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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3865)	1/4/2009 12:21:01 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Mindmelt, Saddam had to go down, as does Ahmadinejad... You and your ilk, who propose this inane "balance of power" scenario fail to understand that the very substance of Islamic radicalism requires constant conflict and Jihad. There is no ability to draw up a peace agreement, only a self-serving truce where they can strengthen their efforts for the next wave of violence. You can not hope for a lasting peace treaty with them, but only periods of calm punctuated by violent struggle as they make their next move. No Meltmind, the balance of power doesn't work in this instance. Iran was supporting Hizballah LONG before Saddam was overthrown. Saddam was not able to prevent 17 years of illegal nuclear weapons proliferation between Pakistan and Iran. What HAS changed is that Sunni/Wahabbist groups like Hamas have found themselves out of favor with their traditional supports (Saudi Arabia.. etc), and NOW have to rely upon an ally who despises them because they aren't SHI'ITE. But supporting an enemy with which they there eventually attempt to destroy is a alliance of convenience for BOTH Iran and Hamas (the enemy of my enemy is my friend). And Hizballah, in Lebanon, has GROWN STRONGER because the Israelis didn't opt to fully destroy their infrastructure in 2006. And Hizballah is Shi'ite, and they have effectively seized control over Lebanon because the UNSC and milquetoast individuals like yourself refuse to enforce the long-standing AND BINDING UNSC resolution banning Hizballah as a military force, despite the positioning of UN observer forces in the region. Hizballah is not supposed to exist as anything other than a political party, yet they possess greater military strength than Lebanon's armed forces, all because the UNSC will not enforce it's binding resolutions with military force. These problems don't exist because of the balance of power has been disrupted. They exist because people like you don't believe they warrant your attention until American civilians start to die. Hawk