may be that is really our intension and if so we are doing a great job of that! we make a war like that and then leave Iraq and keep selling weapons to both sides and keep a malnitrition war till they are all weak and we will then make money repairing their infrastructure. we did that when we gave a green light to saddam to attack iran. we sold weapon to both sides till they both weakened and we assured hezbollah with a complete control of the country. remember that war? no way we stay and support Iraq since then we have to ally with Iran!
2007-08-13 09:44:12 · 11 answers · asked by macmanf4j 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
what happens to iraq if we take the sunnies side. they have a shie'te puppet gov't that we put in place, what happens to them then?
2007-08-13 09:59:18 · update #1
The US has long term plans against the Shiites and even though an event might seem pro-Shiite, it is not. The US govt has these great games it plays with its people, it just wants the common public to stay ignorant of what is happening in the world. They try to involve the common public in stuff that the people have no time to think. Only when a person thinks will s/he question!
But another thing is even though the US might support Sunnis for now, eventually it is going to go against them too. They make friends in order to fight others off and once the 'others' are gone, then it's the so-called friends' turn.
Who got Saddam Hussein into power?
Who armed the Taliban and got them in power?
Who fought them in the end?
The answer is... the one and only US!
2007-08-21 08:19:50 · answer #1 · answered by Kamil A. 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am so sick of reading this "cowardice" bit when it comes to Pelosi-Reid and other Democrats. Let me tell you, the Democratic leaders were winning wars when others were sitting on the sidelines, but our wars were Real Wars, not trumped up efforts to get a little fossil fuel in our Corporate hands.
I was married to a Disabled Vet, a Democrat, until he died, and had several brothers, all Democrats, who went to war. I don't think Pelosi or Reid are cowards, but people with common sense and dignity, who are tired of the aggressively bullying techniques and untruths bandied about in today's administration.
It is one thing to have a political ideology, but quite another to accuse people you don't know a damned thing about, and call them cowards. I think the cowardly way is to Shock & Awe a small country after exaggerating their intentions. I think the cowardly way is to support leaders who fall far short of truthful. I think the cowardly way is to ruin the career of a Secret Agent because her husband threw a kink in your war plans.
If wanting an end to this senseless war is cowardly, call me a coward. If wanting leaders who speak honestly is cowardly, call me a coward. If wanting only to lose our young people in conflicts that are necessary to have a peaceful world, if that is cowardly, then I guess I'm a coward. But I would rather be a coward in these circumstances than be a blind, uninformed and propaganda-spouting fool that only repeats what he has been told.
In answer to the above question, the U.S. has had a history of befriending those leaders that are of use to us at the time, just as we befriended and supplied weapons to Saddam Hussein, then later called him a tyrant. We did the same thing with the Shah of Iran, even though he was a brutal leader. It is our policies in the Middle East that brought about the birth of Al Queda. We are paying for them now, and will continue to do so for some years to come.
2007-08-19 11:15:44 · answer #2 · answered by Me, Too 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If the USA does side with the muslims (unlikely at this point in time) it would be with the Sunnis as they make up 85% of all muslims, with shi'tes in the minority.
However, with Wahabbism in full swing all over the place (elements of modern day Islam blamed for terrorism) I doubt that few combatant muslim soldiers will appreciate the West's continuing role in the region and if they sense weakness will try and drive the West out. The playing field would become much more level in this case.
Still, I suppose the Neo-conservatives will do as they always do. Drop bombs on the problem. Nothing as fun for them as "dropping a neutron bomb on those horrible tannies and preserving our nice sleek oil pipelines."
2007-08-13 09:56:34 · answer #3 · answered by Chris W 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
We will back the sunnis with hardware and financial support.
This backing the shiites has gone on for too long. Our
'allies' in the mid east are getting tired of this. The government is finally realizing this an supporting other govs
with armament. Soon we will give them training I hope or
we may see wild massacres in the mideast as borders
become meaningless and the peoples of the region decide
to settle their differences once and for all.
2007-08-13 09:55:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sunnies.. they're the majority in Saudi Arabia..we certainly do want to make them because of their oil
2007-08-13 09:52:07 · answer #5 · answered by John 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sunni,s
2007-08-13 09:52:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sunni's of course. Why do you think we are arming the Saudi's to the teeth with all our high tech equipment?
2007-08-13 09:49:40 · answer #7 · answered by Sloan R 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
when/if cut and run is established the entire region will decay into chaos and you can count on the pelosi/reid regime to bury their heads in the sand...they will take no side except cowardice.
2007-08-13 09:50:42 · answer #8 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Wow, world politics change, remember that? Get over it.
2007-08-13 09:57:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Israel's side, of course.
2007-08-13 09:50:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