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: Don Hurst who wrote (221747)	2/28/2007 10:48:29 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Ok, if that is the case that 70% supported "forced removal" of Saddam, why didn't they do it? I don't know. Ask them. Maybe the number supporting forced removal was 10% and most of them were in London, Syria and Jordan. Maybe. I'm not their spokesperson, I'm guessing. The Kurds were probably happy with their situation since we were protecting them and they were essentially running their own show even though Saddam still was in Baghdad. My guess is the Kurds greatly prefer their current situation. And the Shia did not seem to be all that excited about our invasion when we rolled in, contrary to the flowers and kisses we were told to expect. If you say so. Btw, how come it seemed that the so-called terrorist training sites we were told about before the invasion always seemed to be in the Kurdish controlled areas and even when we arrested the Iranian "diplomats" recently, they were also in the Kurdish area? The Kurds control Irbil, don't they? You're asking me? How should I know? I've never been to a terrorist training site. I've never even fired a gun.