Allawi, if it were not for the pressure of Iran he would have come back as PM. This is not the best of steps of forward, but it is certainly better than the current status quo, hopefully it will bring some stability to Iraq.

My short (6 month) experience of coalition governments is that they can enact any law they like with or with out popular support and regardless of the cost to society.

Bring back Saddam Hussein – Yes, he was a tyrant! Yes, he gassed his own people! Yes, he was corrupt! Yes, he was an idiot but…

Everyone know there place!

Say he was a wally… off with your head! But you know that! Now, you have even more corruption, and even more people aspiring to power and people been blown up while they are shopping. Thanks Mr Bush & Blair.

The only type of government that works in the region is a military dictatorship. Iraq isn't united and her people are segregated by clan first, religious faction second, third Iraqi. Until they are Iraqi first, the bloodshed will continue.

Iraq (and the rest of the Middle East) doesn't value freedom in the Western sense. Freedom can't simply be given to them. Until they earn it for themselves it will never be valued.

"15. At 12:25pm on 11 Nov 2010, BaldLea wrote:
My short (6 month) experience of coalition governments is that they can enact any law they like with or with out popular support and regardless of the cost to society."
----------

So can any government in power.

We must return to a Saddam Hussein era to achieve peace in Iraq.

Some coalitions do work and some don't...

Those that don't is sometimes down to the fact that outside influence causes disruption in many different areas...

The problem this Iraqi Coalition will have is various Muslim Terrorist Factions in Iraq and the Muslim World...I'm sure that the Iranians will not be happy that this Iraqi Coalition may quickly come out with Western Dogma and especially American Dogma about Democracy...

Difficult times they have...as difficult time we all are in...We can only hope and pray that they indeed do bring stable government to Iraq and hope that they do not eventually head back into a situation where they have another dictator...

LOL That bunch of politicians won't stabilize anything. Democracy does not work for tribal cultures like Iraq and Afghanistan. They respond best under a dictator.

I have no geo-political expertise or inside information, but I hope so.

Iraq is a lost cause. The only thing that the "liberation" (occupation) has done is to sow the seeds of civil war.

No

It is Veterans day here in America a tribute to the men and woman who have died making this world a better place safe from despots and tyrants. Here is a well deserved thanks to all the brave British troops who have helped us make Iraq a better place and a budding young Democracy who I feel confident will soon be a trusted played upon the world stage. When I saw those first Iraqis risking terrorist bombings and murder to vote and stick their thumbs in that blue ink I almost cried.
Good luck to the nation of Iraqi and while most of the world wishes you well, I'm sure the haters here at the BBC HYS will throw the usual insults and negativity at you, ignore them.

What? a coalition of cowards, these are the people that were afraid of confronting Sadham Hussein. They didn't have the bottle to confront him when he was alive, but once he'd gone, they found limitless amounts of bravado to kill women and children in their quest for power. A bit like the wild west when the baddies came into town, everyone hid behind their curtains and closed their businesses until the goodie sheriff (America) came into town and disposed of the baddies, see the similarity?

Will Iraq's power-sharing agreement provide stable government?

Bring back Saddam, all is forgiven. The Iraqi political powers are as corrupt as the baath party were. Iraq is a total mess, and it's Blair and Bushes fault.

Response to post #25 @ 2:00pm on 11 Nov - 'ONE-SICK-PUPPY'.

In case you hadn't noticed, the same respect for the fallen, in all wars is clear and present today in the UK., and always.

While writing, I would like to point out that the HYS screen name 'Tony of Britain' is nothing to do with Britain at all.

This poster apparently has the right to use this name on this international HYS site. Please do complain 'ONE-SICK-PUPPY' about this inappropriate user name - many have, and failed.

Islam according to the Koran does NOT recognize any other religion or beliefs, so how can there be any agreements for peace with coalition? This behavior of not accepting any other religion is the crux on which the Koran is interpreted, any deviation is against the teachings from the Koran. All the leaders are in position only because of the hard lines that they profess and practice. The American armed forces was protecting the interests of the Christian minorities, with the troop pull out there is going to be retaliations against the Christians. The deputy prime minister from Saddam's Iraq is the only highly ranking Christian, now awaiting the death by hanging. It would be nice to release Mr. Aziz now and let him be the voice for the Christians, instead of letting him be hanged by the corrupt government of Maliki and other goons.

