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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (246374)	8/17/2005 10:01:41 AM
From: Elroy	Respond to of 1584044

The insurgency in iraq spreads, an islamist regime eventually takes hold, insurgency begins to ignite fundamentalist fervor in SA and Egypt...you get the picture. Who is better off then? If the majority of people in these countries want to live in an "Islamic state" a la Iran, then they should be able to do so. As far as insurgency in Iraq turning into some united Islamic regime, it seems duobtful. We may find the "local militias" irritating at the moment, but to some extent they limit the ability of one group taking over the entire country as the Sunnis evidently did under Saddam. Sort of an extension of the "right to bear arm" idea - until there is a unified national army, capturing power over the entire country is going to be near impossible for any single group. They've gotta also realize this, and following a US departure one would hope they either take the path laid down in their constitution, or split into separate countries. Either one seems like a good solution to me, and either would be relatively easy if the "lunatic car bombers" stop blowing everybody up! If Iraqis as a people can't stop blowing each other up, then that's their choice and they can spend the next 20 years blowing each other up. They have had the opportunity to control their own destiny handed to them on a platter, something no other group of Arabs has availablt to them. If the Iraqis screw it up that's a shame, but at the end of the day its their actions and decisions that will determine their success or failure in governing themselves. As for GB misleading the nation etc. etc. etc. I basically agree with your assessment. I don't like GB much, and have never voted for him. So I think we're doing the right thing in Iraq, but not with our best guy running the show and we're not doing it for the reasons he gave. Nevertheless, I support the idea of eliminating by force unpopular authoritarian leaders that have been rejected by the international community for 10 years and shown themselves unable to initiate reform from within, regardless of the reason.