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 : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (4052)	11/2/2006 2:35:12 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

Re: "...I thought that was your anticipated long term benefit" No. (I listed them in order for you, remember?) The ultimate long-term benefit would be an Islamic Reformation, and the adoption of pluralism, Democracy and religious toleration. That could - I acknowledge - be a very long-term game though. Never-the-less, a bloody, ultimately futile war between the two sides could lay the seeds for this... just as it did in Europe. Re: "...You can argue that the report is wrong or unreliable." But I don't! Anytime every single American Intelligence agency gets together and AGREES on a conclusion --- I'm SURE to give that conclusion much weight! (No, what I pointed out was that you misrepresented what they said. The analysis DID NOT say that 'would' be the result of US withdrawal... it said it might be the result --- there were numerous other possibilities, of course. That is what the phrase 'perceived jihadist success' implies. Obviously if SUNNI jihadists are still engaged in a bloody and massive struggle with SHIITE jihadists... then it would be MIGHTY DAMN HARD for either set of jihadists to 'perceive' much 'victory'. :-) And, as the report was QUITE CLEAR IN POINTING OUT: the present circumstances are a TREMENDOUS BOON to extremists of all stripes. Money and new recruits are pouring into their efforts massively --- far faster then anyone is killing them off. [Define what the term 'winner' means to you in this context.] Re: "Emerging stronger, and with more support." OK... if you are so sure there will be an obvious 'winner'... then presumably you should have NO DIFFICULTY at all in telling us just WHO that 'winner' will be? WHO will be the winner? ('Cause, if you can't agree on a winner... then just perhaps your CERTAINTY that they WILL be a 'winner' becomes less certain.) Re: "...Specifically within Iraq it might mean controlling Iraq, or at least exerting total control over large sections of it, and being able to use these areas to recruit and train more fighters and terrorists to its cause. In that sense both sides could win. You could have a radical Shia area/state and a radical Sunni area/state." So, EVERYBODY 'wins' just as soon as the foreigners leave?????????????????? They are all going to settle their religious/ethnic/and financial blood feuds peacefully --- WITHOUT WAR or further ethnic cleansing --- and then, what? Sit around campfires singing 'Kumbaya' to each other while their oil royalty checks roll in? :-( Re: "... That may still be rivals, and occasionally work against each other to an extent but that aren't focusing all their attention on each other." HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (You do think they will quit fighting each other as soon as we leave! It's UNBELIEVABLE! So... just answer this one question: Why the HECK are they FIGHTING each OTHER right now? Because they are all cross-eyed, and while aiming at us, they hit each other by accident? P-L-E-A-S-E!) [You can't seriously expect anyone to believe, though, that the Shiites are going to defeat the Sunni world, or visa versa, in any ultimate sense.] Re: "Totally and forever defeat? No of course not. But tactically beat back the other side, while gaining strength that they could use against us? Yes that could happen. Or they could come to at least a temporary accommodation with each other and focus on their common enemies." Please... such naivety! (I fear we are right back to the 'If pigs could FLY there would be bacon in the SKIES' fantasy... and you are looking up expecting breakfast. :-) Just answer this: WHO would be sitting on top of the oil wealth they'd be coveting? Their ancient religious enemy... or us? (PS --- you do realize that, to a fundamentalist Wh'abbist, at least Christians and Jews are regarded as "people of the Book" [because we share the Old Testament in common, among other things], while SHIITES are called apostates, referred to as "the Spawn of the Devil". Do you REALLY think that, especially with vast oil wealth thrown into the mix, that these blood hatreds are going to be so easily quenched?)