Jump to content

Talk:Government of Kurdistan Region

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment

[edit]

I dont understand why there is a link to northern iraq, and then it redirects you to the page Iraqi Kurdistan? , which one is it? is it northern iraq? OR IRAQI KURDISTAN? it seems kind of redundant to name that twice, and have it go to the same link... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.90.141.44 (talk) 22:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mosul?

[edit]

From the Article...

"The Kurdistan Regional Government currently has constitutionally recognised authority over the provinces of Erbil, Duhok, and Silemani, as well as de facto authority over parts of Diyala and Ninawa and provinces as well as Kirkuk Province.

One particularly difficult issue yet to be resolved is the future boundaries of the region. Many Kurds wish it to be expanded to include the largely Kurdish cities of Mosul and Kirkuk,"

Since when did Kurds claim Mosul as a Kurdish city? I've never heard of Kurds claim Mosul as a "Kurdish" city until now.... ܐܵܬܘܿܪܵܝܵܐ 05:34, 11 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Since when did Kurds claim Mosul as a Kurdish city?"
Since well before I was born, or even thought of, Mosul and Kirkuk have been seen as Kurdish cities (by Kurds, at least), and have been mainly populated by Kurds (though Saddam forced a lot of Arabs into the area and Kurds out of it, so as to change that).--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 11:42, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's impossible, Mosul was founded during the Seleucids. The Kurds (as an ethnicity) did not exist in what is Northern Iraq until the 1100s. If they did, then Arab and Assyrian sources would definitely show up like they did in the Middle Ages when the Kurds migrated to Northern Mesopotamia. ܐܵܬܘܿܪܵܝܵܐ 19:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"The Kurds (as an ethnicity) did not exist in what is Northern Iraq until the 1100s."
As I am not born anywhere close to the 1100s, your counterargument is clearly invalid.
There have been plenty of centuries in which Kurds have been able to become established in Mosul, so that it has been a firmly Kurdish city (in terms of population, rather than who officially owns/rules it, that is) since well before I was born.--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 11:51, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
By that logic, what if 3 million Russian decide to migrate to Mosul, does that make Mosul a Russian city since they will be a clear majority? ܐܵܬܘܿܪܵܝܵܐ 19:56, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kurds have lived in both Mosul and Kirkuk for generations.
If you say that, that doesn't count, do you also claim that the people who live in the United States of America, are not the people of that country? That only Native Americans have any real claim to the land, and that people who have lived there for centuries, don't belong there?
Would you go further and say that the people in China can't say that China is a Chinese country, because they only settled there about 1.3 million years ago?--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 04:03, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What your argument boils down to, is that no one has any claim to any country at all ...other than a little valley in Africa, where all Humans originated from.--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 04:19, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the native americans have a real claim, if they didnt then they wouldn't be called Native Americans now would they?
Alright then, according to your counter-argument, I can go steal somebody's land and have 6 generations of my descendants live on that land. According to your counter-argument, it's now my land even IF the descendants, of the person whos land I stole, come back with the original title saying the land is theirs. Is that correct?
What if I steal somebody elses land that have many items of that persons history? According to your counter-argument, the country of Israel shouldn't exist as it's technically Palestinian land since Palestinians were living there for centuries as the majority before Jews from Europe and elsewhere immigrated there.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Assyrio (talk • contribs) 17:43, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Yes, the native americans have a real claim, if they didnt then they wouldn't be called Native Americans now would they?"
That's not what I asked. I repeat:
Do you also claim that the people who live in the United States of America (aside from native americans), are not the people of that country? That only Native Americans have any real claim to the land, and that (the other) people who have lived there for centuries, don't belong there?
"Alright then, according to your counter-argument, I can go steal somebody's land and have 6 generations of my descendants live on that land."
If you did, then your descendants have a valid claim on that land.
That is the case for every single human being. Native Americans were not originally in America. Your people have no claim on any land, that they didn't steal from others.
"According to your counter-argument, it's now my land"
No.
It's the land of your descendants. Not yours. Nor does it make your initial taking of the land right/good/valid.
"even IF the descendants, of the person whos land I stole, come back with the original title saying the land is theirs."
Yes.
...or would you claim that it would be perfectly valid for the whole country of China (with their well over one billion citizens), to invade a single valley in Africa, because their ancestors originally lived there?
"What if I steal somebody elses land that have many items of that persons history?"
What do you mean?
Sorry, but that's not understandable English.
"According to your counter-argument, the country of Israel shouldn't exist as it's technically Palestinian land since Palestinians were living there for centuries as the majority before Jews from Europe and elsewhere immigrated there."
How on earth would you come to that conclusion?
I'd argue that Israel shouldn't originally have been created, but today you have two peoples who have both been living there for generations.
Israel has Jews of European origin, who are grandfathers and were born there, after it's establishment.
...and there are, of course, plenty of Palestinians there, who have also live there for generations.
Thus they both have claim to the land.--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 02:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From your conclusion; if that's the case, then that means Assyrians and Arabs have the same claim to Mosul as Kurds do because Assyrians and Arabs have lived in Mosul for generations. So Mosul is NOT a Kurdish city, rather it's an Arab-Assyro-Kurdish city. ܐܵܬܘܿܪܵܝܵܐ 01:42, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"From your conclusion; if that's the case, then that means Assyrians and Arabs have the same claim to Mosul as Kurds do because Assyrians and Arabs have lived in Mosul for generations. So Mosul is NOT a Kurdish city, rather it's an Arab-Assyro-Kurdish city."
Well yes.
Though wether or not it should fall under the Kurdish region (and thus under the rule of the Kurdish Regional Government) or not, is an issue of who are the majority there (which, arguably, should include still living Kurds that have been kicked out and not count still living Arabs that have been recently forced/encouraged there, specifically to change the numbers), and what the citizens of those cities want. Clearly that would be between Arabs and Kurds, as Assyrians are a minority.
Assyrians are, much like the non-Iraqi Kurds (and Iraqi Kurds, until recently), a people that sadly have no land of their own that they actually have any control of. Even the Kurdish Region in Iraq is only a member state, and under the authority of Iraq, so it's not quite independent.
This makes the Kurdish involvement in the Assyrian genocide (a rather dark and shameful part in the history of the Kurdish people) rather ironic.
Nevertheless there are regions that have a clear majority of Kurdish citizens and have had for generations. Thus one can argue that those are Kurdish lands and that Kurds should control those. I don't know if there are places with a majority of Assyrians (as I don't know too much about them), but Mosul certainly isn't one.--ZarlanTheGreen (talk) 06:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion on US presence

