Great Michael...now how about a trip to Bahgdad (outside the Green Zone).

The Kurdish area is about the only section of Iraq that is better off than it was during Saddam's rule. This sentiment was recently echoed in a poll of Iraqi citizens from across the country. Elsewhere in Iraq stores, shops, businesses, restuarants are all boarded up. More than 50% of Iraqis have had a family member or neighbor or someone they know well who has been killed or wounded. People are afraid to go to the market for food. More than 50% think it is acceptable to attack Americans and more than 50% blame the US for Iraq's problems (admittedly, I didress).

The problem I see in contrast to your rosey dipictions (other than the situation in the rst of the country) is that there is developmental disparity in post Saddam Iraq. The Kurds, in their relatively homogenous area, have been able to get it together, while the Sunnis and Shiites in the South have not. There are no doubt several reasons for this, not the least of which the extent and nature of outside influences and ethnic/cultural homogeneity (or lack thereof) itself.

But the disparate rise of the Kurds should not be seen as a solely positive development. First they will demand that Iraq be partitioned into separate countries - with a Kurdistan being one of the three; maybe not too bad a result). However, the Kurds will then attack Sunnistan (?) to the South and go after the oil resources there. Mark my words; it will happen. The Kurds have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior. Furthermore, note that their government is only "democratic" in that it has elections (so did Saddam). In function it is more of a dictatorship relatively benign towards fellow Kurds at the moment - though we have seen its ugly side revealed a few times - and potentially very hostile to non-Kurds.

In the middle east power disparately leads to violent aggression.

Thanks for stating the obvious Avedis, and way to stick it to a guy that has been in has been in more hot zones than you will in your worst nigthmares.

You're right though- we hear so much about Kurdistan in the media all the time, heck, its hard to even remember there is a Baghdad or that it is far more violent. The last thing we need is yet another report on a major part of Iraq that is actually prospering, dont we ever get to hear about thing blowing up? If only there was a massive media industry that could feed us that and nothing else for 5 years...

Reading is fundamental?

"My dinner companions were shocked when I told them I’m going to Baghdad next month with the American military. (I’m going, that is, unless the Department of Defense delays my trip yet again.)"

However, the Kurds will then attack Sunnistan (?) to the South and go after the oil resources there. Mark my words; it will happen. The Kurds have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior.

Excuse me?? Can you give me one reason why anyone should give any credence to the opinions of someone who slanders a whole group of people that way?

Avedis, you have a history of making bigoted comments like that here, don't you?

Mary, of course you shouldn't take my - or Totten's, for that matter - depiction of Kurds at face value. Why don't you educate yourself (thoroughly) on the topic of the Kurds - say for the past few hundred years or so - and then come back and explain, factually, why my comments are off base.

The problem with Americans is that they just don't understand how "foreign" foreigners really are. And sometimes I feel that the purpose of Totten's work is to spread the propaganda that within every foreigner is an American just bursting to emerge. This is a perspective with which I disagree strongly. I am leery of the messenger.

I find it interesting how Totten - and all the Saddam hating freedom fighters here - easily gloss over the dictatorial and ethnically intolerant aspects of the Kurdish government.

But hey, they're open for business! They're just like good middle class Americans! Success!

Oh, and lest we forget, the Kurds - or Kurdistan as these people aspire to achieve - is a quasi-state sponsor of terrorism. Tooten kind of glosses over this as well; as if the PKK and the Kurds in the North of Iraq are some how separate. They are not and he should know better. The PKK receives support from the very people constructing much of what is new in "Kurdistan".

I guess not all state sponsors of terrorism are created equal.

Why don't you educate yourself (thoroughly) on the topic of the Kurds - say for the past few hundred years or so - and then come back and explain, factually, why my comments are off base.

Have you actually done this research yourself? If so, maybe you can tell how the Kurds are more (as you said) "jackal like" than any other race or group. Do they have curved canine teeth? Do they hunt small mammals, birds and reptiles? Are they nocturnal, can they run at 10 mph for long distances without resting?

