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: michael97123 who wrote (189671)	6/19/2006 10:24:28 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

>> Iran was reacting to the US lightening victory in iraq and perhaps the fear that they might be next. Perhaps it was hubris that kept the US from the table back then. Correct on both counts...except that the "dirty mullahs" were very weak then. The executive and the legislative branches were under the control of the reformists. The judiciary and some "rogue" elements remained. It was a great opportunity to strengthen the reformists and change the regime in all but name...but nooo, Bushies had to have bragging points and a puppet regime too. I hear a lot of commentary about what US should do with the Iranian regime. So I'd like to draw your attention to the last contract signed between US and Iran, the "Algiers Accords" of January 19, 1981: Point I: Non-Intervention in Iranian Affairs. It reads "The United States pledges that it is and from now on will be the policy of the United States not to intervene, directly or indirectly, politically or militarily, in Iran's internal affairs." >> so it is time to settle up at least on iraq You must be kidding! You expect the Iranian government to sit at the table with the administration that supports anti-government terrorist groups and explicitly has the agenda for its overthrow? Would you consider cooperating with Iran on anything if Iran had an explicit policy of supporting every terrorist group that wanted to harm US and was procuring funds for a regime change in USA? That aside, I don't know why there is this tendency to think just because there is some affinity or mutual understanding between Iran and some Shia factions, Iran can just pull strings and magically solve all the major problems in Iraq. Iran has good influence in Iraq, but influence is not the same thing as control...as a case in point, the Iranian embassy in Basra was under Shia mob attack just a few days ago.