26. At 2:12pm on 11 Nov 2010, Toothpick Harry wrote:
A bit like the wild west when the baddies came into town, everyone hid behind their curtains and closed their businesses until the goodie sheriff (America) came into town and disposed of the baddies, see the similarity?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Baddies and goodies. Is that you, Dubya ?

Sir Winston Churchill; (The River War, first edition, Vol. II,>> pages 248-50 London )
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." Sir Winston Churchill; (The River War, first edition, Vol. II,>> pages 248-50 London ) Thus spake the Greatest of our Prime Ministers.

13. At 12:11pm on 11 Nov 2010, captainmoonlight wrote:

At 10:40am on 11 Nov 2010, corncobuk wrote:
"It`s possible to form a stable government if all factions are represented and their concerns and interests are taken up. My concern is that, like Northern Ireland, if these are not met you will find breakaway factions ready to destabilise the government. It`s crucial that historical hatreds are forgotten and that all factions feel involved in the process of taking Iraq forward."

Could you please state exactly which factions you feel are not represented in the Northern Ireland Assembly? It seems to me that every faction in the six counties is represented and given the problems faced by the people...not the factions...of the last thirty years, given the short time in which it has existed and given that to a considerable degree it is made up of people who were in armed conflict with each other, the NI Assembly is working extremely well.

As to the actions of the "breakaway groups" in Northern Ireland, I would not be so quick to assume that their motivations and aspirations are of a pure, political nature.

As to Iraq, no-one could have reasonably predicted the kind of horror that would sweep into the power-vacuum created by the fall of Saddam's regime, but I believe that the only way forward is coalition government that must be seen to be acting with fairness to all the people of Iraq.

----------------------------------------------

1) I agree, the Northern Ireland agreement has been a huge success, but going back to the late 60s the republicans were not represented and due to their exclusion the IRA came into being.

2) When talking of the breakaway groups in NI i never made any assumptions, merely observations that violence usually ensues with breakaway groups.

3) The only outcome by removing the Iraqi police force is to create a power vaccum, and i don`t believe for a second that it was unforseeable. But like you i hope for the sake of the Iraqi people, who have seen far too much violence already, that peace can come to the country and they can move forward.

The Power sharing agreement wont last long.It seems they identify themself as sunnis,shias or khurds more than as Iraqis...sectarian partition seems better solution

I worked on a large project in Iraq during the mid eighties. At the time Iraq were in conflict with Iran. Like most Middle East countries if you kept to the rules you got on fine.
I have to say Iraq was perhaps the best and most tolerant Middle East country I have ever worked in.
The country appeared very stable, I know various tribes and different Islamic sects existed but they co-operated with each other, let us say, with some guidance.
For them to exist now without overall leadership is an impossibility.
Iraq needs a dictatorship, not a coalition, to survive. However a more moderate type of leader is preferable.

33. At 2:49pm on 11 Nov 2010, nelson wrote:
The Power sharing agreement wont last long.It seems they identify themself as sunnis,shias or khurds more than as Iraqis...sectarian partition seems better solution

-----

If that happens there will be civil war for sure.

Geographically the vast bulk of the oil is in Kurdish or Shia territory. It'd leave the Sunnis impoverished (apart from a large cache of weapons).

There's also the problem that the Tukish government (any Turkish government) is unlikely to be happy about the estabrlishment of a sovereign 'Kurdistan' on their borders.

Its only massive US pressure which is (mostly) stopping them and the Kurds taking pot shots at each other at the moment.

Whether the new deal will provide stability for Iraq or not remains to be seen.A better idea would be to divide Iraq into three different states,giving the north to the Kurds,the south to the Shiites and the west to the Sunnis.It should be noted that Iraq was not created by the Iraqis but by the British and the French back in 1919 to the detriment of the Kurds who were aspiring to create their own homeland.

