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: Sam Citron who wrote (131711)	5/6/2004 1:53:49 PM
From: Jacob Snyder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Unfortunately, Sam, this article is mostly wishful thinking, like 90% of what is said about Iraq. 6 months ago, before the war crimes (collective punishment of cities, torture and murder of prisoners), we could have handed a (relatively) united Iraq over to a (relative) moderate like Sistani. That opportunity is now past. Sistani doesn't command an army, so he won't rule Iraq when we leave. <America's aspirations for Iraq and those of the Iraqi silent majority, particularly Shiites and Kurds, are still aligned.> If only we had allowed elections, and let that majority speak, and abided by their decision. But we didn't. Instead, we made it clear to Iraqis, we only respond to violence and force. We closed their newspapers, and arrested their leaders. So they fought us, and their militias are carving out Safe Havens, no-go areas for American troops. Those militias will hold the ground when the last American leaves Iraq in a helicopter, from the roof of our Baghdad embassy. The young men with guns will speak, and the silent majority will stay silent. And Bush did this.