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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (50022)	11/21/2006 10:30:44 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 50167

You have inspired me, let me work a good artilce on it with my limitations, thanks a lot for asking the right questions.. Glad to hear it. It's a subject that needs to have some light shown upon it, if only to reveal Ahmadinejad's hand in it (given his strong support from, and ties to, the IRGC). The Iran connection to Al Qai'da has been knawing in my mind for the past couple of years since I became aware of the IRGC's involvement with harboring Bin Ladin's son, who is the heir apparent, as well as their alleged financial and logistical ties, via Syria, to Al Qai'da in Iraq. My view had been that Iran and Syria had divided up the task of destabilizing Iraq's government, with Syrian intelligence supporting the Sunni side, while Iran funneled resources into the Mahdi Army. They could keep the insurgency in Iraq at a "high simmer", frustrating Bush's goal of creating democracy there, while preventing the country from falling into a civil war that would have floods of Iraqis fleeing into both neighboring countries. And IMO, since Persians really could case less for Arabs, Iran's mullahs would not fear any particular aversion to permitting Arabs to kill one another, even if one the sides happens to be Shi'ite. And of course, any destabilization that pushes the Iraqi Shi'a holy sites under the influence of the Mullahs in Qom would be a major side benefit. They have Grand Ayatollah Haeri standing by to be ushered into Al-Sistani's place by his surrogate, Muqtada Al-Sadr. en.wikipedia.org And let's not forget all that oil that sits in Shi'a dominated territory across the border from Iran, and recent maneuvers by Iran to plant insurgent cell networks in the nearby Gulf states possessing substantial Shia populations: iranfocus.com strategypage.com So the question I really have is, given that we have a public alliance between Iran and Syria, and that both parties are seen publicly supporting both sides of the Iraqi insurgency (Mujahidin Shura Council/Al Qai'da by Syria and Mahdi Army by Iran), why are we not seeing the Iraqi Shi'a not understanding that they are being manipulated and torn apart by Iran? Hawk