What can I say; I'm rather sorry to hear this news because now the United States has an official Government in Iraq with which it can make an official arrangement to have American troops (which supposedly left, but actually stayed to the tune of 50,000 troops) to officially remain in Iraq with one extension following another - forever.
No doubt there was a lot of American pressure to bring this official situation about.
Iraq's parliament is due to meet on Thursday afternoon.
Mr Barzani: "Thank God, last night we made a big achievement, which is considered a victory for all Iraqis."
I guess this means that the killing will stop; the bombs will stop; the general mayhem will stop because the American troops will be officially back.
The agreement does seem to provide for checks & balances - Shia, Sunni and Kurds; it even has the chance to become stable and effective, except for the ongoing opfficial presence of the Americans who seem to be able to destabilize anything if they so wish and for their own purposes.
The question is, will that body turn out to be an effective power-sharing instrument whereby they can influence policy, especially in the realms of security. Maybe, depending on how "secure", the Americans want Iraq to be, how much mayhem they want to blame on the Iranians. Iraq has suddenly become a key factor that could lead to war with Iran.
Mr Maliki's opponents said Shia-dominated Iran was playing a major persuasive role behind the scenes. I'll bet on that! What this likely means is that the Americans, who love to blame the Iranians for all and anything that goes wrong in Iraq, were playing a major persuasive role behind the scenes.
The biggest issue here is that the Coalition Government is not yet formed; the biggest parliamentary coalition, Mr Maliki's, has to nominate its candidate to try to form a government. He would then have a month to try to put together an administration.
The one fact that gives me hope for the new Coalition is that, Shia cleric, Moqtada Sadr announced that the 40 or so seats he controls in the new parliament would back the incumbent for a second term, and like it or not Sadr can pull this control at any time.

The only way to avoid the sectarianism and perhaps civil war is to exploit the huge natural resources. Not just the oil and gas that is wanted by the world but also the vast agriculture propagated by the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers , "Iraq, the breadbasket of the world". If people are prosperous as in UAE they will forget about their ignorant religiosity and will get along with each other. Northern Ireland's poverty amongst the Catholics incited hatred. The Iraqi people want wealth; when they see the other oil rich ME countries they must be envious. The violence will stop when poverty is eliminated. Countries like Japan and China not to mention most of Europe want the those precious resources and will pay for them. The potential is enormous but so is the ignorance of a religion still floundering around from the Dark Ages.

The coalition can work out if both parties stay focused on their course. Iraq needs to pull-along with life. they need to rebuild. If they can for once put aside all that's dividing them, then like the coalition succeeding in the UK, it certainly will do there.

Does it realy matters? They were a mess before the US invaded the country. And they are still a mess after the US supposedly made it a democracy. Still think that we should put a big fence around the middle east and come back after 500 years and see if anybody is still standing

Saddam should have been left in charge.

Iraq would still have order and he could have been a great ally against AQ and Iran.

Yes,he was tyrant,but one of many.

Err no....

Fragmentation and implosion awaits....

So, how long will it be before the various Iraqi factions accuse each other of "not being Muslim enough?"

Then, of course, Iraq can descend, once again, into the state for which the so-called 'Religion of Peace' is famous - endless violence and killing.

No doubt, as is usual in the Islamic world, they will refuse to accept any responsibility whatsoever for their own numerous inadequacies. They will blame 'Western spies' and the 'Israelis'.

"
9. At 11:05am on 11 Nov 2010, Sepenenre wrote:

Hopefully their priority will be sending our troops home.

As to what else they do, that's their business, not mone.
"

By "our" troops, I assume you're an American, in which case once you lot go they'll be a civil war.

43. At 4:53pm on 11 Nov 2010, Bob Smyth wrote:

So, how long will it be before the various Iraqi factions accuse each other of "not being Muslim enough?"

Then, of course, Iraq can descend, once again, into the state for which the so-called 'Religion of Peace' is famous - endless violence and killing.

--------------------------

Add to that, it was with horror that I listened to the latest report on the new wave of killings of Christians & wonder when the killings which seems so much a part of every day life/religion ever will stop.
I have a problem killing my chickens- killing a human who believes in the same God seems so extraordinarily inhuman.
Until the population are educated, stop being influenced by violent clerics & have work, little will change in Iraq or even some other countries in the Middle East.

At 12:48pm on 11 Nov 2010, ian cheese wrote:
We must return to a Saddam Hussein era to achieve peace in Iraq
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes......the peace of the dictator, just like the 'peace' citizens enjoy in North Korea.


Or the 'peace' ordinary citizens enjoyed in Afghanistan under the Taliban, who used them as human-punching bags if they didn't measure up to their harsh rule......before those nasty Americans showed up, and ruined their party mood.

