E-Mail Post To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Ten Fascinating Facts about Iraq Overlooked by the Media.' to a friend

* Required Field

Your Name: *

Your E-Mail: *

Your Remark:

Friend's Name: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Friend's E-Mail: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Image Verification: *

 Loading ...

1. topher
   September 5th, 2006 at 11:03 am

   I disagree with the paragraph below from #5. Above this paragraph the author writes that the kids purchase the petro from the station, so there would be no loss of station revenue or taxes.

   Makes you wonder about the rest of the article.

   The contraband cuts down on gas station revenues, and consequently, the government’s cut of gas taxes, so U.S. forces in northern cities such as Mosul are trying to help out by cracking down, sometimes giving away the confiscated gas to motorists for free.

2. dodgyd55
   September 5th, 2006 at 11:48 am

   rofl iraq navy, pwned by teh ark royal

3. marty yarbrough
   September 13th, 2006 at 12:37 pm

   In April 2003 we (the 490th Civil Affairs Bn) arrived on BIAP (Baghdad International Airport)and began working with the Iraqi Airways employees to recover and repair over 100 peices of ground support equipment. This equipment had been stolen and vandalized by the Iraqis shortly after the start of the war. There was not one peice of equipment fully operational when we began.When we left in Mar 2004 and the Royal Jordainian airways was using the equipment for daily flights. Just another little known fact

4. Vegas Vic
   December 2nd, 2006 at 2:53 pm

   All around the world, many areas of conflict share one root cause in common. They are artifical states constructed by the LoN after WW1 and the UN after WW2. This is true not just in the Middle East but also in Africa and Asia.

   Some ascribe this to the incredible ignorance of local needs and custom by paper pushers thousands of miles away. Myself, I suspect that it’s a strategy to keep people in constant civil war which is used to justify never ending UN intervention.

5. Joe Schmoe
   December 2nd, 2006 at 5:54 pm

   “Ethnically speaking, Iraq is mostly Arab, though there are large numbers of Kurds (who are descended from Europeans), as well as Turkoman (from Turkey) and Persians…”

   Bullshit. Kurds descended from the Europeans? The Kurds are ethnically Aryan, as are the Persians. Several thousand years ago, a group of the Aryans left Iran and colonized Germany, and subsequently spread throughout Europe.

   This author is apparently rather ignorant of these things…

6. Named
   December 2nd, 2006 at 7:11 pm

   Jews didn’t leave in 68 after Saddam showed up. They left in the 40’s when Israel was heavily recruiting them.

   http://www.bintjbeil.com/E/occupation/ameu_iraqjews.html

   Saddam ran a secular government, and he fought the kurds since they were trying to take some of Iraq away from him and he fought the muslims, because he wanted a secular government… not a theocracy.

   Additionally, Iraq had a very modern social structure up until gulf war 1. Women wore what they want, went to university had jobs…

7. Lex Talionis
   December 2nd, 2006 at 8:36 pm

   This is one of the most ignorant articles I have ever read. True, the Kurds tried to declare their independence on land that they have squatted on in Turkey, Armenia, Iraq, and Iran. However, their attempts at establishing an independent State were never successful. The necessary corollary is that “Kurdistan” is no more a country than are, say, the Confederate States in the U.S. that, like the Kurds, also tried to declare independence from the Union with the same lack of success. Indeed, the “ethnic cleansing” of the Kurds for which Saddam Hussein has been accused was actually nothing more that the Iraqi government’s response to the Kurds’ attempt to declare their separate independence on Iraqi soil, and as such, it is analogous to the United States’ use of military force to suppress the Confederate States’ attempt to declare their separate independence on U.S. soil.

   It is articles like this one that exacerbates the problems currently facing the U.S. by rendering Americans wholly ignorant of the geopolitical climate in the Middle East.

   Perhaps some day when African-Americans get fed up enough to declare an independent ethnic State on some portion of U.S. soil and China uses military force against the U.S. in an effort to force the U.S. to recognize the African-American State maybe then Americans will understand the true dynamics of Kurdish/Iraqi politics and realize their misgivings regarding Saddam Hussein and mideast politics in general.

8. Amy Goodmann
   December 2nd, 2006 at 9:57 pm

   This will all end in crying.

9. NinjaYaddaYaddaYadda
   December 2nd, 2006 at 11:46 pm

   “…some villages still practice an ancient non-theistic religion called Yazdanism.”

   According to Wikipedia, Yazdanism is not non-theistic, it is monotheistic. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yazdanism)

   Who is right?

10. James
    December 3rd, 2006 at 12:01 am

    >1. Iraq is Actually Two Countries
    WRONG. Very ignorant article. Kurdistan is not a country, and that map is wrong.

