The Shiaa are united and belong to greater Iran (Persia). The Sunni are similar to the Chieftans in Afghanistan -- not united! However, these are the moderates and would kick out alQueda if we would help them unite as a nation.
2006-12-21 03:23:54 · 9 answers · asked by Frank OH 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
al Maliki and al Sadr are united? Perhaps you should tell them, so things will move along better. While you're at it, tell DOD and State. You seem to have found facts that have eluded everybody else in the world. If the major factions will acceed to a cease-fire and cooling off period, I think they'll mostly find they have common interests that are worth a bit of trust. It's understandable that Shia factions may be leery of Sunni ex-Ba'th people, but it does not have to follow that they must align with Iran. And Sunni concerns about Shia retaliation for the Ba'thist years is certainly valid, but protections in view of the obvious alternatives in a complete melt-down deserve cooperation. The Kurds are in much the same boat, and have been quite on board in this regard.
2006-12-21 06:03:46 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq has as much right to call itself a 'Nation' as any of its screwed up neighbors. Just because you may feel they are just a bunch of murdering thugs is not to say that those same thugs dont exist in Iran and Syria.
Iran wants Iraqi oil and has publicly stated that on numerous occasions before.... resulting in one war after another.
The Shi'a and the Sunni are not united and never will be until the tribes, clans, and clerics get their heads out of their butts and finally agree to work with one another.
2006-12-21 11:46:11 · answer #2 · answered by wolf560 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There actually are weapons there that Iran, SA Russia & or China but Russia for sure have been developing like 'scalar' weapons. Also US shot down an aircraft during Gulf War and ME news had it all over it was a UFO and 'supposedly' Hussein is lodging them and Bush is therefore very concerned(if its true, but I have heard an Iraq vet mention they were looking for ET Tech also over there). Anyone can look this up on the Internet.
2006-12-21 11:32:35 · answer #3 · answered by spareo1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As usual, America gets involved because we want to help out other countries and make the world a better place. Obviously, there is a need in Iraq, and if we leave now, there is great danger that things could become worse over there, such as rioting. America does things right, and we don't want them saying, "America is a sissy. They backed out too soon because they were scared," or something like that. In no way we want to antagonize them. However, I am against the idea of sending any more troops out there.
2006-12-21 11:32:18 · answer #4 · answered by Chels 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Becareful of history repeating itself, in the past we have supported sunni dictatorships against the shia, precisely why there is a shia backlash against us in the middle east, and when democracy finally comes to the middle east the backlash will take on a more democratic face as is the case in palistine, egypt and lebanon.
2006-12-21 12:17:13 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would like your reasoning for saying this.
It sounds like you have never been to Iraq nor have you been watching current Iraqi politics.
2006-12-21 12:57:08 · answer #6 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know. Ask Cheney and Halliburton.
2006-12-21 11:30:06 · answer #7 · answered by flip4449 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
stealing their oil
2006-12-21 11:28:37 · answer #8 · answered by me 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
let it be, let it be, let it be, oh let it be," whisper words of wisdom" let it be.
2006-12-21 11:34:24 · answer #9 · answered by nobody 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