A meltdown? Please...

Rob says he is worried about the state of affairs in Iraq based on one article and one article alone. I, on the other hand, see right through the Telegraph in a number of places. The sense I get is that everyone is worried about the Sunnis. They don't want federalism, yada, yada, yada. This is what Omar has to say about that.

However, that's not what all Sunnis think; there are the tribal chiefs of Al-Anbar who announced yesterday that they have no objection to the idea of generalizing federalism and there is also the governor of Mosul who seems to be in favor of federalism and in a statement he gave a few days ago he expressed his interest in turning Mosul into a federal state without the need to include other provinces in that state since Mosul alone was one of the four (or was that five?) counties from which modern Iraq was established after the fall of the Ottoman empire.

Bottom line, I think that even if the draft gets approved by the National Assembly tonight or tomorrow, we're still going to face more obstacles with this constitution that focused on unnecessary details; these details were introduced to please politicians and serve partisan ambitions while the interests of the people came only in the 2nd place and believe me, till this moment no one can know for sure if Iraqis are going to accept or reject the constitution, maybe the Kurdish people are most likely to vote with "yes" but the Shaet and Sunni people's position is not definite yet and that particularly applies to the Sunni whose current spokesmen do not necessarily represent the mainstream Sunni opinion.

There ya go. Always question the picture that the MSM paints. I kind of thought that was your general opinion as well, Rob. Challenging the status quo? Eh?

But anyways, back to the original article that began this debate (link at top):

Throughout the day in Baghdad, politicians bickered over how to proceed with the constitution without driving the country to civil war.

I actually don't think I've ever heard anyone in Iraq use the term "civil war" since this entire process began. This seems to be the work of the Western media alone. Yes, there have been clashes... that was to be expected. But come on now:

The drafting began amid the optimism engendered by January's successful elections, when Iraqis turned out to vote in defiance of bombers and gunmen. But US hopes of establishing the first secular democracy in the Arab world have foundered on ethnic and religious divisions.

Foundered?!? FOUNDERED?!? Like suddenly everyone in Iraq that voted in the January elections just decided that they are going give it up and deal with anarchy and chaos for the rest of their lives? Who is this reporter to speak for any Iraqi (he sure did a great job quoting people)? All he is doing is making a number of terribly unfounded assumptions based on a series of minor clashes between rival fanatical groups (fanatical, as in, not mainstream).

At least 12 people were killed as [Sadr's] Mahdi Army militia clashed with members of the Iranian-linked Badr Brigade in six cities and a Baghdad suburb.

Yeah, that definitely sounds like a civil war is starting up. Everyone, head for the hills.