44. At 5:29pm on 11 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:

"By "our" troops, I assume you're an American, in which case once you lot go they'll be a civil war."

Maybe that was Americas intention.

You think about it,Iraq is the crossroad between Sunni,Shia and Kurds and that place erupts it will drag all the surounding countries into it,thus meaning the attention on the West by fanatics will disappear as they fight for control of the ME.

Iraq first needs a credible census and then a referendum on whether they want to be one country on not.

Shias because of their size, share of oil, access to the sea and a friendly neighbor, Iran can easily thrive as an independent country.

Kurds too have a sizable share of oil but are landlocked and surrounded by countries that don't want an independent Kurdista. Right now the Kurds are eating their cake and having it too. They have considerable autonomy and yet getting an equal share at the center.

Sunnis have to decide if they can live with anything remotely resembling a proportional representation system. This is the group whose share of power is going down from a 100% to something like 25%. Do they really have a commitment to proportional representation? Would their share in the power structure provide them with another venue to bring the structure down and go back to the privileges they have enjoyed for well over a 1000 years?

If there is unity among factions, Iraq is poised to prosper. They are mostly surrounded by friends. Only two of their smallest neighbors are springboards for Neocon-Isareli mischief.

FirasKay wrote:

Iran should stop meddeling in the affairs of Iraq, and it should stop trying to take over the region. The Iraqis clrealy voted for Allawi, if it were not for the pressure of Iran he would have come back as PM.

_________________________________________________________________________

If it was not for the pressure of NATO he wouldn't have won any seats. The occupation forces suppressed Sunni representation by blocking the candidates the Sunnis really wanted.

Iran has only one interest in Iraqi politics, keeping the Neocon-Zionist agents out. Allawi is clearly one of them. There is a solid proof; when the Neocons were planning a Vichy Regime in Iraq he was the Vichy. Did he not rule Iraq before any elections? He was nothing but a front for the brutal occupation.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"
47. At 6:32pm on 11 Nov 2010, panchopablo wrote:

44. At 5:29pm on 11 Nov 2010, Kuradi Vitukari wrote:

"By "our" troops, I assume you're an American, in which case once you lot go they'll be a civil war."

Maybe that was Americas intention.

You think about it,Iraq is the crossroad between Sunni,Shia and Kurds and that place erupts it will drag all the surounding countries into it,thus meaning the attention on the West by fanatics will disappear as they fight for control of the ME.
"

Invaliding Iraq has to go down as the biggest blunder any set of Governments, since the day they allowed women to drive automobiles.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Give it five years - by then, Iraq will have reverted to its old state, and nothing will have changed since Sadam Hussein's downfall.

Why should we imagine that this will work?. Under Maliki's watch we have had the ethnic cleansing of Christians in Iraq.

I hope it's better than the UK's useless, incompetent coalition.

I wish the Iraqi people all the luck in the world. They need strong leadership and I hope it works out well for them.

What it means is that Iran's proxies are now a recognized legitimate part of the Iraqi coalition government. What the Iranians could not win in battle against Saddam Hussien in a stalemated loggerhead war they have now won cleverly through imported democracy. More Iranian money will pour in as in Afghanistan. Who's really winning? Hats off to the US and its allies they will put a brave face on it and give it just the right political spin for domestic media. 'Mission Preposterous' has been accomplished.

At 12:48pm on 11 Nov 2010, ian cheese wrote:
We must return to a Saddam Hussein era to achieve peace in Iraq
-------------------------------------------------------------
How would you suggest we do that.....build a time-machine?

The very fact that the deal for a coalition government in Iraq was hammered out after eight months of intense negotiations suffice to say that the government will rest on a weak foundation that may totter after sometime. It is a heady concoction of different philosophies that is not reassuring to hold out for long.

Being a standard UK resident I have to say, apart from the oil no-one mentions, which isn't ours,

WHO CARES?

If this makes for stable government in Iraq, it will be a first. There is no stable democratic government in any Arab or Islamic state apart from the failing regime in Pakistan, every one is a religious or military dictatorship. Iraq will go the same way in the fullness of time.

Finally they have divided the present and future oil wealth which has noting to do with the people or with the country yet.
That next stage would need a revolution to implement.
The deal of the US now is just to secure neocon shares against the military protection of the new elite...

