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 : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (2044)	7/7/2007 4:09:42 AM
From: GST	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

You always insisted that Saddam harbored terrorists because groups linked to al Qaeda linked had a presence there on the northern fringes near the Iraqi border. Since al Qaeda is clearly operating in Iraq today, and using your logic, I can only conclude that the US is harboring terrorists in Iraq. The Saudis finance them, elements of the Pakistani government sympathize with them and yet you want to pretend that the real issue is Iranian support -- what a surprise. The very article you quote from throws cold water on the notion that Iran needs to or has a reason to want to support al Qaeda. At most we can say that Iran is not lifting a finger to help us -- what a surprise. As we continue to the process of destroying Iraq, Iran has no reason to get involved with al Qaeda -- we are doing a fine job of serving Iran's long term goals all on our own. They will step in over time to create a much more powerful regional hub that links Iran and large parts of Iraq. There is no need for them to rush -- they can sit back and watch us self-destruct in slow motion.

To: KLP who wrote (2044)	7/7/2007 7:46:10 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4152

Three years ago, Pakistani officials said members of al-Qaeda had begun leaving Pakistan’s border region close to Afghanistan and heading for Iraq. Of the routes used, going overland via Iran was the easiest. That traffic might have increased as links between al-Qaeda and its Iraq offshoot intensify. And 2 years ago, I was practically called an idiot when I suggested the very same thing to a number of high level "analysts" that I was working with in Iraq. However, the evidence I was seeing suggested that Iran was supporting BOTH sides, Al Qai'da as well as the Mahdist Army. My view was that Iran felt that working to perpetuate the turmoil in Iraq would keep the Shi'ite Arabs reliant upon Tehran, as well as embarrass the Coalition and keep them preoccupied. A very simple and basic Machiavellian strategy that I would use, were I in charge in Iran. But our folks were too involved in trying kill/capture Zarqawi to focus upon the role being played by Iran, as well as Syria. Nice to finally find my perspective justified. Worth reading up on the Quds (Jerusalem) Force in Iran.. en.wikipedia.org msnbc.msn.com msnbc.msn.com Hawk