The Kurdish Question

To my knowledge the question of a Kurdish State in northern Iraq has yet to be formally resolved by the Iraqi government . Now the improved security situation Iraq should have allowed steps to be taken to formally resolve the matter . IMO once the US whines down its presence and if the Kurds lack confidence in the Iraqi government , its institutions and local security forces then they will look to UDI as there best option . The Kurds may feel that even without international recognition and sanctions they may still be better off then the rest of the country .

Should my thinking be correct then Turkey will further be alienated . Just about anybody expect for the right wing kooks who still think the war was a good idea know that Turkey the only secular Islamic democracy in the region should have been a strong ally rather then a country that has been alienated by bad policy making . Kurdish separatists remain problematic Iran and other countries are within there rights to go after any security threats inside Iraq's borders. If the separatists are not willing just to settle for a interdependent Kurdish State whose borders fall within what is currently Iraq then any chance of International recognition will go out the window .

reply to post by xpert11

Iraq should have allowed steps to be taken to formally resolve the matter . IMO once the US winds down its presence and if the Kurds lack confidence in the Iraqi government , its institutions and local security forces then they will look to UDI as there best option. The Kurds may feel that even without international recognition and sanctions they may still be better off then the rest of the country.

Should my thinking be correct then Turkey will further be alienated. Just about anybody expect for the right wing kooks who still think the war was a good idea know that Turkey the only secular Islamic democracy in the region should have been a strong ally rather then a country that has been alienated by bad policy making.

Kurdish separatists remain problematic Iran and other countries are within their rights to go after any security threats inside Iraq's borders. If the separatists are not willing to settle just for a interdependent Kurdish State whose borders fall within what is currently Iraq then any chance of International recognition will go out the window.

The Iraqi majority living outside the Kurd’s region are not planning to GIVE away the oil that lies under that region. Not to a distinct minority they have always dominated. The issue of who gets the money will most likely end in violence. Presently, the more cohesive Kurds could defeat the discombobulated Iraq Central Government forces. Baghdad. For how long that remains true depends on how much the 20 million Iraqi living OUTSIDE the KRG region want to work together. And that may be a very long time!

The total area of Iraq is 164,000 square miles. Its border with Iran is 903 miles. 504 miles with Saudi Arabia. 375 miles with Syria. 239 miles with Turkey. 148 miles with Kuwait and 112 miles with Jordan. Iraq’s population is given as 28,945,000 by CIA est. for 2009. A country of youth, its median age is 20.4 years. And it is growing, the fertility rate is 3.89 children per woman in child bearing age. GDP per person is said to be $4,000. Last count showed 14 million cell phones. Military expense is 8.9% of the GDP.

By ethnicity Iraq is populated with 75% Arabs, 20% Kurds and 5% Turkmen Assyrian and others. By religion, the CIA allots 97% to Islam - 62% Shia, 35% Sunni - and 3% Christian. See Note 1. Arabic is the official language but Kurdish is the “official” language in the area under their control.

Regional. The people known as Kurds live predominately in the southwest corner of Turkey, the northeast region of Iran, some Kurds are in the extreme northwest corner of Syria, and in the north and northwest of Iraq amounting to about one-ninth of the land area of the country.

The city of Karkuk is the CRITICAL MASS for the Kurds. Located in the middle of the northern oil fields, the population was once nearly 100% Kurdish but under Saddam Hussein the Kurds were forcibly removed from Karkuk and supporters of Hussein were installed there. The Kurds want the Saddam contaminated Iraqi OUT and the Iraqi want the OIL. Karkuk (also spelled Kirkuk) will be the FLASH POINT! The Shia led government in Baghdad disingenuously has called for a plebiscite to determine whether Karkuk would be added to the KGR or remain in Iraq. The Kurds want only the pre-Saddam residents to be allowed to vote.

Iraqi Kurdistan is an autonomous, federally recognized political, ethnic and economic region of Iraq. It borders Iran to the east, Turkey to the north, and Syria to the west and the rest of Iraq to the South. Its capital is the city of Erbil, known in Kurdish as Hewlêr.

In the Iraqi Constitution, it is referred to as Kurdistan Region. The regional government refers to it as Kurdistan-Iraq (or simply Kurdistan region) but avoids using Iraqi Kurdistan. The full name of the local government is "Kurdistan Regional Government" (abbrev: KRG.)