The problem with Americans is that they just don't understand how "foreign" foreigners really are. And sometimes I feel that the purpose of Totten's work is to spread the propaganda that within every foreigner is an American just bursting to emerge. This is a perspective with which I disagree strongly. I am leery of the messenger.

Anyone who has travelled extensively knows that everyone in the world is not "American". In fact, most people in Asia and Africa can't tell a Swede from a Frenchman from an American. We're all 'Europeans' in some places.

I have travelled to the places that MJT reports about, and his reports are accurate.

The Japanese have a very distinct culture, but they have borrowed some things from American culture. And they are open for business, just like good middle class Americans! Should we hate them for that, call them Jackals, castigate them for their history, call them terrorists and foreign foreigners?

I guess if you hate America enough, you'd hate any culture that borrows from us, or doesn't hate us with venom equal to yours.

The Kurds have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior.

You win yourself no points by sliming an entire group of people. If you want to make a point, make it with facts.

If there is good coming out of the tragedy that has been Iraq, and that good is Kurdistan, I'm not going to complain about it, myself.

The Kurdish area of Iraq has been functionally independent since the 1st Gulf War.

I'm assuming that the building going on now, has to do with money coming in from U.S. funnelled through the central government. And that this money wasn't coming in previously. It would be good if Totten got into that detail, as will that money keep coming in, for development?

Also, I thought there were basically two "rival governments" in the Kurdish area, that were often at loggerheads with each other. I haven't heard about that in the last couple of years.

Also not mentioned, the flashpoint of Kirkuk - from what I understand, Kurds have been slowly evicting people who are not Kurds, from the city. Is that accurate? Is it still happening?

Those are valid questions, avedis.

But "The Kurds have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior."

What is that crap?

"as if the PKK and the Kurds in the North of Iraq are some how separate. They are not and he should know better. The PKK receives support from the very people constructing much of what is new in "Kurdistan"."

As if Boston Irish and the IRA are someone seperate. Why dont you try backing up your outrageous accusations against an entire people? And dont forget the context of a minority group without a nation that has been abused by every border that has crossed them.

I'm sorry, Kurdistan isnt perfect, but do you want to hold them up against Turkey or any other neighboring regime? You are completely mischaracterizing the Kurdish political process as well- i'll give you the benefit of ignorance and assume its not malice. To compare Kurdish politics to Saddam is just absolutely beyond the pale, the selfsame Saddam that greased the wheels of his tanks with Kurd blood for a generation. The same Kurds that have been seen poison gas used against by both Saddam and the British in the last hundred years.

Mark Buehner's comparison should be the IRA and the Irish in Eire, not in Boston—but his point is well-taken anyway. And even though the PKK's methods are abhorrent, their grievances are not all off the wall, especially before liberalization of Turkish anti-Kurdish laws.

IMHO, the rise of supranational associations like the EU have taken some of the steam out of movements like the IRA and ETA. They get recourse to a higher authority for violations of human rights, and the get a relative subordination of the power of the larger state. Perhaps instead of inciting separatism and violence, the Iraqi Kurds could pursue natural economic connections to Turkey.

From all that I've read - the Arabs are just as much bandits as the Kurds. I mean mo' started JUST like that.

Al

The bandit is the thief without the badge. Just like the old west here in the US.

I have met one Kurd in my life. He appeared to be OK. He was an Architect in NY. The Kurds do have a problem, though. They are landlocked and surrounded by enemies. Add to that the fact that Iraqi Kurdistan is only about a third of the size of Greater Kurdistan, you can pretty much bet that Kurdistan will not be prosperous for long.

But "The Kurds have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior."

What is that crap?

I am Armenian. The Kurds killed my grandfather's father and my grandmother's parents, sisters, brothers and neighbors. Most of what is often labled "Kurdistan" was Armenian. Southern Turkey, once mostly Armenian going back at least 3000 years is now populated by Kurds and Turks. Why no Armenians? Because the Kurds and Turks killed them all in the 20th century's first holocaust.

