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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (85995)	11/13/2004 11:50:34 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793843

I assume that we are trying to do that. State is actively opposing it. We are not running the type of media war against them we need to if we want to overthrow them. When they get the bomb, they could become very aggressive with their neighbors with little fear of retaliation. It would cause SA and Jordan to get the bomb also. If Iran moved to take the Saudi oilfields, just across the gulf from them, and Shiite territory, what would we do? The bomb is not a problem in core states. It is in these gap ones.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (85995)	11/14/2004 2:07:42 AM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793843

Steven, Iraqi and Iranian Shiite clergy are mostly competitors. This won't necessarily be the case: but once the Iraqi election is done, the Iranians will have as much influence on the Constitutional process as we do, and maybe more. Historically, the leading Shiite centres have been in Iraq. Their importance was downgraded during the Hussein era and many clergy fled to Iran. But they never were Khomeneists. Sistani's relation with Iranian Komeneist mullahs is very prickly and his relation with their Hizbollah creatures even more so. I'm not saying the Iranians won't have any influence but they're going to have to fight tooth and nail for it.