Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
HamzaTR

Choose Pm Who Can End Takfiri Crisis: Al-Sistani

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Well although Syed Ali Al-Seestani is much more intelligent than I am, I think it might be very risky to choose a new PM as it really goes against the concept of democracy but if they do, the new PM sure as hell needs hit the ground running due to having Isis running freely around.

 

By the way, why should there be such a de facto for dividing positions according to ethnicity? Arab Shias are the vast majority so honestly they should at the very least have 2/3 and there should definitely not be a kurd in the last post due to their increasing lust for independence.

 

Let's do some math on this subject, population of Iraq is 85% arabs (thereof 60%-75% Shia and the rest Sunni), 10% Kurds and 5% others (Assyrian, Turkmen etc.). So already from the beginning all positions should be Arab and if kurds with their 10% should get a position then for every 8 positions Arabs get, the kurds get 1. We then see how flawed the de facto is, it would only be correct if kurds are 33% of the population. Now having all three positions being Arab, Shias get 2 because they're approximately 2/3 of the population (1/3 = 33%) and one position for the Sunnis. The area where algorithms and algebra originated can't even handle a simple division, dear God what have Iraqis come to.

Edited by Ibrahim_A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well although Syed Ali Al-Seestani is much more intelligent than I am, I think it might be very risky to choose a new PM as it really goes against the concept of democracy but if they do, the new PM sure as hell needs hit the ground running due to having Isis running freely around.

 

By the way, why should there be such a de facto for dividing positions according to ethnicity? Arab Shias are the vast majority so honestly they should at the very least have 2/3 and there should definitely not be a kurd in the last post due to their increasing lust for independence.

 

Let's do some math on this subject, population of Iraq is 85% arabs (thereof 60%-75% Shia and the rest Sunni), 10% Kurds and 5% others (Assyrian, Turkmen etc.). So already from the beginning all positions should be Arab and if kurds with their 10% should get a position then for every 8 positions Arabs get, the kurds get 1. We then see how flawed the de facto is, it would only be correct if kurds are 33% of the population. Now having all three positions being Arab, Shias get 2 because they're approximately 2/3 of the population (1/3 = 33%) and one position for the Sunnis. The area where algorithms and algebra originated can't even handle a simple division, dear God what have Iraqis come to.

 

Although your numbers may be correct, the problem is that in order to create a union, you must give incentive to the minorities not to want to break off. In other words, knowing that the Kurds would very much like to be completely independent, the one thing that would keep them as part of the Iraqi national government (if not brute force) is to offer them political gains that would make breaking off less desirable. 

You might think this is a bad idea, but arithmetic does not govern how things are weighed on a strategic level. Instead, you must realize that there is a non-linear relationship between what your goal is (to unite various groups) and what you're willing to pay for it (political gains). 

For example. if you're familiar with the American electoral college, then you know that each state has a certain number of electoral votes (some have 3, some have 10 - California has 55). When the presidential election results are counted in that state, all of that state's electoral votes go to the president who won in that state (regardless of the percentage). Interestingly, the population does not determine how many electoral votes each state gets. While the population of the state may be one variable, the state's economic strength is one factor, and more so is how much the federal government is willing to give in order for that state not to want to break away. Each of California's 55 electoral votes represents 410,000 voters. Each of Wyoming's 3 electoral votes represents about 130,000 voters, but carries the same weight. In other words, voters of California are being ripped off, because their vote is worth 1/3 that of someone from Wyoming. The reason this is necessary is because without this added benefit to the smaller communities (like the agricultural states - such as Wyoming), those smaller states would fear that they'd never have a say in political matters, because the bullies from the BIG states would always win the elections. This incentive is necessary to preserve the interests of the minority groups. Analogously, you have to give any minority group in Iraq (especially one with a defined political identity) more than what it's worth in simple algebra terms. That's how politics work; that's how you unite a diverse population under an overarching national banner.

 

No one lacks the ability to perform the 1/3 division you've demonstrated, however, matters become MUCH more complex when you introduce the weights of each of the parties based on variables like wealth, military power, foreign influence, the natural resources in the regions they occupy, etc... Haram, let's not underestimate the intelligence of the Iraqi leadership. They really are dealing with a very complex issue, and there are a LOT of obstacles for them to overcome. It would be easy to suggest resorting to the military option, and forcing everyone to accept the "Iraqi National Program"; but this is not how you establish a sustainable state (if we're to concern ourselves with the country's future).

 

Just my 2 cents...

Edited by jonrhaider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although your numbers may be correct, the problem is that in order to create a union, you must give incentive to the minorities not to want to break off. In other words, knowing that the Kurds would very much like to be completely independent, the one thing that would keep them as part of the Iraqi national government (if not brute force) is to offer them political gains that would make breaking off less desirable.

You might think this is a bad idea, but arithmetic does not govern how things are weighed on a strategic level. Instead, you must realize that there is a non-linear relationship between what your goal is (to unite various groups) and what you're willing to pay for it (political gains).

For example. if you're familiar with the American electoral college, then you know that each state has a certain number of electoral votes (some have 3, some have 10 - California has 55). When the presidential election results are counted in that state, all of that state's electoral votes go to the president who won in that state (regardless of the percentage). Interestingly, the population does not determine how many electoral votes each state gets. While the population of the state may be one variable, the state's economic strength is one factor, and more so is how much the federal government is willing to give in order for that state not to want to break away. Each of California's 55 electoral votes represents 410,000 voters. Each of Wyoming's 3 electoral votes represents about 130,000 voters, but carries the same weight. In other words, voters of California are being ripped off, because their vote is worth 1/3 that of someone from Wyoming. The reason this is necessary is because without this added benefit to the smaller communities (like the agricultural states - such as Wyoming), those smaller states would fear that they'd never have a say in political matters, because the bullies from the BIG states would always win the elections. This incentive is necessary to preserve the interests of the minority groups. Analogously, you have to give any minority group in Iraq (especially one with a defined political identity) more than what it's worth in simple algebra terms. That's how politics work; that's how you unite a diverse population under an overarching national banner.

No one lacks the ability to perform the 1/3 division you've demonstrated, however, matters become MUCH more complex when you introduce the weights of each of the parties based on variables like wealth, military power, foreign influence, the natural resources in the regions they occupy, etc... Haram, let's not underestimate the intelligence of the Iraqi leadership. They really are dealing with a very complex issue, and there are a LOT of obstacles for them to overcome. It would be easy to suggest resorting to the military option, and forcing everyone to accept the "Iraqi National Program"; but this is not how you establish a sustainable state (if we're to concern ourselves with the country's future).

Just my 2 cents...

Makes sense now :P Then the problem is the people of kurdistan and how they are being the bullies. You know it's like when a minor behaves really irritatingly but you can't give it a slap on the face because it's a minor? I have observed many cases where Arabs can't get into kurdistan because of some absurd reason, either an Arab looking guy blew himself up so all Arab single guys weren't allowed in. Well as I said before, kurdistan is like a minor and we can't go brute force as the peshmerga don't seem like how they are described "the strongest militia in Iraq" and even the Isis terrorists (may Allahs wrath and curse be upon them) figured that out so instead of sending a suicide bomber who knows what hes doing, they sent a mongol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...