Even before the Turks and their then Kurdish henchmen implemented their final solution Kurds would rob and kill Armenians whenever the opportunity arose (as the Turks, who had disarmed the Armenian population, looked the other way). Kurds, nomads, would wait until harvest time to plunder Armenians harvests......this was their way and it is their culture.....and it is in their blood and so will always be. Now the filthy jackals claim a right to the land whose original inhabitants they slaughtered and you stupid white bread Americans cheer them on..........Mary, you say you have travelled? Have you ever been to Urfa? It's all Kurds now isn't it? It had been an Armenian village for millenia. Fools like you are why is the US is doomed in their efforts in the Middle East....you don't know now history,,,,,you don't understand the culture....and when you are told you don't believe it because it doesn't fit your PC US government approved mythologies.

But hey, maybe we can have a discussion about not calling all Nazis "bad"...you know lumping them all together is so not PC (or something). At least the Germans admitted their actions and feel shame today; much more than can be said for the Kurds or Turks.

As for Kurdish terrorism...again you people here are remarkably uneducated; by choice I imagine.

avedis,
I think everyone here generally knows about the slaughter of Armenians. We're likely more than a little fuzzy on the role of the Kurds. Thanks for your perspective. Unfortunately, there are no shortage of victims from the rise and fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Avedis,

Thanks for the perspective. I do hear you. Certainly, the Kurds have been, in the far past, perpetrators of violence. I don't think anyone disputes that. But of course, this is true of every country, and every group of people, in the world today.

I once had the chance to see Elie Wiesel speak, and answer questions, right around the time that East Germany and West Germany were beginning re-unification.

One question he was asked was something along the lines of "how do you feel about the reunification/does it make you uncomfortable?".

I remember one part of his answer completely. He started by saying something about how Germans have the right to their own destiny, because (and this is the part I remember):

"the children and grandchildren of killers are not themselves killers".

Meaning, of course, you don't judge a person by what his parents/grandparents did, but by his own actions.

[As an aside, he did go on to urge that Germany "go slow" with reunification, and think on all the possible effects, and not to do it quickly, or all at once.]

I think this also applies here. The grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Kurd killers, are not killers, unless their own actions make them so. (And possibly, there might be some evidence of this in Kirkuk. But I think it would be counterproductive for there to be great violence in Kirkuk by Kurds, as surrounded they are by not very friendly countries.)

Also, regarding the armenian genocide, at the end of the Ottoman empire, the Turks started going after Kurds too, as I'm sure you know. So, depending on the timeframe from the 1890's to 1910's, Kurds were at times perpetrators, and at times victims.

At any rate, surely you can see how counterproductive it is to judge a whole race, based on the actions of 100 years ago?

Mary, you say you have travelled? Have you ever been to Urfa? It's all Kurds now isn't it? It had been an Armenian village for millenia. Fools like you are why is the US is doomed in their efforts in the Middle East....

I've been to Ireland many times, the place where more than a million people died as a result of the British occupation. But I don't call the British 'jackals' because these things are in the past. I call the British 'trading partners' and occasionally I note that they're less well-off than my Irish relatives.

Europe was obsessed with old grudges during the last century, just as the Middle East is now. Europe nearly destroyed itself as a result. It would be nice if the Middle East could learn from past mistakes.

"the children and grandchildren of killers are not themselves killers".

This is a noble perspective. It can be applied 1. where the perpetraters have admitted their crime and made some gesture of reparations or reconcilliation and 2. Among people that are progressive; whose cultures are evolving.

The middle East is very ancient and the cultures are relatively static. Americans tend to not realize this because we have come so far so fast.

It is also noble and romantic to think that the Middle East could evolve, given the opportunity or proper stimuli, just as we did. I dispute this notion because I do not think the proper stimuli - which would be environmental (see Guns, Germs and Steel for a basic primer with which I agree) - exist. The cultures are what they are and will remain as such because they cannot be any other way given the regions resource restraints. Therefore I say the Kurds of today are and will continue to be just like the Kurds of yesterday.

avedis, I would guess your resources would allow you to be something other than a generality-spouting bigot.

