Kurdish Peshmerga...

[JudeObscure84]

Its a socialist revolutionary group that has struggled for self determination against the Baathist government of Iraq. One of its leaders was Jalal Talibani, a member of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, an associate member of the Socialist International.
If you guys support the Palestinian struggle for independence so much, why not the Kurdish rebels who fought against a real oppressive state like Saddams Iraq.

Just what constitutes a revolutionary movement in your eyes?

http://www.peshmerge.info/

http://www.americanphoto.co.jp/photosearch/Previews/PLX105351.jpg

http://www.americanphoto.co.jp/photosearch/Previews/PLX105350.jpg

[JudeObscure84]

After reading some other posts I've gathered that the hatred for Iraqi Liberation has penetrated the forefronts of your pious desires for social justice. The Kurdish Peshmerga has been dubbed the "new Contras" by such sick anti-war jokers. These people fought and died to bring about the end of the Iraqi regime. Now the US is "instigating"a civil war using thier para-military "death squads" of Kurdish and Shia Militas (both groups horribly oppressed under Saddam). What junk! What Rubbish!

You people are too desperate to prove GWB wrong. :angry:

[Militant]

I like 'em. They want a independent homeland, are socialists, and work are for co-existence with Israel. Pretty good for the ME.

[JudeObscure84]

I like 'em. They want a independent homeland, are socialists, and work are for co-existence with Israel. Pretty good for the ME.
:D

Its about time someone made some sense here.

[Militant]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2006, 06:02 AM

I like 'em. They want a independent homeland, are socialists, and work are for co-existence with Israel. Pretty good for the ME.
:D

Its about time someone made some sense here.
The title here for "one who makes sense" is "restricted member". :P

[JudeObscure84]

The title here for "one who makes sense" is "restricted member".

I see you are a supporter of the IDF. Another fighting force against fascism. :D

[Hiero]

So this group collaborate with the US and other imperialists?

[JudeObscure84]

So this group collaborate with the US and other imperialists?

I would first have to harbor the presupposition that the US is an imperialist force, but yes they fight alongside the coalition in Iraq.

Now it seems that many in here support the Iraqi "resistence", would you say that you're all collaborating with Sunni Nationalists, Baath Loyalists and Islamists (who advocate for Islamic imperialism)?

[Hiero]

Supporting Iraqi resistance means you support national liberation. In Iraq there needs to be a National Front. This includes all nationalities including the Kurds to fight against the imperialists.

Anyone who collaborates with the US are enemies of the National Front.

However there isn't a good Maoist party to put forward the national front, there isn't also a good Communist Party to put forward self determination for the oppressed nations in Iraq.

Iraq needs a Maoist party to unite and push out the imperialists. Iraq does not need bourgeois lead nationalists who help the imperialists oppress other nations for the sake of their own nation. Also you can never be compleltly liberated if you collaborate with the US.

[Zingu]

The Workers' Communist Party of Iraq is the most progressive faction to me, they don't collaborate with the Americans unlike the Iraqi Communist Party, and oppose the Islamic extremists and western imperialists both; in defense of women's rights and focuses on working class action.

I wish them all the best. :)

[JudeObscure84]

Supporting Iraqi resistance means you support national liberation. In Iraq there needs to be a National Front. This includes all nationalities including the Kurds to fight against the imperialists.
:lol: Kurds support the Sunni Nationalists, Baathist Loyalists and former Fedeyeen that would kill thier families. Thats rich. About two years ago many left winger were yapping about thier already being a strong resistence movement (like how George Galloway debated against Christopher Hitchens), but as it turns out more than a half of these groups focus on civilians to spark sectarian violence.


Anyone who collaborates with the US are enemies of the National Front.

good.


Iraq needs a Maoist party to unite and push out the imperialists. Iraq does not need bourgeois lead nationalists who help the imperialists oppress other nations for the sake of their own nation. Also you can never be compleltly liberated if you collaborate with the US.
:lol: yeah maybe so they can start a 100 Flowers Campaign and slaughter all the "suspected rightists".

