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 : Dutch Central Bank Sale Announcement Imminent? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_urchin who wrote (23436)	8/1/2005 9:54:12 AM
From: philv	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82157

Funny how time changes perception. That is a good plan, if it indeed is a plan, but who can know the eventual outcome and its affect on Israel? When the old Shaw of Iran was overthrown and Ayatolla Khomeini took power, the Shiites were seen as by far much more radical and fundamental than the Sunnis. The American hostage crisis reinforced that perception. The Sunnis, (a la Saudi Arabia), were seen as more compliant, westward leaning etc. Israel fears Iran now more than any other country, and Iran's nuclear program will surely result in war unless Iran gives up those programs. To have Iran and Iraq on friendly terms, united by their religion must be a continuing threat to Israel. Indeed, when Iran and Iraq were fighting each other, Israel prospered and felt secure. In fact Israel supported both sides, probably hoping they would kill each other to the last man. If you accept that, can you also support the argument that Israel now wants a united Iran/Iraq? The Arabs are as disunited now as ever, and most are dominated by either US or European interests. The Sunni/Shiite problem seems to exist mostly in Iraq, and I haven't seen any evidence of a similar problem in other Arab countries. Who knows what the future will look like. The danger of Iraq breaking up into Sunni/Shiite/Kurdish parts has long been recognized, even before the war. The Americans are doing everything possible to ensure that this will not happen. And it is costing them billions, while in the meantime, Israel prospers. I just don't believe Israel would want to have a strong united Shiite fact so close to home, especially given their fundamental opposition to Israel.

To: sea_urchin who wrote (23436)	8/2/2005 3:53:47 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Respond to of 82157

Re: The Shi'ite clerical hierarchy that has controled Iran for 26 years now controls Iraq as well, thanks to the US of A. I've already addressed that issue: Message 21045455 The US endgame in Iraq is to pit an Arab Shiite ally against Iran in order to further isolate the latter... Btw, keep in mind that Syria is already run by a Shiite elite: Will the Brotherhood Take Over? Several factors have sparked concern about the prospect of Islamist groups such as the Brotherhood taking power in Syria following a regime collapse. Many jihadists are traveling from and through Syria on their way to Iraq, raising the question of how active Islamist extremists are inside Syria and how much Damascus tolerates or encourages their activities. Syria’s basic demographics are a key factor as well. As mentioned previously, much of the Syrian leadership, including [Bashar el] Asad, hails from the Shiite Alawite sect. Alawites represent only 15 percent of the Syrian population, however, while Sunnis comprise more than 70 percent. Many Sunnis do not regard the Alawites as true Muslims and would prefer not to live under Alawite control. [...] washingtoninstitute.org