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: Hawkmoon who wrote (130009)	4/25/2004 8:55:38 AM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 281500

>> And who is organizing it? And does this mean that they seek a return of Saddam's regime, or at least a restoration of the Baathist party? << Le'ts ask the question this way, if the Iraqi army was occupying towns in the US, would it be proper and moral and patriotic for Americans to drive out the occupiers ? And if the promoters of the occupation dismissed the resistance as "just a bunch of republicans trying to restore their party to power", would that convince anyone ? I think you are forgetting that before anyone in Falluja attacked any occupation soldier, the US was dropping bombs on Falluja in the first days of the US attack on Iraq. It was reported in the UK papers, anyway. Then the US physically occupied the high school in the town. And when the locals went to the school yard to demand the soldiers vacate the building so classes can resume, the US soldiers shot dead about 13 people. That is when the trouble started. And revenge and counter revenge began. >> Or is it another force, long suppressed by Saddam, emerging to attempt to wrest control over the second largest reserves of oil in the world.. The Islamists (from both Saudi Arabia and Iran)? << I wouldn't know. But from appearances Iraq's people are against the US occupation. You are again forgetting that before anyone in Iraq EVER attacked a US soldier, the US soldiers were conducting nightly raids to abduct people out of their homes and disappear them into interrogation camps. Hundreds, probably thousands of people are held as hostages in US run jails in Iraq. If the Iraqi army was doing this in your town, USA, would you think it OK ? Or would it be understandable that the local population would fight to the extent thay can ? >> And should they succeed in driving the US and CPA forces out, what kind of government will they replace it with? << A brutal government that would be obsessed with security and retribution. It would keep Iraqis killing each other for a generation. Which I think is the basic motivator of US policy in this invasion of Iraq. >> So what the hell are the Arabs resisting? Do they enjoy living in poverty... << There was no poverty in Iraq until the US imposed a siege of Iraq with daily bombing raids from 1991 to 2003, and when that was not deemed sufficiently destructive, it made up some lies to justify putting troops inside the country to turn the whole place into a battle-ground that is destroying the cultural institutions, government offices, education system, hospitals, museums and whole towns. >> Occupied? An occupied state implies that all Iraqis are responsible for the acts of Saddam's regime. That the war was not just overthrow Saddam and liberate a repressed people, but that now the people are identifying themselves as supporters of Saddam and his Baathist criminals.. << Is that the new party line of the war justifiers ? I thought it was about weapons of mass destruction and yellow cake. 45 minute deployments and such ? Did you listen to the puppet-in-chief reiterate his claim that he still expects the weapons will be found ? That was in the last couple minutes of the press conference. Where he couldn't think of any mistake that he might have made. Doesn't that tell you the destruction of Iraq is intentional, and not a mistake ? >> So if they want to consider themselves occupied, then maybe we have less reason to feel remorse about killing those who claim we're occupying them.. That is exactly why US-UK claimed there weapons ready to deploy. It was to make sure there was no remorse about the bombing of un-armed civilians and daily killing that the US soldiers did in Iraq during the invasion. After all, the US VP kept saying Iraq was connected to the WTC attacks. Has he apologized for that yet ? >> But it would seem that many Iraqis don't seem to understand that their surrounding rivals have a VESTED INTEREST in seeing them dissolve into factional war. Iran and Saudi Arabia would certainly love it, because they could use that as an excuse to step in and seize those oil supplies for themselves (and not the Iraqi people). And the only thing preventing is not the Iraqi people, it's those CPA forces that you flippantly call "occupiers". << Iraqi governments had kept out foreign agents for the past 80 years. The US destroyed the Iraqi Army and police. After the US leaves, their legacy will be the physical destruction, the ruined lives and families, the crippled and maimed. And in addition, the foreign agents that came in to fight the US. Yes, Iraq's tragedy will continue for a long time. >> But it's alright for Al-Sadr to be a foreign agent of Iran? Btw, it was both Al-Hakim and Al-Khoei.. They were there to reconcile their previous difference and unify their efforts. Al-Sadr saw that as a direct threat to HIS (and Iran's) interests, and had him killed... And 23 witnesses in the Iraqi legal indictiment claim that Al-Sadr was the guy who told them to kill those two. Again... is it alright for Al-Sadr to be an agent of Iran? << Well we do know as a fact that Hakim was in Iran for many years, and Iran supported his militia (Badr Brigade) with financing and protection. So are you saying that one agent for Iran (Sadr) killed another agent for Iran (Hakim) ? I don't know. But it doesn't make sense. he other thing that doesn't make sense, is why did Sadr seek refuge in the areas where Sistani has influnce (Najef and Karbala) ? By the way, Sistani is from Iran. he was born there. So are the pro-Iran fighting their battles in Iraq ? Maybe you can ask why did the US bring back into Iraq fighters trained and paid by Iran (the Badr people) ? The US has no coherent policy in Iraq. It was duped into attacking Iraq by Israel who wanted to eliminate the little bit of support to the Palestinian people. The US has no goals of its own in Iraq. And now that Israel got what it wants, the US president will be left to flounder and flail. Killing both Iraqis and US troops in an effort to save face.