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 (4110)	11/2/2006 9:33:16 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

You can't have it both ways, Tim.... Either the level of Iranian influence upon the Shiite-dominated government in Iraq (the formal Treaty of Mutual Defense they both inked... the US & British reports of Iranian munitions showing up... the Iraqi militias training in Iran... the fact that Iranian Intelligence agents are reported thick as fleas inside certain Iraqi government ministries, like the Interior Ministry, the religious linkages, etc., etc.) is a 'relevant' factor in the strategic situation there... or it is not. Tap dancing won't help you avoid the question --- no matter how fast you can dance. And, if you are of the belief that Iranian influence isn't relevant to the strategic situation there (as you have asserted...) then my reply is --- the burden of proof for establishing that contention must lie with you. (Personally, with the weight of all that evidence, I have NO PROBLEMS stating that it is a 'relevant' factor! But perhaps you drink a stronger 'cool aid' then I'm used to... and that helps you to be able to deny what seems obvious to most everyone else, eh? :-)