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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PartyTime who wrote (182612)	2/28/2006 1:42:59 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

.....Hawkman, I get the feeling the Bush-Cheney Administration wants present day chaos Iraq,.... So now you're an Iraqi "conspiracy theorist" now, are ya? Maybe you think we bombed the Mosque in Samarra too, eh?? Can't take anything at face value? However, so long as the chaos and confusion reign it's more likely the US will not be asked to leave. Seems to me the Bush-Cheney strategy is to keep at least toe-hold Iraq.... Sounds to me like it's exactly what Bush stated.. If they ask us to leave, we'll leave. It's a "Lazzez-Faire" approach that puts the maximum responsibility upon the shoulders of the Iraqi government. However, I would accede that, given the fact that there is so much strife and ALL SIDES require someone to be their mediator and honest broker while they resolve their differences and learn the art of compromise, Bush probably figured it was pretty safe to set such conditions. But no.. you think we're actually involved in a conspiracy to maintain a US presence there REGARDLESS of whether we're asked to leave? Personally speaking, I think people like you don't give a sht about Iraq, or even the average Iraqi child stuck in the middle of all the chaos. You'd sell every US soldier down the river if it permitted you to destroy the Bush administration. That's just as plausible as your conspiracy theory, now isn't it? Because that's what you're basically saying.. That Bush is selling out US soldiers in order to increase the profit of oil companies and that he doesn't really care about trying to create democratic foothold in the Mid-East that might provide a positive example to the rest of the region.. And then there is the matter of the major military bases the US has built in Iraq (for what?),* As a place to re-deploy the troops located in outlying Forward Operating Bases as Iraqi forces come on line to replace them in the outlying areas. And eventually, we'll turn the primary bases over to the Iraqis as well, as soon as they ask us to leave. How is it that Saddam managed put Iraq's utilities services back together, I guess you believe that re-connecting Baghdad to the power grid, WHILE DENYING POWER TO THE OUTLYING VILLAGES to represent "rebuilding"?? Listen.. The power grid and power plants were in such disarray, with equipment held together with chewing gum and band-aids, that it had to be replaced. Furthermore, up until November of last year, power production EXCEEDED pre-war levels, and that power was being EQUALLY distributed to the entire country, not just the Potemkin City of Baghdad. But that still was not enough power to keep up with the TREMENDOUS number of NEW appliances that Iraqis were buying, inluding AC, TVs, Microwaves, Satellite dishes.. etc... The demand will continue to exceed the supply for many years. But furthermore, it was the decision of the Ministry of Power to take a number of powerplants offline this winter so that they could be overhauled in anticipation of the summer peak demand. Hawk