What should be their priorities ? -- is a matter for THEM - I thought we had left - so what business is it of ours ? If they tried to tell us what to do in our own country we wouldn't like it would we - so LET THEM GET ON WITH IT !

"53. At 10:37pm on 11 Nov 2010, milvusvestal wrote:
Give it five years - by then, Iraq will have reverted to its old state, and nothing will have changed since Sadam Hussein's downfall."

Than the coalition removes Malaki.
No more WMD excuse would be necessary...

Iraq requires peace & democracy but it has been waiting since above 20 years. Dictator & Shia leader Saddam Hussain was assassinated by the US forces some years ago. He looted the nation & now it has become a poor country. We need not to develop it, but to take a majority voting so the nation can be ruled for more than five years by UN. The White House will take decision after the discussion for more than one year. Then US based govt will be generated in Iraq.

No.

Had a good laugh when I heard over the BBC Worldservice that the reason why they took so long to form a government was because no party wanted to be in opposition. Which, in a way makes sense : I got elected, I rule. Why put me in opposition?

Shows you how much they understand western democracy.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

How can you call this government "representative" and "inclusive" if there is not a single woman in it?

The strugle in Iraq is between those who want a democratic Iraq and power sharing and those who admire Saddam's regime and want to rule Iraq accordning to their liking. Al-Iraqia block has many leaders who belong to the old way of thinking, those who opposed elections, constitution and power sharing and many of them openly or covertly supported terrorism to acieve their aims but largely failed. Now they have no alternative but to go along with the democratic process relectantly. Their boycotting the parliament proceedings during the election of the president and prime minster proves their intentions.

The democracy there is an illusion as the liberation was...

This U.S.-implanted model of democracy leading to a delicate power-sharing equilibrium in Iraq is not going to last long. Baghdad is the power base for minority Sunnies who tend to eradicate majority Shiites from the capital. The stability is superficial.

MARCUS YOU ARE QUITE RIGHT IN MANY WAYS ,NOT FORGETTING THAT EGYPT ,THE ARABIAN PENINNSULA -GULF & MANY POPULACE MOSLEM NATIONS INCLUDING TURKEY SHAN,T STAND BY INDEFINITELY & PERMIT AN AXIS OF EVIL PERSO-IRANIAN SINNISTER PLAN MEDDLING IN THE REGION ROBBING MANY ARAB & NON ARABS OF THEIR BIRTH RIGHTS FROM HAVING ACCESS TO THE IRAQI ECONOMY & PARTAKING IN BUILDING IT & REAPING SOME OF THIER JUST REWARDS. THE STATE OF AFFAIRS & DEPRAVATION FACED BY MANY OF THE ORIGINAL IRAQI CITIZENS IN THE PRVENTION OF THE ALLAWI ALLIANCE FROM SITTING IN GOVT. POSES A CLEAR PICTURE OF DISENFRANCHISEMENT OF MANY THAT IS TANTAMOUNT TO PUSHING A RIGHTFULL POPULATION FROM WHAT IS THEIR FAIR DUES!!THE REAL IRAQ IS THE ROYAL HASHIMITE TRANS JORDANIAN-IRAQI ARABIAN -GULF KINGDOM ,SIR T. E. LAWRENCE,S VISION"THE PILLARS OF WISDOM" THE ANGLO-ARABIAN BRITISH COMMONWEALTH PART & PARCEL OF AN ALL ECOMPASSING CULTURAL COOPERATIVE FREE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISE WITHIN THE FAMILY OF BRITISH COMMONWEALTH NATIONS & BEYOND EXHANGING EDUCATIONAL & SPORTS PRGRMS.

Iraq does not need Americans there. Barack should dismiss all Americans still stationed in the country. The Baghdad Coalition worked. The new Republican HOR must save money and eliminate this as an expense.

UNTIL IRAQ IS RESTORED TO IT,S RIGHTFUL ROYAL HASHIMITE TRANSJORDANIAN -IRAQI -ARABIAN-GULF KINGDOM ,THE AMERICANS SHOULD STAY THERE & SUPERVISE THAT TRANSITION ELIMINATING THE AXIS OF EVIL THREAT FROM THE DIRECT EASTERN BORDERS!!

