@Augustusea With respect I think you are being defeatist and identifying with the govt as some kind of saviour. Civil war is horrible. And a coup will still bring in a corrupt govt.
What I'm saying is any govt is going to oppress to some degree. If you are able to work study and travel then live your life. Politics is not a saviour.

well we dont really have electricity and no one is going to do anything about that as long as the current gov is here, what do you expect us to do?

@Augustusea How are you on the internet?

I am what you call the bourgeoisie,
the people don't have water, or electricity, while I do, which is complete bollocks tbh

@Augustusea Well you are part of the problem.
Saying the choice is civil war or coup is irresponsible.
Will the poor be better off with civil war?
Its amazing how bourgeoise think the solution is always some drastic nonsense whilst sitting home pontificating on the internet.

it wasn't really my choice to be part of the problem,
anywho, well I am not saying they will benefit off civil war, I'm saying those are the only things we haven't tried yet.

@Augustusea Well you have a choice to wish for non violent solutions. Hasn't Iraq already been involved in civil war?
You act like this is a game and you have to try new things.
So if they wont benefit whats the point?
Life is precious. Pakistan in the eighties had intermittent electricity and crappy sewage systems plus govt corruption. No civil war. Much better now.
Politics ain't no game and neither is war.

Point is, we tried every possible peaceful approach, the school system ruled by the elite is destroying and corrupting the youth, there will be no better tomorrow if no one works for so

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

@Augustusea What a load of marxist nonsense! It's like you want war. So war will purify the youth and you will build your utopia and free iraq from the elite by imposing another elite on the backs of dead bodies.
I'm sure every revolutionary said these same words.
Even mr Saddam Hussein would approve. Going to war for economics. Bravo.

Utopias dont exist, Iraq is hopeless, really, revolutions dont work in the 21st century

@Augustusea So civil war works in the 21st century?
It sounds like your attitude and personal politics are hopeless mate. Let's hope Iraq improves peacefully.

one I wasn't advocating for civil war, two
Iraq will never improve in a peaceful manner, that would need a 1000 years to be done

@Augustusea Read your posts.
1000 years! Man your attitude is a problem!
Places like Yugoslavia Rwanda northern ireland achieved peace in relatively short times.
Seriously,you are part of the problem. A pessimist with running water and electricity and internet probably better fed than me and with two cars.

me being born into a part of the problem doesn't inherently make my pessimistic attitude invalid,
and Iraq has been going on with this situation for about 600 years now, what makes the next 100 any different?

@Augustusea 600 years! Before the first gulf invasion iraq had one of the highest GDPs in the middle east.
Your attitude is invalid. You've swallowed a bogus history.
I've met many Iraqis and they never said that the previous times were as bad as your making out.
100 years! Man you have no faith in progress. Hows Yugoslavia Rwanda and northern Ireland different to Iraq?

600 years yes, this goes beyond just GDP or what baghdad was doing, the people were living in slums and tents for the last 100 years, with constant conflict, only hope of anything good went away with the monarchy and the 1958 coup,
its not bogus history, but you haven't seen how these people are,
all the countries listed dont have a deep complex conflict that stretches throughout history like ours

600 years! Before the first gulf invasion iraq had one of the highest GDPs in the middle east.
Your attitude is invalid. You've swallowed a bogus history. — Asif

What is so wrong about thinking history in a longer scale than the typical American?

If something that happened 60 years ago is important, why not something that happened 600 years? Augustusea just reflects a very common way for people in the Middle East to think.

For example, when Dubya Bush once accidentally (or out of ignorance) referred after 9/11 to go on a crusade, you bet that came the punch line of Al Qaeda back then.

@Augustusea I do believe Iran,Saudi,Palestine,Pakistan Turkey,Bangladesh Yemen etc etc all had similiar problems. I've never heard Syrians say anything remotely like what your saying and they had a very recent civil conflict.
I see no reason why you think Iraq is unique in history.
You are aware the current iraq is not necessarily the same borders from 100 years ago?

@ssu Because the history from 60 years ago is full of propaganda. So 600 years is gonna be even worse.
I'm not American btw. What's important is recent history and now. Living in a mythical past is for politicians and nationalists.

Iraq is actually the same borders from 100 years ago technically, but anywho
why would what you heard from other individuals matter in this argument? it doesn't add, decrease or make any point valid or invalid,
I think yes Iraq is unique in history and is quite different to all of those, as they are also different to each other

@Augustusea Was there an ottoman empire. And was there a Sykes picot agreement In 1916?
Other individuals matter because I'm showing people dont agree with your pessimism.
Every nationalist claims his country is unique.
You realise Syria and Iraq both had baath party ideology during the reigns of Saddam and Assad?

you realize these baath parties were seperate and had quite different approaches and were undeclared enemies?
every country is unique, thats a true term, it doesn't entail nationalism
1920 the borders of iraq were the same as they are now.

@Augustusea Yes I'm aware the parties were hostile and had different approaches. I'm showing that there was similarity in political structure in both countries.
Pre 1916 what were the borders?
If every country is unique what makes iraq different?
Iraq is Arabic speaking Muslim and comprised of different ethnic groups. No different to Syria Saudi Jordan etc. Iran has more difference due to language and ethnicities.

Practically similar according to Ottoman structuring,
Iraq is more diverse then saudi or jorden,
not entirely arabic speaking either,
has a bigger sunni shia divide then syria
and Iraq has the oldest history and the most different amount of identities out of all of them,
a very multicultural and multi ethnic place

@Augustusea Iran is more multicultural. Doesnt speak Arabic. Has even more Shia and ethnicities. And has twice the poulation of Iraq.
But the point is this is just nationalist posturing.
The main relevent history with Iraq is the the fall of Saddam, the US invasion and the current Saudi Iranian US
Interferring and disgruntled iraqi troublemakers.

Iran is more diverse that is correct, how is it any better now? I dont understand that point,

what I listed above doesnt make iraq any better or superior, it just is what makes it different,

and no the relevant history is that of the people, it goes far beyond that

@Augustusea The potential oil and American business contracts are top factors as to why iraq has these problems. Plus the greedy factions covering power and their supporters and propagandists.
My point is Iran is quite different bit doesnt have the problems Iraq has. Nothing to do with unique countries but foreign policy. You realise Libya and Egypt also have a few problems due to US interventions?

@Augustusea The "history of the people".
You mean the Iraqi propoganda called history.
The masses dont write history the wealthy political Elite do. And of course they never lie or propogandise!

According to extremist Islamist or extremist Jewish history Iraq belongs under the rule of a single caliph or greater Israel. Whose "history" is valid???
@Augustusea