And yet, you go on.

"The Kurds killed my grandfather's father and my grandmother's parents, sisters, brothers and neighbors"

THE Kurds did, or Kurds did? How does a race murder someone? Did they form some sort of super-Kurdish Voltron type monster? This conversation wouldnt fly if i indicated The Jews killed my brother or The Palestinians killed my uncle, it wont fly in this context either. I'm sorry for your loss, but perpetuating this kind of hatred and bigotry isn't acceptable under any circumstances.

"How does a race murder someone?"

This is exactly what you don't understand and that will be the source of US failure in that region.

Obviously there are exceptions to generalities. I'm sure there are good people that are also Kurdish. However, the generalities still hold in...well, in general. Racial, ethnic and religious and cultural affiliation is a basis for violent conflict over there. The US may be a melting pot where your values hold true (most of the time), but the Middle East is not. That is what you don't want to understand. Racial warfare is alive and well in the fertile cresent and history is not like something that happened so long ago that it doesn't matter (even your hero Bush echoed this sentiment).

Also, it's easy for someone posting on the internet from the comfort of his/her cushy US upbringing to believe in lofty PC ideals. But even in the US there are American Indians that would disagree with you. Would an Oglala Sioux on the Pine Ridge Res. share your views? I doubt it. They understand that race and culture are intertwined and together form a way of life that can stand in opposition to another way of life. You fail to recognize this because you are protected from this reality. Your people were the victors.

And I find yours an interesting argument from someone who persistently inhabits a blog where eyebrows are not raised when someone writes a post about Islam being the problem. Can an entire religious faith murder someone? Be responsible for the woes of a region? Many of you think so. Where is the internal consistency?

BTW, Aren't Kurds Islamic?

Avedis do you honestly not understand the difference between idealogy and genetic makeup? Come on.

of course I do, Mark. A genetic kurd raied in an American middle class household by American non-Kurdish speaking parents - as in adoption - would be pretty much the same as any other dark skinned adopted kid living on the block in his/her views towards just about anything or anyone.

Again, what you don't understand is that in that region of the world (and elsewhere too) genetic make up is closely related to ideology. It's a clanish kid of thing. The world has been that way for a long long time. The US is the exception, although not entirely (e.g. witness racism and related belief structures in the US).

I cannot understand why you can't grasp this reality.

What is that that most tribes call themselves? "The people" or "God's chosen People" and that sort of thing. Doesn't leave much room for acceptance or fair treatment of "the other" does it?

Mark, you need to get out and around the block more often.

Avedis,

This is f&cking bull&hit.

What's funny, is you know what you sound like? This is the type of stuff that prejudiced Turks spew, in regards to Kurds. NOT TO MENTION in regards to Armenians!

It's exactly that type of thinking that then "justifies" the killing of more Kurds, the killing of more Armenians, or, as has been seen on this blog in comments before, the killing of all the Middle East (hey, "they" won't change, let's nuke em all and let God sort 'em out).

Just change the "Kurds" to "Armenians" in your sentences above, and hey, you've got yourself a pogrom right there!

What the hell are you thinking?

"The Kurds have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior."

"The Armenians have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior."

"The Jews have a long history of banditry and general jackal like behavior."

That type of thinking, that type of prejudice, that type of bigotry, lead to one thing and one thing only - mass exterminations.

Which, of course, has happened, to ALL three of the groups above. Once you start dehumanizing all of a people (and all of their children/grandchildren/greatgrandchildren???), you have well and truly kicked yourself out of any type of productive conversation, because you are simply being a racist.

As an Armenian, knowing that this type of racist thinking is one of the justifications that the Turks used in their massacre of Armenians - how do you stand by it??

Hypo, you're a pretzel.