11. jim johnson
    December 3rd, 2006 at 2:01 am

    Lex Talionis, let me guess, you are a semi-educated african american that is too young to have experienced true inequality but your still angry at the government for this type of thing happening in the first place. My ancestors were american indian but why would I be angry about what happened before I was born. Just be happy we’ve made progress.

12. faisal
    December 3rd, 2006 at 9:11 am

    1. Iraq is Actually Two Countries

    completely wrong. theres has never been a kurdistan. the map shows this mythic country of kurdistan encompasing large chunks of turkey and syria. political opinion about what you want to be true disguised as fact is unethical and irresponsible journalism.

13. gunther
    December 3rd, 2006 at 9:16 am

    People are entitled to their own opinions, not their own facts. There is no Kurdistan.

14. HistoryGeek
    December 3rd, 2006 at 11:55 am

    Kurdistan or no Kurdistan?

    Prior to the Europeans imposing administrative borders, the region was akin to a feudal system with regional warlords/kings - somewhat like India prior to British colonization.

    Under the Ottoman Empire, there was no strong centralized government that ruled all of the Middle East, and there were no clearly defined administrative borders. The Ottomans, especially in the declining centuries, experienced constant revolts. It wasn’t until the Ottoman Empire collapsed and after WWI that borders were imposed.

    Saying there is no Kurdistan is much like saying there was no Greece - since really it didn’t exist until 1830 or so, and and didn’t finalize its borders until the early 1920s. Sure, there was that Golden Age thing (and most of that spent as a region of independent city states) - but for most of its history, Greece has been a colony of one Empire or another… the Romans, the Byzantines, the Ottomans, etc.

    So, the question is, how do you define a nation? Is it an arbitrary set of borders that have existed long enough for people to have accepted them as part of the map (then what’s Kashmir?) Is it a strong government that exerts control over a specific region (Russia/Chechnya)? Is it a national identity that has some historical connection to otherwise occupied lands(Israel)? Or is it a common cultural, linquistic and racial heritage shared among a number of people who occupy relatively contiguous territories (Kurdistan) that happen to be ruled by another crowd (Romans, Armenians, Turks, Arabs)?

    Though it is true that there is no historical nation of Kurdistan (though there was, breifly a kingdom of Corduene), Roman maps acknowledge the region and a distinct culture, and an administrative region named as such.

    The Kurdish people apparently had less influence than others at the end of WWI, and no distinct borders were created. Rather, the Eurpoeans were more interested in appeasing the Hashemites and the Turks.

15. Alex
    December 3rd, 2006 at 12:11 pm

    Kurdistan is a *de facto* country, as the article stated (”functionally independent”). It has its own government, its own economic system, its own military, its own language, its own ethnic people, and its own way of life that is separate from iraq and turkey.

    To go into Kurdistan, you’d have to “cross” its border, complete with customs house and passport stamping.

    The map delineates the area that is known as Kurdistan. The “border” if you will.

    Of course, the issue of nationhood remains a touchy subject, as shown by the comments. Turkey is particularly touchy about this subject, since Kurdistan falls within its border and no nation likes losing land.

16. Alex
    December 3rd, 2006 at 12:40 pm

    Regarding yazdanism, you may be right. “non-theistic” was the original word in the mental_floss article.

17. Tom Joad
    December 4th, 2006 at 6:34 pm

    I do not agree with paragragh 7. “the second-largest reserve in the world after Saudi Arabia’s”. Venezuela’s new Orinoco heavy crude belt. With a speculative count it is expected that certification will be at least 260 billion barrels of oil. In addition to the existing amount of 80 billion barrels of oil, the country’s reserves would total 340 billion barrels as from 2008, the largest in the world.

    Even if they are over speculating they will still have the largest reserves.

    Just some mental floss Here is a question…. When these reserves are certified, how will the geo-political landscape change… Is Mr Chavez going to be the new enemy? Time will tell.

    Tom Joad
    http://humanopinion.org - because we should have a voice..

18. mediater
    December 5th, 2006 at 11:13 am

    I must say I really enjoyed reading this artical. It encourged me to do my own homework and read some of the homework posted by other critcs. This turned into a discussen board with every one bringing their knowlege to the table! This petty good stuff….

19. Av3nger
    May 14th, 2007 at 4:01 am

    Gunther say: “People are entitled to their own opinions, not their own facts. There is no Kurdistan.”

    Attention Gunther, next time try talking without placing your head up ypur ass! You are not entitled to your own opinion(s) until you learn to distinguish them from factual reality! There IS a Kurdistan indeed, it is just not politically established. It is obvious that Gunther is an Ataturk fascist who wishes to deny the existence of the Kurds (the way some uber-Zionists deny the existence of a Palestinian people), and for that matter a propagandist and a liar!

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT