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: Neocon who wrote (144258)	8/27/2004 2:22:31 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

May I add that Sistani emerges with options regardless of how the rest of the disputants fair.

To: Neocon who wrote (144258)	8/27/2004 2:27:37 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Sistani did what Sadr made him do -- save the shrine. Sadr banked on the symbollic importance of the shrine to avoid being crushed by sheer military force -- and he was correct in his assessment. By forcing Sistani's hand to intervene to "save him", he acquired legitimacy as a person worth saving by the topic Shia cleric. It is doubtful or at least debatable whether Sistani would have moved a muscle to save Sadr's skin, if not for the shrine. So Sadr takes the most valuable Shia symbol, mounts a battle, is joined by Sistani, and walks away clean as can be -- no, wishful thinking aside, this was masterful politcal theater. I find it almost amusing that some would think the heart of the matter here is the "military battle" -- that just reveals plain old-fashioned ignorance.