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: Hawkmoon who wrote (184600)	4/4/2006 11:24:14 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So just how would you address our opponent's strategy of "Wait Bush Out"?? Are you going to do exactly what the enemy wants you to do? Is that how you win wars? Well, I would like to have a good answer to your first question. I would really really like to. Unhappily I don't. The situation is too complex, and I'm not there. The article you posted on "trends" was interesting, and points to an answer of sorts, involving reaching out to the Sunnis and trying to ensure that their tribal leaders have a stake in and a reward for joining any Iraqi political order. I've also seen suggestions to partition Iraq into three semi-autonomous regions, with the oil wealth managed by a third party and split between the regions in accordance with population. While the Sunnis might go for that at this point, it isn't at all clear that the Kurds and the Shia would. And even if they did at first, it isn't at all clear how long the arrangement would last without some form of violence and/or accusations of favoritism or corruption popping up. For your second question, I would reply that Bush did exactly that when he invaded Iraq--he did exactly what the leadership of Al Qaeda wanted him to do. Now, in some ways, you can call that a "flip" answer, and in some ways you would be right. But it is also a true answer. As for your third question, No. Why did we do it?