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: Win Smith who wrote (238148)	7/28/2007 7:30:17 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

How is it all connected? Beats me. I'm not the dot connector around here. Bergener was pointing out the large body of evidence that Iran is meddling in Iraq. You doubted it. Is it too hard for you to connect Hezbullah with Iran? Is that too tough? The same Hezbullah who I keep hearing should not really be counted as terrorists because they only attack Israel. Well think again, boys and girls. Hezbullah is a wholly owned subsidiary of Iran, bought and paid for, they attack whomever Iran says to attack.

To: Win Smith who wrote (238148)	7/28/2007 7:30:35 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Al-Qaeda has always been thought to be the principle threat and I'm sure they intended themselves to be that. Once they were diminished it became obvious to all there is a lot more to it. I don't think our military was ready for insurgencies to be as tenacious and resilient as they have been. The level of insurgent threat has disoriented the Bush mission, I am sorry to say, and I still have hopes that the mission works out in our best interests. I wrote a long argument on this thread back in 03 or so describing Al-Sadr as the bigger threat to the mission and I was mocked by all sides.