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: sylvester80 who wrote (184828)	4/8/2006 9:15:19 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The American, British, and other coalition forces in Iraq would be at greater risk of attack from Iranian troops or from Shiite militias operating on instructions from Iran. First off.. by what authorization via the UN does Iran any legitimate right to be supporting insurgent forces committing violent acts within Iraq?? NONE!!! Secondly.. It's long been known by US military forces that Iran has been attempting to send its agents into Iraq. Hell, every year that Iraq hosts the Shia pilgrmage, Iran has sent it's agents... and this was long before the overthrow of Saddam. Thus, what you are acknowledging is that Iran, ruled by an Islamo-Fascist government, is attempting to use violence to destroy and creation of a democratic government within Iraq. Which translates into an act of war by Iran against Iraq. So what's the solution?? Getting out and letting Iran increase it's activities? Or confront them, if necessary with military force, and "encourage" them to reconsider their extra-territorial activities?? Hawk