This is a completely POLITICAL thread discussing the status of the middle-east, those involved in responding are NOT political leaders or decision makers so remember that all opinions stated are just that, opinions. Proceed with caution!
--------------------------------------------------
I was watching some recent reports on reaction to the Baker-Hamilton report on the state of Iraq. Needless to say the report was not flattering of the current situation, and justly so. The report called for the surrounding nations of Iraq to be involved, to an extent, in helping resolve some Iraqi state and surrounding state issues. So remarks focused on the Kurdish north having pretty much complete control of northern oil profits and the fact that the near "statehood" of the Kurdish sect was a problem for Iraq and the region along with the Sunni and Shia issues.
Now not to my surprise Kurdish leaders didn't like the report, southern Iraqi leaders didn't like the report, the President of Iraq didn't like the report...why...because it basically said the road they are going down will continually lead to war, not only in Iraq, but also in surrounding areas. Since each one of these area leaders simply wants more control for themselves, not really the best interest of Iraq.
The one thing that escapes me is the fact that no leader in the US, or the world, has come out and said what I believe is obvious: these leaders in the middle-east have NEVER had peace in their region and have been in constant battle since the dawn of time. So IMO leaders from the region acting as if they know the road to peace is asinine. These are "leaders" with no track record of success in peace yet they can't stop destroying any item that comes out laying out a possible solution. I watched an interview with James Baker on the topic and he was seconds from saying "why are we being questioned by these people?".
--
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html