Iraq constitution deal-breakers quietly celebrate

[sabra]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L1621260.htm

Iraq constitution deal-breakers quietly celebrate
16 Aug 2005 14:50:22 GMT

Source: Reuters

By Michael Georgy

BAGHDAD, Aug 16 (Reuters) - A cleric with a long beard, a former translator for Saddam Hussein and a tough-talking lawyer stayed long after Iraq's parliament announced politicians failed to draft a constitution, quietly celebrating their victory.

The group of Arab Sunnis sitting in a sprawling hall where birthday parties were once held for Saddam Hussein have emerged as deal breakers in marathon efforts to write up a constitution, men who believe they are fighting a conspiracy to carve up Iraq.

After weeks of politicians talking about Iraqi unity, they are digging in for the next round of talks after lawmakers failed to meet an Aug. 15 deadline for finishing the charter and instead agreed on a one-week extension.

....

"We came here to prevent the Shi'ites and Kurds from striking a deal," said a Arab Sunni lawyer who declined to give his name. "If we had not come they would have signed a deal without us weeks ago and we would have nothing. We will not let this happen."

[frankly_fedup2]

1. They need to split it up according to which type of Muslim is where.

They would have the same constitution but the sunnis would handle their business, the Shi'ite theirs, and the Kurds (from what I have read), have already separated themselves (as far as land) from the other two groups.

It would be easier to have like three leaders that work together through diplomacy then the constant bickering over religious beliefs and who is not a true muslim because they don't do what one group does. That's the only way it is going to work. Separate it into three Countries.

[endarkenment]

3. That would be difficult.

Its all about the oil. The two oil fields are in the shiite south and the kurdish north. Without a deal on the oil the sunnis are simply cut out. They have nothing to lose by fighting this all the way.

[atreides1]

7. Not that easy

The Kurds are also Sunni, but are a more secular society then the Arab Sunnis are.

Besides, their are some Sunnis who do not accept the Shias as Muslims.

So you see it's more complicated then what BushCo and his braindead cabal would have the American people believe.

[Teaser]

10. The Sunnis would get a lot of sand then.

Really, they need to Gerrymander the country.

[Rose Siding]

2. That's pretty blatant

Connecting the Sunnis with Saddams BD party. Beyond protecting their owm minority, aren't the Sunnis also the ones likely to be holding out for the more secular aspects of govt, which would involve women's rights?

[endarkenment]

4. Nope - that would be the Kurds.

[papau]

5. First in line for the more secular aspects are the Kurds - the federation

concept and what power the federations have is the Sunni concern.

[Barrett808]

6. Asia Times calls these the "Sinn Fein" of the insurgency n/t

[alkaline9]

8. does anyone else feel like...

...splitting up Iraq was BushCo's plan all along? The mighty US military comes in, destroys everything, then divides the land into 4 sections... Wait, did he say 4? Yes, 4! one for the Sunni, one for the Shiites, one for the Kurds, and one for the oil ... a new US territory. After all, a divided Iraq means less unified counter attack on the US forces. It almost feels like he's trying to do this in America too...but thats another topic

Maybe I'm crazy, but I wouldn't put it past this administration.

Thoughts?

[enigma000]

9. You give them too much credit

I find it unlikely that the Bush administration was capable of predicting this post-invasion outcome. If they did, they would have done a much better job in managing the situation. Look at the cost: 200 billion spent, 2,000 dead troops, elected officials trying to keep the country unified. Not to mention each delay, each casualty is seen as a blemish on the administration's record.

No, if this was planned, it would have gone much more smoothly than this.