[edit]

What is the opinion of this government on the presence of US troops? --84.20.17.84 08:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update On Referendums

[edit]

Reading the article this morning to learn more about what's happening with the boundaries of the Kurdistan region in Iraq, but what I found was a section in need of updating. The section I am referring to is below, so I thought I would let you know it needs an update.

"The final boundaries of the autonomous region are set to be decided through a number of referendums which were scheduled to be held before the end of 2007 as stipulated in the Iraqi constitution. However, the preparations needed for such a referendum to take place have not been made by the Iraqi central government, and the promised referenda have been postponed for up to six months.[12]"

Seahappy (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Iraqi Kurdistan level of autonomy

[edit]

A "Request for Comments" has been opened at Iraqi Kurdistan talk page, whether to include Iraqi Kurdistan region as part of the list of political entities in Asia. The question is whether Iraqi Kurdistan is of similar status of autonomy as Hong Kong and Macau, to be included in template:Asia topic. Please discuss at Iraqi Kurdistan talk page.GreyShark (dibra) 14:21, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Iraqi Kurdistan's level of autonomy (second RfC)

[edit]

I would like to invite editors to comment at RfC proposal on Iraqi Kurdistan's level of autonomy, essentially resolving whether Iraqi Kurdistan should or shouldn't be added to the "other Dependent territories" under Asia topic.GreyShark (dibra) 18:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Minister of Higher Education

[edit]

It looks like the name of the Minister of Higher Education may be wrong: instead of the listed Yousif Mohammad, the current Minister is dr. Yusuf Goran (see for example http://www.mhe-krg.org/node/2089). Even if the two are the same person, I think it would be preferable to use the form that the Minister uses to identify himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.186.20.254 (talk) 16:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hikûmetî or Hikumetî?

[edit]

Current 2015 article has government as حکوومەتی hikûmetî, but KRG website has حکومەتی.

The use of double وو or single و was the subject of some back-and-forth editing by User:Broosk and 130.193.235.132 back in March–May 2014.

Anybody have insights into the two spellings? And if spelled with one و does it represent long or short u?

Pelagic (talk) 19:39, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

وو is the correct spelling since it indicates a long vowel. The official website of KRG spells it with a single "و". However, a quick look into the content of the website shows that they are using "وو" frequently . This suggests that a standard official spelling may not be followed by even the KRG itself. Anyway, I personally spell it with "وو" and I believe it is a better representation. The letter "û" in the Kurmanji dictation also shows the it is a long vowel. Thanks --Broosk (talk) 12:58, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kurdistan Regional Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:43, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kurdistan Regional Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:06, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kurdistan Regional Government. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:05, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:23, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:11, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Government_of_Kurdistan_Region&oldid=1212454271"