Coalition govt in Iraq?are you out of your mind?..
Iraq is never going to be the same,never ever.
Whether the U.S.stays,most probably they will never leave,there is so much oil to be taken to the U.S...
Iraq will be exploited by every regime in the region,as well as Israel looting as much oil as possible.

"74. At 6:04pm on 13 Nov 2010, MOM wrote:
UNTIL IRAQ IS RESTORED TO IT,S RIGHTFUL ROYAL HASHIMITE TRANSJORDANIAN -IRAQI -ARABIAN-GULF KINGDOM ,THE AMERICANS SHOULD STAY THERE..."

...to keep the puppets at power?
Iraq is Iraq and this fact has nothing to do with America and it won't be influenced by America, just as it is vica verse.

Killing fields for the West and the Muslims.
The corrupt Gulf Nations should have played a bigger role in Iraq,what do they care as long as they get to whore around in the West.
Educate in the West party and play in the West and then go home to find virgins to marry.
Little do they know that the Gulf Nations will be owned by the West very soon.The bases and the troops are already there,all they need to wait for is a signal from the Pentagon.
Keep betraying your brothers and the wrath of the U.S.boots will be upon you,cowardly rich gulf Arabs.

"74. At 6:04pm on 13 Nov 2010, MOM wrote:
...THE AXIS OF EVIL THREAT FROM THE DIRECT EASTERN BORDERS"

What an unfortunate expression this is, a disgrace for a "super power"
if there is any...

Besides other problems and there are so many in Iraq,there is all this
hatred (or at least not understanding between the different Reliouse Groups,the Pro and against US)that there is not much use in Speculations
if this Coalition will work,Only time will tell.

But one can Hope for it,the Iraq-people deserve by now Stabilisation
and peace.

Stability to whose dream?

Has the ISS provided stability to Outer space?

Only good governance can ensure success of the proposed or any power-sharing; In fact, power-sharing always reduces complacency and corruption.

At 7:24pm on 13 Nov 2010, joe kahn wrote:
Killing fields for the West and the Muslims.
The corrupt Gulf Nations should have played a bigger role in Iraq,what do they care as long as they get to whore around in the West.
Educate in the West party and play in the West and then go home to find virgins to marry.
Little do they know that the Gulf Nations will be owned by the West very soon.The bases and the troops are already there,all they need to wait for is a signal from the Pentagon.
Keep betraying your brothers and the wrath of the U.S.boots will be upon you,cowardly rich gulf Arabs.

-----------------------------------------------------------

You may or may not be right, I do not know enough about them to argue the point.

But give an example of what you think the ideal Muslim or Arab state would look like.

Certainly not Saddam Hussen's Iraq, he was a brutal slayer of Muslims, on a par with the Amercan invaders, not Iran, even its own people accuse the Mullahs of manipulating the recent presidential elections, because they had sole control over the ballot boxes and the vote counting, and as Stalin once said "it is not those who cast ballots who decide elections, it is those who count them".

Certainly not the former Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, a brutal despotic regime who kept their people in poverty, and invited American invasion by allowing their country and resources to be used to fund and train terrorist armies, to attack their neighbours near and far, culminating in the infamous terror attacks in America on Sept 11, 2001.