[JudeObscure84]

The Workers' Communist Party of Iraq is the most progressive faction to me, they don't collaborate with the Americans unlike the Iraqi Communist Party, and oppose the Islamic extremists and western imperialists both; in defense of women's rights and focuses on working class action.

I wish them all the best.


Why not support the Iraqi Communist party because they favor Iraqi democracy? Its ironic that this other Communist group you list found shelter from Iraq in the UK, Kurdistan and Australia! The three major nations that support the ousting of their oppressor. Also to note that they would not have had the freedom to protest at all if it wasnt for US/UK and Kurdish forces. But its thier loss because the Iraqi Communist Party joined the Iraqi National List (a leftist secular coalition) and gained 8.0% of the Iraqi vote giving them 25 seats out of 275. that more socialists or communists in a legislative branch than the US and UK combined (excluding new labour).

Plus, the little rags they put out ever week is nothing compared to the international support that the Iraqi Federation of Trade Unions get. While remaining neutral in the war they still support the new government and the fight against the extremists.
Also on the table is the Iraqi Democratic Youth Federation, the best group in Iraq that opposes Iraqi extremism and supports the growing democracy in Iraq.

Some leftist you guys really are! ;)

[Andy Bowden]

The Iraqi Communist Party was in an alliance with the Baathists at one point, they aren't to be trusted. And they were part of a US-backed govt in Iraq - despite opposing the war on paper.

Put simply, they have an almost chemical urge to sell out.

The Worker-Communist Party is smaller, but it does important work in the emerging Iraqi labour movt, and it doesn't sell out it's politics. It's been heavily involved with the Union of Unemployed in Iraq, and the FWCUI.

Heres their website - http://www.wpiraq.net/english/

As for the Kurdish regions of the north, they have been involved in repression against those who oppose the US occupation - this for example, - http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=8100

[JudeObscure84]

The Iraqi Communist Party was in an alliance with the Baathists at one point, they aren't to be trusted. And they were part of a US-backed govt in Iraq - despite opposing the war on paper.

First off the ICP signed a National Action Pact with the first President Hasan Al-Bakr, which basically just gave them operating room without being killed. It wasnt until Saddam Hussien stepped in and stepped all over this pact and began to oppress them.
Secondly, they were against the invasion, yet they stated before the invasion that they were also against the Baath regime. They worked with the coalition to regain seats for thier district. I dont see that as "selling out". In fact the other younger commie party opted to operate mostly out of iraq in places that are now occupying Iraq.


The Worker-Communist Party is smaller, but it does important work in the emerging Iraqi labour movt, and it doesn't sell out it's politics. It's been heavily involved with the Union of Unemployed in Iraq, and the FWCUI.

These groups have no where near the support that the Trade Federation of Iraq and The ICP or the Youth Democratic Federation. Mainly because the people support a new Iraq.



As for the Kurdish regions of the north, they have been involved in repression against those who oppose the US occupation - this for example, - http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php?article_id=8100

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=11082

http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=11177
I harshly disagree with the Kurdish government this time. But I bet with international support it will be overturned and he will be let free. This is a stark contrast to what wouldve happened in Iraq pre-invasion.

[Loknar]

So to support Iraqi insurgents is to support liberation?

I notice that when it came to the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan communists specifically opposed American/Pakistani/Saudi/Mujahadeen actions because of the repression they represented and that the ruskies were 'liberators'.

Honestly guys, i think your own hatred for America clouds your good judgment.

What do you want Iraq too turn into? You have a choice between...Ba'thists, Al-qeda in Iraq, or for 3 new nations to come out of the ashes of this Iraq thing. And even then those Shia’s would form a government like Iran. Al-Zarqui would hang around in Shialand. The Bathists would hang around in Sunniland, the Kurds would just hand around in Kurdistan and perhaps even kick the Arabs out of Mosul.

