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: one_less who wrote (224707)	3/19/2007 1:26:34 PM
From: Lou Weed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Thanks for clearing it a little.....the more I understand about this the more I realize that Sunnistan, Shiiastan and Kurdistan seems like the best solution. When they drew up the borders for Iraq it looks like little consideration was given with regards to the indigenous ethnic and religious groups present. Now seems like a hell of a good time to do it right IMO. mon

To: one_less who wrote (224707)	3/19/2007 4:02:06 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Consider these questions, not an attack. "Religions: Definition Field Listing Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3%" cia.gov Now if you're a Sunni in Iraq `and you're choices are to support and maybe join an Iranian fellow Shia invasion by Iran or be slaughtered by Sunnis, which would you choose? Based on population, the Shiites got it. There are also the repeated American charges that Iran is supporting the Shia mlitias in Iraq (al qaeda, of course, supports the Sunnis). If Iran invades, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Turks invade and take the Kurdish north. The trick is the Saudis have said they will support the Sunnis. With their small population, they can themselves do little, but they can finance resistance. The rest of the world may have opinions, but what will they do? We know the UN is useless.