Questions

Soundfuryhas posted a group of blogs from Iraqis under the May 20th entry "Carnival of the Liberated. Obviously its not a completely rounded viewpoint as its from people who speak some English and have access to the internet, but it is some information that's direct from the source and not screened through a media outlet.

Whilst I was reading it this morning, I noticed that one of the blogs had a set of 4 questions for Americans. It was posted 6 days ago and he already had 181 responses so I didn't bother to put in my $.02 there, but I thought I would repeat it here and let you thinking about how you would answer:

1) What is your opinion of the Kurdish situation and will the US establish an experiment in the region?

2) The US started the war claiming that Iraq had WMDs. Where are the said WMDs?

3) Weren't these weapons given to Iraq by the US in the first place?

4) Wasn't Osama Bin Laden created by American policy?

Now, I've cleaned the questions up a little bit in terms of grammar and gone after what I believe is the bloggers intent to ask. I'll offer my own answers to the questions here.

1) I know the Kurds are progressing faster in the rebuilding process mostly due to their great unification. They are extremely worried about the new government being formed and are fearful that the new government will carry on the old Iraqi policy of "dealing" with the Kurds. That being said, I don't believe that the US will attempt to break off the Kurdish region into a separate state. Political alliances with Turkey (NATO) will not allow the US to officially recognize an independent state of Kurdistan barring complete military victory over an invading Turkish army. So, no, I don't think that the US is toying with the idea of setting up an independent state.

2) Large standing stockpiles of WMDs most likely do not exist. Saddam did have some but I imagine that they were only for last minute localized use only. The advance came too quickly for him to deploy anything, even in isolated pockets. Iraq did have scientists who, given the raw materials, could probably make large stockpiles in a relatively short amount of time. However, I believe that the WMD story was a red herring supplied mostly by incorrect intelligence. Most of the intelligence came from Iraqis in exile who had a vested interest in seeing the US move to remove Saddam.

3) Not exactly. We supplied Iraq with large amounts of conventional weapons to deal with Iran during the war of the 1980's, but as a rule, we don't like adding to the club of large weapons. Its a lot easier to browbeat your "ally" if you can hold nastier weapons over his head. Now, might the CIA have introduced small amounts of chemical agents which Saddam replicated? Its possible. But I certainly wouldn't ever say that the US gave the weapons to Iraq in the first place.

4) (I couldn't exactly replicate the tone of this question the way he asked it. It was more of a hostile accusation rather than the simplification I have.) No. Osama Bin Laden was funded by the American government as part of the guerilla movement against the invading Soviet army. The US never contributed to his development of extreme Islamic thinking and did not set him up with large amounts of weapons and money after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan. He was given his original start by the US, but he was not formed or continued by the US or US policy.

Your answers may differ. Feel free to leave them here or there.