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: SARMAN who wrote (195463)	8/7/2006 1:21:29 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The US was so eager to go to war that they did not stop and think of the consequences. The consequences are on the American soldiers and the Iraqis. I do not know if you noticed that Iraq is in a civil war and the US is caught in the middle. And 63% of the Iraqi people had the opportunity to elect their own government for the first time in their lives. And there would be no civil war if it weren't for former Ba'thists joining up with Al Qai'da on one side, and folks like Muqtada Al Sadr hooking up with Iran on the other, with Ahmadinejad and the IRGC pulling the strings to perpetuate instability in Iraq. What were the consequences of an ever more desperate Saddam taking ever more desperate chances to exact his revenge upon the US/UN for his humiliation in 1991? What were the consequences of the NOW CLEAR links between Saddam and Al Qai'da in a post-9/11 world? There are far more grievous consequences than sectarian violence in Iraq. And there are even more grievous consequences should people like you, with your support for terrorist states and organization actually succeeding in undermining public will to bring democratic change to the region. Btw, there's only a civil war possible in Iraq if the Sunni and Shi'a are evenly matched. But since Shi'a vastly outnumber the Sunnis, it's hardly likely that the Sunni can win. What they want, and what we must encourage the Shi'a to provide, are security and economic guarantees that will protect their minority status. And the Shi'a are just having a hard time swallowing that reality, given the brutal insurgency that has been inflicted upon them.. As for Muqtada Al-Sadr.. he is the Iraqi equivalent of Hizbullah and he and his Mahdi Militia are eventaully going to have to be dealt with. But that's where I expect Al-Sistani to step in. (but I could be wrong on that). Hawk