Maybe it should go that way. Artificial nations are usually a mistake (though none more successful than Israel).

[JudeObscure84]

Besides, my support is not for the KDP at all but for the PUK. I understand that that Barzani is taking advantage of the political siutation and is involved with some forms of embezzlement, but he is not who I am rooting for. I am actually investing in his defeat by supporting Jalal Talibani, an actual member of the Socialist International.

[JudeObscure84]

What do you want Iraq too turn into? You have a choice between...Ba'thists, Al-qeda in Iraq, or for 3 new nations to come out of the ashes of this Iraq thing. And even then those Shia’s would form a government like Iran. Al-Zarqui would hang around in Shialand. The Bathists would hang around in Sunniland, the Kurds would just hand around in Kurdistan and perhaps even kick the Arabs out of Mosul.

These folks here in che lives are investing in Iraq's failure by supporting madmen who want the new Iraqi government to fall. They cant even let thier presuppositions go that they would rather indirectly side with Islamists, Baathists and Sunni Nationalists than the Kurdish Peshmerga, US troops and The Trade Union Federation in Iraq.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03...sary/index.html (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/03/17/iraq.anniversary/index.html)


I remember one day when my mother was watching news on local TV as they showed the aftermath of an explosion that missed a joint U.S. and Iraqi military convoy, but killed two nearby children.

Tears ran down her face, as she cried in silence. I approached her, hugged her shoulder and asked her in this moment as she sat there crying, "Hey Mom, if you could return to the days before the war, would you?"

She looked at me for a while -- and still crying, shook her head slowly and said, "No."

[Hiero]

Kurds support the Sunni Nationalists, Baathist Loyalists and former Fedeyeen that would kill thier families. Thats rich. About two years ago many left winger were yapping about thier already being a strong resistence movement (like how George Galloway debated against Christopher Hitchens), but as it turns out more than a half of these groups focus on civilians to spark sectarian violence.

You clearly do not know what i am talking about. Im talking about the creation of a National Front. It does not exist yet.

Supporting Iraqi resistance does not mean you support bourgeois nationalist groups. Iraqi resistance refers to groups and individuals who fight the US and their collaborates. They need to build a United National Front to become stronger while the imperialists come weaking.

Here is the link that explains people's war and what the United National Front is.

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/...09/peoples_war/ (http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/lin-biao/1965/09/peoples_war/)


I notice that when it came to the Soviet occupation in Afghanistan communists specifically opposed American/Pakistani/Saudi/Mujahadeen actions because of the repression they represented and that the ruskies were 'liberators'.

Thta's because you know little about anti revisionist communist. These communist oppose Soviet imperialism. You shouldn't assume so much when you do not know all sides and perspectives.


Honestly guys, i think your own hatred for America clouds your good judgment.

Your assumptions clouds yours.

[JudeObscure84]

You clearly do not know what i am talking about. Im talking about the creation of a National Front. It does not exist yet.

I dont think thats going to happen in Iraq.


Your assumptions clouds yours.

your presuppositions about history and foreign policy cloud yours.

[Sankara1983]

I support national liberation for the Kurds, and there are probably thousands of honest people fighting for this goal. National liberation will, however, not arrive through the efforts of groups like the KDP and PUK, which now form a significant part of the corrupt establishment.

As for U.S. policy, the question for leftists should not be whether the occupying forces support the Kurdish parties/groups today, because the leadership of these groups do not represent real liberation (this is shown by their participation in the governing council and the transitional authority). A far more serious question is why many of the people who now form the second Bush administration sided with Saddam Hussein during and after the Gulf War to ensure that the genuinely patriotic workers' councils were crushed. These policies kept him in power and even reinforced his authority so the Iraqi people could suffer decade-long bombings and sanctions, followed by a second war, in addition to Saddam's own repression.