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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (82263)	9/4/2008 9:08:00 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542883

The Maliki government is refusing to incorporate much of the Sunni Awakening forces into the regular army and police. Once the US leaves and stops paying those militias, they have every reason to take out their frustrations on the Shia-dominated government again. The US did our part and the Iraqi government is squandering the chance for real reconciliation. Been there and done that more than once in the Balkans in the 90's, based on my experience.

To: slacker711 who wrote (82263)	9/4/2008 9:16:43 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542883

Just an observation, but your two thoughts are completely contradictory. If the "Sunni Awakening" is responsible for the drastic decrease in violence, then we shouldnt see it erupt after US troops leave. Would that you were right, Slacker. But here's one version of China's argument. Not certain whether it was what he had in mind. One part of the "awakening" so called, was the US paying and arming Sunni tribal groups to both defend against Al Q and attack them. As a completely predictable side effect, the Sunnis used the same arms and money to protect themselves against Shia. At the same time, rather than try to integrate the Sunnis into the military, the Maliki government, for obvious reasons, has been more than loath to do so. One can expect to see them try to keep their control of the central government and the associated revenues and control of much of the country (a big variable, in my mind). Thus, one of the ironies is that the US is arming and training both sides in a future civil war (god knows where the Kurds will fit into this). And this scenario doesn't include the strong possibility of Shia against Shia violence as Maliki's coalition comes into conflict with other Shia groups, not least of which is the Sadr group. Unfortunately, I don't see any way out of this future.

To: slacker711 who wrote (82263)	9/4/2008 9:19:24 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 542883

Slacker, the problems in the Middle East defies logic. You are attempting to drive a logic and there is none. It is not a simple case of "either you are with us or you are against us." The Sunnis at first sought an ally in AQ to thwart the Shia. When the Sunnis realized that AQ did not have their welfare at heart, they joined forces with the US, showed US all the AQ hideouts etc. etc. The Shias in the meantime vanished into oblivion (guerrilla warfare.) Once the US leaves the Shias as well the AQ will surface to battle the Sunnis. Even McCain continues to be confused and needed Lieberman to help him out.