Yes, I support their right to exist but I think the decision to establish the only Kurdish sovereign state in Iraq, rather than say Turkey, was motivated more by a desire to create more Western-friendly regions within a particularly sensitive area of the Middle East (and keep them out of a future EU country) than to save the Kurds themselves.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Genteel Death
Demonrail- You brought up an interesting point about Blair, since his political education would suggest that he'd have tried to avoid a war till the end, then again the whole affair in Iraq gave us the confirmation that the head of state is the face of a more complex political and economical stance that dictates his/her decisions when it comes to critical international matters, in this case the safeguarding of a present and future strategy of re-balancing imperialistic power.
|
I actually think Blair's involvement in the war is one if the most interestingl aspects of the entire conflict. I've tried to look at it from different directions and none of it really makes sense. Not because it was necessarily wrong for him to have gone to war (although I personally think he was) but because it was so utterly out of step with his whole political self-image up to that point. I don't think he was just a mask for a 'more complex political and economical stance' (although to a degree he obviously was). I do really think that he privately believed in it. I don't think he believed in Bush's reason's but simply felt that they were mutually complimentary. I'll never fully understand it though.