Why do you assume someone has to lose out? Map of oil reserves in Iraq http://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...peg&no=11&tt=42&oid=66fe769b85f38438&ei=UTF-8 Here you have a map of ethnic division in Iraq http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/images/iraq-ethnic-map.gif Following the lines of where everyone basically lives now, you give Northern Tigris and part of Kirkuk to the Kurds. The rest of Kirkuk and Baghdad's oil goes to the Sunni. The Shia get most of the fields in W. Qurna. So the answer to your question is. Everyone gets lots of oil, nobody loses out. The Kurd state is basically already carved out, so 1/3 of the job is done. They'll have something to lose. Right now they don't. Of course they will. No matter what happens that will be the case. All plans have that as an element of danger. Under your logic nothing should be done because Iran is treacherous. To extend that thought process nothing should ever be done because of variables. Not a good way to go as whether you do anything or not the rest of the world keeps moving and you'll just get left behind. Please list me, say 10. I keep reading here about how nothing will work because of variables. Yet mostly, I see nobody lists them. If there are so many, 10 important variables should be an easy list to amass. Here I'll start you out. 1. Oil distribution 2. Foreign neighbors influence 3. Ethnic fighting There now you only need 7 more.