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 (720130)	1/1/2006 7:54:53 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Peter... I would like to have you attempt to establish some of your contentions... because I believe several of them to be faulty, impractical, and unlikely. Re: [1) we cannot stand in the way of history or nationalism... if Sunnis/Shi'a/Kurds wish to find a new destiny for their peoples in a looser federation, or even in separate states, that is their right.] "Cutting and running would not allow that. Terrorists would quickly control Iraq." Answers: Who said anything about 'cutting and running'????? What I propose is 'winning, not losing'. Re: 'terrorists would take control'. Prove that, please. The Shi'a majority (some 60% of the total population), and the Kurds (perhaps another 20%), are NOT going to stop resisting incursions by the Sunnis --- whether they use terrorism tactics, or not. PS --- most of the 'terrorists' that you are referring to (al Qaeda, etc.) are SUNNI organizations, spending much of their time trying to blow up Shi'a religious sites and Shiites in general. The Sunni terrorists, of course, receive support and resupply from fellow Sunni nations such as Saudi Arabia, the Gulf, etc..., but there are ALSO dozens of SHIITE MILITIAS that have formed. Some of which are accused of attacking and killing Sunnis (no doubt, attacking and killing Sunni terrorists whenever they can get their hands on them). I fail to see how your contention that 'the terrorists will take over' could come true when terrorists are pitted against terrorists... becoming just another military tactic in the Sunni/Shiite civil war in Iraq. More likely they would 'neutralize' or counter-act each other --- until, hopefully, the civil war becomes militarily settled --- but at the very least, they would be too busy killing each other to have much time or attention to spend on the now-absent American foreigners... who, in any event, would not be choosing religious sides in the religious war... because we don't have a dog in that hunt. [2) the Kurds are not going to give up on their dreams of freedom and independance... and they will remain strong allies for the US.] "We will see. We cannot afford to get too cozy, or we offend Turkey." I believe this is the surest thing of all. The Kurds represent the largest irredentist movement in the world. They have been actively seeking their freedom and national destiny as a people for hundreds of years, or longer. I see no reason they would abandon that goal now. Their recent moves to take control of the oil wealth under their lands is further proof they are building their own state.... [3) hopefully the Iraqi Shiites will desire to maintain some independence from the Iranians --- though likely leaning on them for support against the Sunnis, and the Sunnis are most likely to affiliate themselves with the Sunnis in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Gulf States.] "Currently Iran is playing both sides of the fire. They may yet get burned. They are interacting with the Shiites while providing guns and ammunition to the terrorists." EH??????? Iran is doing what exactly???????? You sound confused about current events... Iran is --- most assuredly --- NOT arming the Sunni terrorist organizations (the Iranians are arming the Iraqi Government Shiite Militias which are fighting the Sunni terrorists).