AN IDEAL ARABIC & MOSLEM COUNTRIES ARE THESE THAT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THEIR HISTORIC FOUNDATIONS ,STRENGTHS & SELF PURPOSE IN TODAYS GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT ALL IT,S ASPECTS FROM CULTURE .BUSINESS, SPORT ,EDUCATION & GOOD COOPERATIVE ENTERPRISES IN ALL FIELDS,MUCH LIKE THE VISION OF OUR OWN SIR T. E. LAWRENCE "THE SEVEN PILLARS OF WISDOM" ANGLO-ARABIAN COOPERATION ACCROSS THE SPECTRUM OF HUMAN ENDEAVOUR WITHIN THE BRITISH COMMONWEALTH & THE FAMILY OF NATIONS BEYOND,MUCH LIKE INDIA HAS DONE & OR TURKEY. KRUGERS EXAMPLES ARE BUT AN INSUFFICIENT INSIGHT , AS HE HIMSELF ADMITS INTO NOT HAVING !THE NATURE & DEPTH OF THE TOPIC SUBJECT AT HAND, BEING ABLE ONLY TO POINT OUT THESE NEGATIVE NON ENTITIES THAT CAME INTO PLAY IN THE REGION & CITING THEM AS CLEAR EXAMPLES OF RUTHLESS TERROR!INFACT IF YOU TAKE IRAQ & THE ARABIAN GULF & THE PENINNSULA IN WHOLE INCLUDING NORTH AFRICA & APPLY THE FOUNDATIONS UPON WHICH THEY HAD BEEN BUILT & SET FORTH ,IT IS THEN CLEAR THAT THEIR SUCCESS LIES WELL WITHIN WHAT HAD BEEN FORESEEN ALL THESE CENTURIES AGO UPON THEM BEING FOUNDED,"IN IRAQ,S CASE AFTER THE 50S IT HAD BECOME A NON ENTITTY & ALL REGIMES COULD WELL BE DESCRIBED AS NON REGIMES" & THUS SHOULD HAVE WELL ACHIEVED A STEADY CIVILISED PROGRESS ,MUCH LIKE THE INDIAN SUBCONTINENT & HAVE A PEACEFULL EXISTENCE & INTERACT IN A FRIENDLY COMPETTITIVE MANNER IN SELF INTERST SUCH AS RETURNING IRAQ TO IT,S ORIGINAL PURPOSE FULL RIGHTFULL PLACE & THE MIX OF POPULATION WITHIN THE REALM OF THE ROYAL HASHIMITE TRANSJORDANIAN-IRAQI ARABIAN GULF KINGDOM & WITHIN THE WESTERN FOLD OF NATIONS AS IS THE CASE IN THE ARABIAN GULF PENINSULA ,AFTER ALL IN TODAYS GLOBAL ECONOMIES IT MAKES SENSE BEING PART OF WHAT IS REALLY THE ECONOMIC ACTIVE FORCE OF THE DAY

coalition can work as long as both parties mean business but in the case of Iraq everyone gets their orders from outside powers (Americans- Syrians Saudis plus Iran so depends if all of the above countries interests are served. too much blood is spell in order to talk peace among them and in the case of the Shia’s still after 7 years in power still execute people for ties to Saddam. coalition forward has to start by forgiving Aziz instead of putting him to death as a token of good faith

@ kruger 82:You make a valid point in saying that Saddam sided and learned from the West to oppress and kill his own people.
Talibans are also a product of the U.S.and that's why they treat their own the way they do.Mujahedeen on the other hand were hospitable decent people,they treated the West kindly and treated and protected their own humanely.
Muslim leaders or warlords nowadays learn the violent ways from the U.S.because money and whores are involved,just like the Talibans/Pakistanis whoring around with U.S.money and diregarding the 3 million Afghan refugees in the borders of Afg-Pak.
As for Iran,it needs to become a regional power to balance Pakistan,Afghanistan and parts of Central Asia,the U.S.need not apply there.

@ 82 kruger:I forgot to mention that 9/11 was most probably carried out by Saudis and the U.S.collaborating,maybe even the Israelis might have been involved,i can't bring myself to believe that 4 planes could be hijacked in the same day with boxcutters,we give these backward Talibans/alqaeda too much credit.I just don't believe it my friend neither do a lot of americans.

Of course it can the question should be do you think it likely? or will it be likely, as I don't have a time machine I don't know.

The Iraqi coalition government can be described as an uncomfortable triangle relationship trying to achieve a marriage of interests by means of a prenuptual agreement. All parties are intensely suspicious of each other and are atuned to the least sign of betrayl. Nobody wants anyone else to have the slightest advantage in any way. Whatever the Iraqis do they will have to live with it and they will never have the Americans out of their hair who have cut out for themselves a permanent military presence for an indefinite time to protect their oil and regional strategic interests in and from Iraq. The obscenely huge fortress-like US embassy in Bagdad, the biggest embassy anywhere in the world, is there to asure that whatever happens in Iraq the US will have the right of future intervention and will always have an unseen hand in Iraq's internal politics as it did in pre-revolutionary Iran. But for the other western 'allies' in Iraq the benefits of having supported Bush's hair-brained invasion are harder to define if at all. Iraq has been a tar-pit for the allies of the US. In a recent interview that was a rebuttal to Bush's fantasy-filled new book about his own presidency Gerhard Schroeder former German cahncellor and Uwe-Karten who was Schroeder's spokesman to German news channel 24 said this about his meeting with George Bush at the oval Office in 2002 on Iraq: "We noticed that the intellectual reach (meaning IQ) of the president (Bush) of the most important nation at the time was exceptionally low"...."For this reason, it was difficult to communicate with him. He had no idea what was happening in the world. He was so fixated on being a Texan. I think he knew every longhorn (a type of cattle and by extension persons) in Texas." Of the link of the 9/11 plotters being sheltered in Iraq as an excuse for war Schroeder said "But this link, as it became clear during 2002 was false and contrived"..."As we know today, the Bush administration's reasons for the Iraq war were based on lies." Lies! About Bush's memoirs Schroeder said "Former American President Bush is not telling the truth." So there you have it the 'allies' were snookered by Bush & looney Blair too into going into a war that was a pack of lies from start to end and all that these allies have gained was to expend the lives of their soldiers as canonfodder for American interests. Europe had access to Iraqi oil before the war so it has gained nothing. The US on the other hand has taken physical possesion of Iraq indefinitely.

