Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (42644)	9/8/2002 8:05:27 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

If we do take Iraq, the effect on Iran may be an overthrow of the Mullahs. We might be able to expedite it with a threat of "Get rid of the Terrorists, (and therefore, the Mullahs) or else!" Interesting observation. However, I find so many unpredictables in those two sentence, my own guess is that it could go either way or none at all. Depends on the success of an invasion (whether what happens is even an invasion--I noticed Bush is hedging by noting there are a multitude of ways to accomplish his goals), the speed with which it does whatever it will do (hard to tell that right now), the degree of popular resistance it finds, etc. One way could encourage resistance in Iran; another way could deflate it and strengthen the present regime. Moreoever, in the long term, it will depend on reasonably widely shared economic growth more than democratic political institutions. But whichever, Iran is a fascinating study right now. It looks as if, in an impoverished land, the best way to defeat a movement is to give it power. Without a modern economy to employ semi educated folk, the regime eventually generates its own opposition. Keppel is fascinating on all this. Best book I've read on Islam, Islamists, and political movements in the ME.