The population is about 8 million. 95% of these are Kurdish Muslims who are Sunnis. There are also significant numbers of Yazidis, Kakeyís, and Christians. Kurds comprise the ethnic majority in the region (about 95%) while the Turkmen, Assyrians, Armenians and Arabs who reside particularly in the western part of the area make up the rest.

The Kurd’s assembly created in 1970 was under the control of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein until the 1991 uprising against his rule following the end of the Persian Gulf War. While the no-fly zone covered Dahuk and Erbil, it left out Sulaymaniyah and Kirkuk.

Following several bloody clashes between Iraqi forces and Kurdish troops, an uneasy and shaky balance of power was reached, and the Iraqi government withdrew its military and other personnel from the region in October 1991. The region thus gained de facto independence, being ruled by the two principal Kurdish parties - the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) - outside the control of Baghdad. The region has its own flag and national anthem.

After 1996, 13% of the Iraqi oil sales were allocated for Iraqi Kurdistan and this led to a relative prosperity in the region. Saddam established an oil smuggling route through territory controlled by the KDP, with the active involvement of senior Barzani family members.

The Iraqi Kurds may be seen in two ways. The first and the most common way is to view the Kurds as victims, both of the central government in Iraq and of neighboring powers - particularly Turkey. The second opposing position is to see them as an agent provocateur, acting as proxy forces for states opposed to the incumbent Iraqi regime.

Following the removal of Saddam Hussein's administration and the subsequent violence, the three provinces fully under the Kurdistan Regional Government's control were the only three in Iraq to be ranked "secure" by the US military. The relative security and stability of the region has allowed the KRG to sign a number of investment contracts with foreign companies.

KDP and PUK have united to form an alliance with several smaller parties, and the Kurdish alliance has 53 deputies in the new Baghdad (Iraq) parliament, while the Kurdish Islamic Union (KIU) has 5. PUK-leader Jalal Talabani has been elected President of the new Iraqi administration, while KDP leader Massoud Barzani is President of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG).

Turkey. The KRG itself is reluctant and in fact is seldom referred to as such by Turkey, who are keen to do whatever is possible in order to bring down the ultra-nationalist PKK (Kurdistan Workers Party). The PKK have themselves staged armed attacks within Turkey from base areas within Northern Iraq and there are conflicting ideas about whether or not encouraging strong ties with the KRG will help or hinder Turkey's fight against the PKK.

Kurdistan is divided among seven governorates of which currently three are under the control of the Kurdistan Regional Government. The stability of the Kurdistan region has allowed it to achieve a higher level of development than other regions in Iraq. Two international airports operate flights to Middle Eastern and European destinations.

The government continues to receive a portion of the revenue from Iraq's oil exports, and the government will soon implement a unified foreign investment law. The KRG also has plans to build a media city in Erbil and free trade zones near the borders of Turkey and Iran. The KGR region gets a cut from Iraqi-Turkish trade, plus also rumored subsidies from the United States and Israel.
en.wikipedia.org...

Note 1. The CIA World Factbook says the Sunni are 35% of Iraq’s nearly 29,000,000 people. That is 10,100,000 Sunni. The CIA also says the region known as the Kurdish Governed Region - KGR - has 8 million people and 97% are Sunni Muslim. What that means is that OUTSIDE the KGR area the number of Sunni is about 2 million. And about 18 million Iraqi are NOT Sunni but are mostly Shia Muslims. So, by deduction, the An bar Province which is the Sunni dominated area close to Baghdad, cannot have more than 2 million people living there. The population of Baghdad is given at 5.3 million.
en.wikipedia.org...

Q. Is it a WORSE condition for 18+ million people to be dominated by 2 million people than it is for 18+ million people to be dominated by 10 million?

OK, I admit my point may be opaque, What I’m suggesting is that if you remove the 8 million Kurds from the 10 million Sunni in Iraq, that leaves only 2 million Sunni (under Saddam) to control the remaining 18 million Shia - exncluding the Kurdistan area. In other words the Kurd Sunni did not participate with Saddam in the control of the country. So Shia animosity is aimed at just 2 million Sunni who made governance by Saddam possible. Was that enough Windex to make my point clear?