68. At 8:31pm on 12 Nov 2010, Olga wrote:
How can you call this government "representative" and "inclusive" if there is not a single woman in it?

-------

In Turkish, there is a saying "The lamb is worried for his life, while the butcher is worried for the meat".

The lack of sense of priorities exhibited by liberal people scares me to death. Here we have a country that is inches from a bloody civil war that can easily escalate to large-scale massacres of hundeds of thousands; and here is a liberal worried about the representation of females.
I keep telling: liberals are fine over a dinner party; but they should be kept away from rule at all costs.

7:54pm on 14 Nov 2010, joe kahn wrote:
"I forgot to mention that 9/11 was most probably carried out by Saudis and the U.S.collaborating,maybe even the Israelis might have been involved,i can't bring myself to believe that 4 planes could be hijacked in the same day with boxcutters,we give these backward Talibans/alqaeda too much credit".


--------------------------------------------------------
I notice you are hedgeing your bets, "most probably", "might even", "I can't bring myself to believe"

A personal belief does not constitute a proof. Many people believe in ghosts, fairies, flying saucers, the Moon landings were faked and so on, but that does prove that they are real.


An investigation was carried out by trained investigators and they reached the conclusion that the 9/11 attacks were the work of Bin Laden's terrorists operating out of Afghanistan.

Have you done an investigation that contradicts the official 9/11 investigation?

About as stable as a four legged table with one leg missing!

Just a correction to my post at #90



I should have said, a personal belief does not constitute a proof. Many people believe in ghosts, fairies, flying saucers, the Moon landings were faked and so on, but that does NOT prove that they are real.

There is a simple fact here, unless or until another investigation manages to contradict the official 9/11 investigation, the official investigation will have to stand.


In all the years since the 9/11 attacks, no group has ever been able to produce evidence that would stand up in court of law, that contradicts the original investigation.


I also disagree with the assertion that Muslims learned violence from the Americans, Muslims have been killing each other for well over 1,000 years before America even existed.

As for hating the west, Bin Laden and his terrorist organisation even use the crusades 1,000 years ago, as an excuse to send terrorists to the west to carry out attacks

At 7:48pm on 14 Nov 2010, joe kahn wrote:
@ kruger 82:You make a valid point in saying that Saddam sided and learned from the West to oppress and kill his own people.
As for Iran,it needs to become a regional power to balance Pakistan,Afghanistan and parts of Central Asia,the U.S.need not apply there.

____________________________________________________________________-

You are misquoting me, Saddam Hussein did not learn from the west to kill and oppress his own people, anymore than Stalin of Russia, or Mao Zedong of China did before him.

Human violence and oppression towards each other, transcend race, colour, ideology or religion.


Whatever the debate over 9/11, what is undeniable is that the Taliban and Al Queda were inviting people to Afghanistan to get millitary style training, so they could carry out terrorist attacks not only in America or Europe, but in other parts of the world as well such as India, Indonesia, or the phillipines, contrary to international law.

As for the most recent Iranian presidential election, the actual quote attributed to Stalin is "It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes"

Unless the storing of ballot boxes and the counting of votes are done in public by an electoral commission independent of government and political parties as in western democracies, the results cannot be trusted.

We all saw the brutality with which the Iranian authorities put down the ordinary Iranian people protesting the election results, did the Iranian secret police learn that violence from the Americans as well?