unified iraq?

Should I stray from the theme of my blog? Ah, who cares, I'm the only one reading it, anyways.

Peace in a Unified Iraq is not going to happen. Why? We handed democracy to Iraq and said "unify." Throughout the course of human history, when has that led to unity? No, what leads to unity on a mass scale is to have a common enemy--whether it be a military enemy or whether it be a 'religious enemy,' a sports enemy, or a business enemy ("we all lose our jobs if this project fails"), people need a common threat to be able to pull together, overcome their differences and unite. The bigger the differences, the bigger the threat has to be.

Since Iraq's 'democracy' was not brought about by a common uprising from within, that common enemy did not exist, nor did they share the bonding experience of a victory over the common enemy.

How is the Iraq conflict going to play out? Civil war, ending in a separated Iraq. That's how they want it.

What could we do to Unify Iraq? Now that we've given them a slight taste of democracy, we take it away. We make them a 'colony,' then rule with fear and terror. We steal their oil and their resources until they get mad and rise up and kick us out.

What makes me think that would work? Well, when you look at former British colonies, that seems to be a large source for the worldwide spread of democracy. They transplanted people throughout the world who had a basic understanding of democracy, then they taxed them until they could no longer stand it. Ta-da!! Revolution.

--og