[edit on 5/13/2009 by donwhite]

reply to post by donwhite


Since the Kurds are and will remain autonomous they are in a position to declare UDI if they feel the security situation deems it . Sure if the security in Iraq was to remain relatively stable in the long term then the Kurds best option is to have guaranteed representation in the Iraqi parliament.

However with the region history of dictatorships would you put your trust in such a constitutional arrangement ?
I certainly wouldn't. Now if it looks like that Iraq is going to get gobbled up by Iran then the Kurds could declare UDI and the overwhelmed Iraqi military would be powerless to do anything . If it wasn't for the issue of Kurdish separatists I would say that the best course of action for the Kurds would almost be to declare UDI in about three years time and then wait say ten years . By then Iraq's future should be clear and if the country looks set to be democratic country modeled along the lines of Turkey , then the Kurds could look at the kind of integration described above .

As for the answer to your question . Minority's should have representation but not rule . Iraq's literacy rate is high enough that there should be no need for a ruling class if you like . Although Iraq does have religious fruit cakes to contend with which may some what complicate the situation . You may be interested in this thread if you haven't seen it already .

reply to post by xpert11


If Kurdistan had just two things:

A port. They are land locked.

US Support.

They have neither, sadly, as the only ones in Iraq to do something constructive since the war began, they will ultimately be dragged back into chaos once the US leaves, or a formal civil war will ensue. I for one hope it's civil war and the Kurds can break away without interference from Iran or Turkey.. they deserve our assistance, but it isn't right for our geopolitical aims.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
If Kurdistan had just two things:

A port. They are land locked.

Now that is indeed a very good point .

US Support.

How could the US support a interdependent Kurdistan without condoning the kind of thing it has been fighting in Iraq ?
I am certainly willing to support the creation of an interdependent Kurdistan providing that terrorists aren't given the mantel of leadership . Look what happened after the International forced upon the wrong leaders in Zimbabwe . Although in the case of the Kurds a lack of international support could lead to the same result .

They have neither, sadly, as the only ones in Iraq to do something constructive since the war began,

I can agree with that sentiment the Kurds are sanest(SP?) ethnic group in Iraq .

I for one hope it's civil war and the Kurds can break away without interference from Iran or Turkey.

I accept that Turkey and Iran have the right to go after any Kurdish terrorists who are using what is now northern Iraq as a base of operations . A full blown Turkish and Iranian invasion of Kurdistan would certainly be undesirable .

they deserve our assistance, but it isn't right for our geopolitical aims.

The Kurdistan Regional Government has no way of building up political capital even if they wanted to crack down on the separatists they wouldn't get any support from Turkey who are against an interdependent Kurdistan. Assuming the Kurdish military and security forces could starve off the disintegration of Iraq I don't know how long Kurdistan could use sanction busting to survive economically.

[edit on 14-5-2009 by xpert11]

reply to post by xpert11

Since the Kurds are and will remain autonomous they are in a position to declare UDI if they feel the security situation deems it. If the security in Iraq remains relatively stable in the long term then the Kurds best option is to have guaranteed representation in the Iraqi parliament.

As for the answer to your question. Minority's should have representation but not rule. Iraq's literacy rate is high enough that there should be no need for a ruling class if you like.

At first I thought “UDI” meant unilateral declaration of independence but now I’m not sure. Clarify UDI for me, please. Has not Turkey warned the KGR that it - Turkey - will not accept an independent country of Kurdistan on its border? And likewise has not also Iran taken the same position? And if the KGR does not or cannot control the PKK there are going to be more Turkish incursions into the KGR.

I don’t know what the US had decided to do about the KGR. I’m pretty sure the Shiite al Maliki government in Baghdad wants the US out of town and to move its soldiers into the enclaves by the end of June. That was a proviso in the SOF - Status of Forces - the Iraqi government FORCED on the Bush/Cheney/Rice trio. Another talking point the Palin/Limbaugh Republican Leadership Team has lost! Yes, Obama wants out of Iraq but he has always qualified that by adding “we will get out responsibly.”

And now for my question and your answer. You have put it all in a single sentence: “Minority's should have representation but not rule.” Around the world this is proving to the be impossible dream. I think it worked a long time ago when the parliaments and congresses around the world were populated by the UPPER class who really shared MORE in common then they had in differences. Bottom line was the UPPER class meant to keep the LOWER class in ‘its place” regardless.

