If the Shia populations in the Sunni areas (and vice versa) are small enough, it probably won't be too big of an issue.
Except for millions of people being ethnic cleansed.
If the Shia populations in the Sunni areas (and vice versa) are small enough, it probably won't be too big of an issue.
It depends on how aggressive Turkey gets, if it gets to the point of genocide, the rest of the world will intervene. An independent Kurdistan would make it harder for another Saddam Hussein to emerge, it would also create a stable nation-state, something that's rare in that part of the world. It's the reason why we broke up Austria-Hungary.Why didn't they in otl when Turkey and Major NATO members opposed Kurdish independence in 2017 and what strategic interest does the west in an independent Kurdistan and making Turkey an enemy. also Kurdistan being landlocked is going be destroyed by it's neighbors cutting off access.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Iraqi_Kurdistan_independence_referendum#Other_states
Greece is a member of NATO, and the rest of the world would certainly side with them if Turkey attacked.Are they going airlift all the necessary supplies over hundreds of mile hostile terrain and possibly trigger a regional war with Turkey ?
Why on earth would Turkey commit Genocide on Iraqi Kurds given it hasn't on it's own population of Kurds.It depends on how aggressive Turkey gets, if it gets to the point of genocide, the rest of the world will intervene.
Turkey is also a NATO member. A Turkey attacking Greek forces flying over it's own territory or that of 3rd party nations isn't going to led to NATO siding with Greece as shown Cyprus Crisis which had Greek and Turkish forces shooting at each other.Greece is a member of NATO, and the rest of the world would certainly side with them if Turkey attacked.
Different timesWhy on earth would Turkey commit Genocide on Iraqi Kurds given it hasn't on it's own population of Kurds.
Turkey is also a NATO member. A Turkey attacking Greek forces flying over it's own territory or that of 3rd party nations isn't going to led to NATO siding with Greece as shown Cyprus Crisis which had Greek and Turkish forces shooting at each other.
How does Greek forces in 3rd party nations or Greek forces flying over Turkey it's self count as Greek self defense not to mention NATO only apply to Europe and North America not Asia as per Article 6. Also why wouldn't the other NATO members side with Turkey the more important and powerfully memberDifferent times
I don't think that's allowed anymore by international law.Could turkey annex or be given the Kurdish territory in this partition? Or could it remain part of one of the two newly formed nations?
You are quite clearly delusional or misinformed with your obsession over Kurdistan and your belief that the world will suddenly line up to support it. Anyone who flies over Turkish territory without Turkish permission is committing an act of war against Turkey. If Greece or Israel is stupid enough to do that (which they aren’t) then Turkey will be the one with the right to invoke Article 5.Different times
See the response to Question 13.View attachment 469548
Iraq is dominated by 3 ethnoreligious groups: the Shiites, the Sunnis, and the Kurds. They all live in seperate parts of the country and as such, it has been suggested that the country be split among these lines. So what if the coalition forces had done so after the invasion?
I don't think that's allowed anymore by international law.
NATO was still VERY important in 1991. Very important in 2003.Turkey's fighter jets will be expensive doorstops once the West cuts off the supply of spare parts.
I know the "enlightened" position has always been that Iraq is somehow fake. Every Iraqi I've spoken with seems to strongly disagree.
I'll be sure to take your opinion into account.It is, tho.
Expect before the 1991 uprising and 2003 war there was no major fighting between the Arab Sunni and Shia populations even in these case. you had Shias fighting on the side of Government along with Sunnis fighting for the rebels in former and Sunnis fighting for the government in the Latter. If that were the case,Iraq wouldn't have survived the Iran-Iraq war. Not to mention the large conversions from Sunni Islam to Shia Islam up until the Early 20th century .Its just a bunch of ethnic and religious groups that hate each other for millenia scattered together, with three major groups of people who hate each other.
Last native Iranian dynasty to rule over Iraq was the Buyids. While the last Iranian based dynasty to rule Iraq was the Safavids for only 16 years from 1622 to 1638.The hard reality is that for a good part of its history, Iraq was just Western Iran. Went it was not Western Iran, it was someone's else land.
What is this Iranian nationalist non-senseAnd it will return to being Western Iran one day, because Iran is strong and Iraq is nothing
Expect this was the case from 1958 to 2003I can't see any endgame to Iraq that is not a messy civil war that goes genocidal, or foreign domination in some way.
Expect before the 1991 uprising and 2003 war there was no major fighting between the Arab Sunni and Shia populations even in these case. you had Shias fighting on the side of Government along with Sunnis fighting for the rebels in former and Sunnis fighting for the government in the Latter. If that were the case,Iraq wouldn't have survived the Iran-Iraq war. Not to mention the large conversions from Sunni Islam to Shia Islam up until the Early 20th century .
I never said it wasn't sectarianThe Iraq insurgency post 2003 shows just how sectarian Iraq was. Cleansing on the basis of sunni versus shia occured.
I never said it wasn't sectarian