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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (700562)	9/8/2005 5:15:00 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769667

"Yes I know that they terrorists are mostly Sunni. However, why is Iran sending the terrorists shaped charges for use in IEDs? They seem to be playing both sides of the conflict. It still appears that they are trying to destabilize Iraq." Nah... I HIGHLY DOUBT that they are arming any of the Sunni insurgents who are blowing up Shi'a mosques, etc. Far more likely that the defense pact Iraq's leaders signed with Iran (resulting in a flood of Iranian 'Intelligence agents', 'military trainers', etc., coming in) is providing for the arming of Shi'a forces to resist and attack the Sunni terrorists. For example, there have been a rash of reports of roadside murders, targeted assassinations, etc., of Sunni insurgents... many attributed to 'militia' forces like Sadr's. It's likely that much of this Iranian military aid is going to support aggressive and activist Shi'a forces, such as Sadr's. (By the way: the US military has had several press briefings recently where they indicated that the cash flows and military equipment resupplying the Sunni insurgents was coming from Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Jordan, etc. In fact the US military has said they the sunni insurgents appear to be able to draw on near 'infinite' resources for their rebellion... that as soon as we destroy military supplies they are immediately resupplied. Likely much of this cash is coming from ostensibly private sources, perhaps not from officially sanctioned government sources, but that is a fine line many times... easy to blur. And, it may turn out that there are elements of official government support for the Sunni insurgents, just as Pakistan's government officially supported the Taliban.) I believe it's highly unlikely that the Iranians would be blowing up their 'own' Shi'a allies in Iraq though.... All of this leads me to believe that a splendid little proxy war is a-building on the territory of Iraq... that the Iranians will seek to defend the half of Iraq that is Shi'a majority, and achieve strategic control over the area's resources, while possibly extending it's boundaries. While the Sunni-dominant governments in the Gulf region (fearful of uprising among their own repressed Shi'a minorities) will fight hard to keep the spector of Shi'a political empowerment from spreading to their own Shi'a... and, possibly, regain strategic control in what remains of Iraq. Two things are important to consider: 1) the Sunni/Shiite conflict has been festering for centuries and, among many extremist Sunni, the Shiites are hated more then either Jews OR Christians (Jews and Christians are still 'people of the book', while Shiites are apostates, and are referred to as 'Devil spawn'.) 2) Most of the known oil reserves for Saudi Arabia are in low-lying areas in the Gulf next to Iraq... and these areas have Shiite majority populations. The last thing the Sunni Monarchists in Saudi Arabia want is a successful example of Shiite freedom and empowerment in the region. [It appears they believe a destabilized Iraq will prevent US action against them.] Nah... there will be no US military action against them. (Hell, like I've been saying here for a few years: the Iranians are the biggest winners from the Iraq war. At no cost to them, we took out their deadliest enemy, the Dictator Saddam, and opened the way for Iran to extend it's influence throughout all of the minority and majority Shi'a communities stretching around the Gulf. They have been grinning like Cheshire Cats ever since. Hell, they should put up a statue of George Bush in Tehran to thank us....) "Who he look good on a horse? Your logic is related to why we had supported Iraq against Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Dealing with the devil always seems to result in a bad hand." LOL! (Maybe a statue could show him in a flight suit, on the decks of a carrier... or maybe he could be on a bike?) The principle of 'the enemy of my enemy' often is valuable for TACTICAL engagements... but I believe it frequently fails to achieve lasting success when measured against long-term STRATEGIC goals. Likely if we had long ago adopted the goal (first ennunciated by Carter, now placed at the heart of our national policy by Bush II) of valuing and supporting Democracies, Capitalism, human rights and rule of law --- and acted for those goals in the Middle East and elsewhere... although the going might have been slow, we would have much more success to show by now.