Consider America’s upcoming debate over the delivery of health care here. I’ve recited these numbers before but indulge me to do it once more. There are more than 1,500 private companies selling health insurance policies. Each company has several forms or versions of polices. Let’s say 10 each. Each state and the DC are supposed to “regulate” the insurance industry but you know the states never did a good job of that.

Whatever regulating was done was in the PAST tense and not in the FUTURE tense. Only New York stands out as a genuine regulator of the industry. (Being smarter than a 5th grader, I have always advised that you check to see if the insurance policy you are considering can be sold in NY and if ‘yes,’ only then do you buy it!)

1500 X 10 X 51 = 765,000. By the sheer number of variations and multiplicity of jurisdictions you can see the industry is in the cat-bird seat! Any effort at the national level to control the industry is promptly attacked as AN INTRUSION INTO STATES RIGHTS. Or the other shibboleth of the Right Wing, BIG GOVERNMENT.

I’ve already accepted there will be NO reform of our health care system. Obama has merely proposed to add $700 billion to the already outrageous expenditure - $2.4 trillion - so the R&Fs can be paid again for doing what they should already be doing. We cannot REFORM health care up here. TOO much money is at stake. You and the world will know when we have reformed our system when we go to the SINGLE PAYER. And not before.

That was a long way around to say that on some issues compromise does not immediately recommend itself. How can we have more than ONE single payer? Representation is not the answer. It is the ONE great defect in the democratic system. That is, in the END you have to do only one thing. You cannot do two or more things when you are trying to accomplish one thing. Keep health care available and affordable. And everyone does admit the present system is BROKEN.

Reply to post by xpert11

I am certainly willing to support the creation of an interdependent Kurdistan providing that terrorists aren't given the mantel of leadership.

Is “terrorists” as used here generic or is it specific? Up here our government labels anyone it cannot control a “terrorist.” Back in the good old days it was 1) communist or really a long time ago, 2) anarchist. You don’t gain the mantel of leadership by playing in safe. You’ve got to be in the forefront of CHANGE to win the top spot!

Look what happened after the International forced upon the wrong leaders in Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe - formerly the colony of Rhodesia - was carrying so much baggage from the pre-independence days that it is no surprise to me that the country fell into the hands of political demagogues. Gangsters disguised as patriots. But the WEST let that happen and has tolerated it - criminals in government - all through the nightmare of Zimbabwe. Just as we have done for all too long nearly everywhere on the planet.

The marvel to me is that despite the WEST - in this usage I’m referring primarily to the US and the UK - there are still places in the world trying to do the right thing by their own citizens.

The Kurdistan Regional Government has no way of building up political capital even if they wanted to crack down on the separatists they wouldn't get any support from Turkey who are against an interdependent Kurdistan.

Well, wanting an independent country is really natural. I’d guess 97% of Kurds in and out of Iraq want an independent country. Such as is found in Armenia, or Geogia. But for petroleum none of those land locked countries are self sustaining. Much as Jewish people and Israel. (But the Jews have managed to entangle the US into its political machinations to their distinct advantage).

I think this discussion of the seemingly insurmountable issues in the KGR and elsewhere in the Middle East do nothing but to show this is an area where the United States is ill equipped to be involved very deeply. Semitic people love to bargain and to engage in tet-a-tet for hours over the price of a cup of coffee. This is not our nature. We quickly lose interest. We are already fed up with Iraq and are not far behind that feeling in both Afghan and Pakistan. Were it not for the 60 or so atom bombs in Pakistan, we’d be out of there now.

We have no more chance of achieving our claimed objectives there than we had in transplanting democracy into Iraq. Shucks, we still can’t count the votes in Minnesota! Who wants that kind of democracy anyway?

reply to post by xpert11

I am certainly willing to support the creation of an interdependent Kurdistan providing that terrorists aren't given the mantel of leadership .

The Kurdish President (Southern Kurdistan is currently a separate State inside a State, they have a defined border with their own 250,000 man army armed and trained by the US.) is not a Terrorist, and in fact there has been NO terrorist attack inside Kurdistan, they protect their own borders without US assistance, and our total US troops inside Kurdistan is under 100, and almost all are there training their army.

