I apologize for the rather souther/redneck thread title. Moving on:

So there is a lot of discussion of partitioning Iraq into three sections now that the Democrats have taken control.

Do you think something like this would be beneficial for the stability of Iraq? Is it only a temporary fix that will likely end in equivalent, if not more, violence than already exists and perpetuate a civil war where the Shiite's crush the Sunni's and destroy the Kurds? Or, is this something that could provide a lasting solution and sturdy stepping stone to a prosperous Iraq?

Opinions?

We still get the motherfuckin' oil, right?

I don't think there is a lasting solution, but giving them their own sandboxes and jungle gyms will at least get them on on separate playgrounds and they'll have to bike over to the other dudes' swingsets in order to get into fights. That's something.

I guess.

Most of the violence is in or around Baghdad were the population is mixed so partitioning Iraq up doesn't seem to solve that too much.

The oil is in the north (Kurdish area) and south of Iraq (Shia area), the Sunni's are/would be dead against partition.

Also, any Shia state from a fragmented Iraq would probably get into bed with Iran pretty quickly which I'm sure would be 'against US interests'.

By "a lot of discussion" you mean "Joe Biden is talking about" right?

Declare victory and leave.

I did a report on the Kurds in '91 during the first Gulf war. Even my MC Breed & the DFC listening 16 year old self could see that there was no logical reason beyond oil that the Kurds were part of Iraq.

Well not just Beiden, and I didn't mean to make it sound like it was a "democrat" idea because I don't know that that's true at all. But I read a couple news stories about it and almost my whole commute home was NPR talking about it.

It was one of the more prominent stories I saw today anyway. "A lot" may have been a bit misleading.

can't we just bomb the entire country and say good riddance?