That is some weird twisted logic. Armenians never genocided anyone. Turks and Kurds did (and will continue to do so when opportunity avails itself). Just because perpetraters project their thinking on to their victims doesn't mean the thinking is validly ubiquitous. Nazis projected all sorts of vile labels onto Jews. Jews (and most sane people) use some of these same labels to, correctly, derogate Nazis.....

Can you seriously not differentiate between projection/justification for atrocity and accurately placed descriptions?

Intelligent people are able to examine actions and draw conclusions and are not caught in the trap of moral equivalence and political correctness.

So let me get this straight, according to you, I kill Joe's child and Joe accuses me of murder. In my defense I call Joe a baby killer (even though Joe has not done this) and were equal. It's all the same and you, as judge, see Joe and I as equally guilty????????????

Weird, very weird.

Yes yes I know...we are talking about a culture; not a single man. See my comments up thread.

A shorter Hypocriseyrules: Nazis called Jews bad and killed them. Americans called Nazis bad and killed them. Americans are as guilty of propogating violence as Nazis.

Or, shorter still, it's words that count not actions.

#1 from avedis: "But the disparate rise of the Kurds should not be seen as a solely positive development. First they will demand that Iraq be partitioned into separate countries - with a Kurdistan being one of the three; maybe not too bad a result). However, the Kurds will then attack Sunnistan (?) to the South and go after the oil resources there."

I am skeptical that this would happen.

Even if it did happen, I do not see the problem. None of these people are really our friends. Red on red fights are windfalls, not calamities.

On the "skeptical" bit: avedis, what makes you think that it would be a question of Kurds trying to seize control of Arab oil rather than vive versa?

David, I think the Kurds would go against the Arabs eventually - as opposed to the other way around - because they are becoming better organized and stronger than the Arabs and the stronger force is the one that will attack. Also they need the oil to fuel their economic development.

On the other, the Arabs could attack the Kurds preemptively.

I agree with you that could go either way; regardless it will happen. Despite the rosey PC lib "why can't we all just get along" folks beliefs on this blog, Kurds, Arabs, Turks and maybe Persians will fight for control of scarce resources. That is what they have always done and that is what they will contunie to do.

Another reason I think the Kurds will make the first move is because the are beginning to realize something they have wanted for generations. They can taste it now and they are motivated to finish the process while the opportunity to do so is there.

Oh. apologies to all you PC folks here and please don't bother trying to explain to me that it is impossible for there to be cultural attitudes and desires that are strong and general within a homogenous population and spanning generations because ....I guess because you just don't like the notion.........history versus cumbaya...........

David Blue:

Close but wrong. None of these people are our friends at all, and red-on-red fighting is a blessing.

The only thing that I have to add is that we ought to turn the winners blue. Actually not blue, but a colour that is invisible; the colour of gamma rays.

avedis, I'm confused about where you think oil is in Iraq. Let's take it from the top.
1. Kurds
2. Sunni Arabs
3. Shiites
Take two X marks, and put one next to each side that has desirable oil resources.

Is this right?
1. Kurds X
2. Sunni Arabs X
3. Shiites
Or this?
1. Kurds X
2. Sunni Arabs
3. Shiites X
Or this?
1. Kurds
2. Sunni Arabs X
3. Shiites X

I don't think the Sunny Arabs are nice and the Kurds nasty or vice versa, I just think the side that doesn't already have the oil is likely to attack first. And you seem to see it the same. Which is puzzling me.

:P Remember also that Armed Liberal thinks the Americans have seized Iraq's oil as booty. (Yo ho ho, and a bottle of rum!) Which, if you believe that, may alter things. :P

#30 from Fletcher Christian: "The only thing that I have to add is that we ought to turn the winners blue. Actually not blue, but a colour that is invisible; the colour of gamma rays."

I've said many times that I think any idea like that is impossible, immoral and a bad thing even to talk about. I have nothing to add to that.

Anyway, I want to take this opportunity to say thanks again to Michael Totten for his reporting.