They just cannot break away political ties from Iraq, because they are land locked and would have no way to sell their oil.

That and Iran/Turkey would commit ethnic cleansing in an effort to take down the state.

I accept that Turkey and Iran have the right to go after any Kurdish terrorists who are using what is now northern Iraq as a base of operations . A full blown Turkish and Iranian invasion of Kurdistan would certainly be undesirable .

WOAH .. ok, I believe anyone has the right to wage war against Terrorist, however I accept that any "Terrorist" has the right to wage war against an oppressor. South Western Turkey is 90+% Kurdish .. few to no Turks live there, however, South Western turkey holds Turky's most valuable natural resource: Water. thousands of lakes, rivers, streams and rainfall.. the beginnings most Middle Eastern rivers start in Turkey.. just so happens Kurds live there. Turks have persecuted, killed, massacred Kurds to protect it's borders and hold the water since the Ottoman Empire collapsed. In Iran and Iraq, the Kurds live on top of vast Oil fields.. So the Kurds bomb the Turks, I don't have sympathy for the Turks.

Assuming the Kurdish military and security forces could starve off the disintegration of Iraq I don't know how long Kurdistan could use sanction busting to survive economically.

Kurdistan has the second fastest growing economy in the ME, it holds the second most number of Cranes, has the second highest Construction rate, only beat by UAE. They recently opened a British University and an International Airport. They could take on the Iraqi government and win hands down ... Turkey or Iran however would end them in a matter of days.. However, Turkey has never crossed the border but by a few miles since the Kurdish army was organized.. they used to chase "Terrorist" well into Turkey, killing innocent people on a whim while inside.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I just think it's a shame that these people went from nothing but persecution and ethnic cleansing to prosperous and independent, and once we leave there is absolutely no doubt they will be crushed once again. Someone's got to pull for the under dog.

reply to post by donwhite


UDI does indeed stand for Unilateral Declaration of Independence . My understanding is that you are correct concerning Iran and Turkey not wanting a independent Kurdish state . Sure Zimbabwe is a case of majority rule gone bad but that is mostly another topic expect for the context of the Kurds ability to prosper in Iraq . Of course I am talking about actual terrorists and not the Department of Homeland Security daft statements .

IMO there is no real sound outcome possible . I don't give a toss about the Iranian regime but alienating secular Turkey isnt a smart move . Turkey does provide a realistic model that Iraq and Afghanistan could aspire to . Feeding the Kurds to wolves in the event the worst happens in Iraq isnt acceptable either . Talking about a policy jam .

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hey all I am saying is that if an Independent Kurdish state can be established without condoning terrorism then it could be one of the better options . I suppose on a smallish scale the Kurds could smuggle Oil thou Syria if needed . I wasn't referring to the present day economic conditions in the Kurdistan region . In the event of sanctions investment in the region would come to a halt .

I don't foresee any way of the Kurds maintain what they have gained . As a general observation notice how when Israel and the Palestine's are not mentioned the hounds stay away . The Kurds deserve a brighter future then they look set to get and to few people care .


[edit on 16-5-2009 by xpert11]

reply to post by xpert11

UDI stands for Unilateral Declaration of Independence.

Thanks on the UDI clarification.

Turkey does provide a realistic model that Iraq and Afghanistan could aspire to.

Look again at what you have said. Turkey we now like because it has adopted Westernized habits of dress and liberalized its public education, That is confirmation for us. When Turkey was the major player in the Ottoman Empire, we did not like Turkey. That cultural sea change was imposed on the Turks in the 1920s. And not a few of those who resisted were summarily dealt with, let us not forget.

I’d argue that Afghanistan, Pakistan and for that matter, all Arab and other Middle East countries have had 75 years to make Turkey type internal changes if they wanted. I believe without proof that Jordan has more or less done that. Ironically, IRAQ was far ahead of any other Middle East country in following the secular way first adopted by Turkey.

Yes, I prefer a secular state. But Afghani and Pakistani must make that choice for themselves. The ELITES in both places are secular although they must pretend to be religious, because the ELITES number fewer that 5% of the total population, and I’m being generous using 5%.

I think if you have time, you should consider reading the book by well known (up here) journalist Chalmers Johnson, entitled “Nemesis: The Last Days of The American Republic” written in 2006. He connects the dots.

