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 : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (17045)	4/10/2008 9:29:18 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

We are already seeing that happen. Or else how do you explain the fact that the US President has to sneak into Iraq under cover of darkness but the President Of Iran lands in broad daylight and is given a red carpet welcome. Isn't it stupid to keep pursuing a policy that us landed us in this state. Time to withdraw and look at a new policy. We should have thought about what you say before going in. Two Presidents before Bush pursued a policy with Iraq/Saddam which was very successful with regards to geopolitical balance. This President comes in with his band of primitive politicians and rushes into removing Saddam. We a deep in the abyss already. Now let us plan on coming out of that abyss.

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (17045)	4/10/2008 9:32:41 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 149317

there are two enemies of the US in the middle east and south asia. 1. Al queada and sunni fanatics in pakistan and saudi arabia and in europe. They have already attacked us. 2. iran/shia crescent spreading from persia into iraq, lebanon, palestine with radical movements like hizbo and hamas. Here radical movements have attacked targets but not the grand kind of attack as with al quaeda. I dont think we can fight both at the same time. Al quaeda is the more logical first target but they are weaker than iran is and iran is also on the verge of becoming a nuke power. This is similar to our strategic problem during the sino-soviet emnity. We will need great Foreign policy people in the next admin to make the right choices for us. Perhaps we can start by neutralizing al quaed by allying with the sunnis for democratic change and not support the mushaifs and mubaraks anymore. Iran strategically is the greater danger. Al quaeda tactially is the greater danger.

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (17045)	4/10/2008 9:45:49 AM
From: DismalScientist	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

<< Question: Would you be willin to accept a Theocratic government in Iraq hostile to the US (a la Iran) in return for an immediate withdrawal of US forces? >> First, let's remember that before we went in, we had a government - yes a brutal one - that was opposed to Iran and, in fact, neutralized Iran's power. Now that we have imposed "democracy" in Iraq the result we all fear - a Theocratic Shia government - is a very likely outcome - whether we leave sooner or later.

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (17045)	4/10/2008 10:29:12 AM
From: Travis_Bickle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 149317

I would have no problem with that, it is of interest to the Iraqis, not to me ... so long as we don't end up with a theocratic government in my little corner of sunny Florida, I don't have a dog in that fight.

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (17045)	4/11/2008 12:05:11 AM
From: RetiredNow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Yes, I would. Who cares? If we weren't busy sticking our noses in the Middle East we wouldn't have made so many damn enemies there in the first place. And let's face it. The only reason we are sticking our noses over there is that they have oil. So let's solve the problem permanently. Let's get off the oil, then let the Muslims have their forever tribal warfare without us trying to break up the fight all the time. We have better things to do with our time, money, and child soldiers. There are plenty of problems right here at home. Now just to be clear. I've always been for a strong military. When we leave Iraq, I'd make it very clear to everyone in the region that we have a new policy. We won't play world police or interfere in other countries. However, if we are attacked, we will make damn sure that the group of people or rulers of the country who attacked us don't survive the experience. End of story.