As a general observation notice how when Israel and the Palestinian's are not mentioned the hounds stay away. The Kurds deserve a brighter future then they look set to get and too few people care.

I see similarities between the Kurds and the Jews. Unfortunately for the Kurds, there are 8 million Jews in America and about 500,000 Kurds or descendants. Plus, the right wing Protestant evangelicals and “end-timers” number perhaps 50-60 million people up here out of 309 million per the latest census estimate. Those “slow on intellect” types see the RETURN of Jews to Israel as a necessary prerequisite to the SECOND COMING OF JESUS!

Between the machiavellian AIPAC - American Israel Political Action Committee - it should be required to register as a foreign agent - and the ilk of the 700 Club’s own Pat Robertson, the Kurds have no chance at all of getting any popular support up here. They are own their own.

reply to post by donwhite


I think you would find that the Turks were at least had secular leanings while the Ottoman Empire was the Sick Man of Europe . TE Lawrence noted this in memoirs along with the fact that it was another reason for the various tribes to hate the Turks . IMO in terms of Pakistan and Afghanistan you haven't grasped the lesson from Rhodesia which is that a less then perfect government can be replaced by something far worse . Returning to the focus of the topic you have somewhat inadvertently hit upon an issue related to the creation of the state of Israel.

How can the Jews be given a homeland and then the US and the UN say no to other people like the Kurds ?

I know about the associated guilt with the Holocaust and Truman support for the creation of the state of Israel because he wanted the Jewish vote . Never the less my question is still valid .

reply to post by xpert11

I think you would find that the Turks were at least had secular leanings while the Ottoman Empire was the Sick Man of Europe . TE Lawrence noted this in memoirs along with the fact that it was another reason for the various tribes to hate the Turks .

You have the advantage on me Mr X11. I have not read T. E. Lawrence’s memoirs. And I have said in other contexts that any politician can only do what the general public will allow or accept, at least over the long haul. The old argument is: Do men make the times or do times make the men?

IMO in terms of Pakistan and Afghanistan you haven't grasped the lesson from Rhodesia which is that a less then perfect government can be replaced by something far worse.

Well, I nave never denied that possibility. In fact, it seems the more probable at least in 3rd world countries. That things will get worse, not better. I was using the Rhodesia/Zimbabwe sequence as an example of the lackadaisical attitude the WEST say the US and UK, take towards cruel governments so long as they comply with our wishes. In other words, the balance of trade trumps our humanitarian concerns.

Returning to the focus of the topic you have somewhat inadvertently hit upon an issue related to the creation of the state of Israel. How can the Jews be given a homeland and then the US and the UN say no to other people like the Kurds? I know about the associated guilt with the Holocaust and Truman support for the creation of the state of Israel because he wanted the Jewish vote. Never the less my question is still valid.

E A S Y! In 1948 the United States 'owned' the United Nations. I like to think the Four Freedoms proclaimed by FDR (January 6, 1941) a goal he said we should work to achieve in our lifetimes. 1. Freedom of speech and expression. 2. Freedom of religion. 3. Freedom from want. 4. Freedom from fear. I believe those freedoms embody the RIGHT of self determination.

The UN Charter, Chapter 1, Article 1, Part 2, reads in part: “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples . . “

I don’t know when Christianity began its endless litany of “Christ Killers.” I’m satisfied the terrible verses were inserted into the text of the Holy Writ - Matt. 27: 24-25 - by some ambitious scribe (or monk) between the late 4th up to the early 5th century CE. 360 CE to 450 CE. More particularly AFTER the canon of scripture - the 27 books of the NT - became the rule. It is still popular with proto-Nazi groups up here. (Members of my family live in a sub-division built after 1972, that was formerly a Jewish golf club when Jacksonville’s local golf courses opened to Jewish members). Anti-Semitism is not all that far away in point of time here in the US of A. Nor is anti-black sentiments. The best I can say about America is we are a “work in progress.” And you know which of the two political parties is holding us back, too.

The Kurds, the Balochi, the Tibetans, the Tamil, the natives of Brazil, and on and on and on. If we did “right by them” there would be about 2,000 independent countries around the world and 1,900 of them would not be self-supporting. So what do we do? We talk the talk all the time but we rarely walk the walk!

[edit on 5/17/2009 by donwhite]