Al Qaeda threatens to wage war on Iran

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by DeadCanDance, Jul 9, 2007.

  1. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127
    One thing that's troubled me about neocons and Bush-fans, is the tendency they have to lump all muslims into one group. To create a false impression that we face one monolithic enemy.

    For those who don't know already: Al Qaeda and its associated groups are an extremist sunni movement. Their blood enemies are the shia, and particularly the persians. The persians (shia) and the arabs (sunni) are blood enemies going back hundreds of years. The likelyhood of Iran actively supporting al qaeda is about the same as Hugo Chavez supporting George Bush. They are natural enemies.

    A smart, clever president, who was able to recognize nuance in geopolitical world affairs might be able to exploit the differences between persian and arab. But, alas we have a president (and his supporters) who fail to recognize any nuance, and simply think that somehow Iran, al qaeda, and bin ladin are all part of the same group:



     
  2. hjmick
    Offline

    hjmick Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16,178
    Thanks Received:
    4,680
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +7,121
    The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
     
  3. DeadCanDance
    Offline

    DeadCanDance Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,414
    Thanks Received:
    127
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +127
    Exactly. Iran has common interest with us in fighting al qaeda. They are natural enemies of al qaeda.

    A smart, clever president could use Iran the way FDR used the Soviet Union to defeat Hitler. We don't have to like iran. We don't have to coddle them. But, we can use them. In fact, Iran was somewhat helpful to us when we attacked afghanistan in 2001.
     
  4. Superlative
    Offline

    Superlative Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,382
    Thanks Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +109
    This has been the plan for a few weeks now.

    And now that the Sunnis have the backing of the US, they feel they can threaten anyone.

    Bush does in fact know the difference. And he is exploiting the differences. Hence the funding of the Sunni's.


    The US will leave, when the risks outweigh the rewards.
    The reward being, US political control of the region, and its resources.

    The risks, Lives and Money.

    If and when the violence becomes too much of a risk, the US will retreat to bases, and escalate the training and arming of the Sunni's.(al Qaeda)

    Sunni's (al Qaeda) will probably be dubbed something fantastic, like "Holy Warriors"

    Iran will be coordinating training and funding and Shiite's.
    All the while mumbling nuclear threats, which is ok, cause the US (No longer being spread out and tied down) will then have the availability of its full force to bring to bear if events call for it.

    but there are other enemies
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/09/world/middleeast/09cnd-iraq.html?hp

    The little al Qaedians (Sunni's) will have all the help they need and more from the US, and if theyre lucky, some Sunni buds from Saudi Arabia.

    This is all necessary in order to maintain the consistant and ideal levels of contained, controlled chaos, (CCC Im trademarking that.)and to maximize sectarian blood shed.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/09/world/middleeast/09iraq.html

    The US will just sit back, and watch while everyone explodes.

    Sprinkling in some foregn aid, in the form of guns, rice and water.

    The fight will rage on forever.

    The US will stay a stones throw away in case there is a violent movement coordinated against Israel, other allies, or any other countries that house US military bases.

    The US knows full well this occupation is a lost cause, and is doubly aware that it could, in actuality go on forever.

    They remember the Afghanistan battle with Russia, they were the ones training and funding the little guys (Mujahadeen) then.

    The warring factions in the region will never stop fighting, and this is key.

    As long as the US funds the minority in the battle, in world view, it is politically acceptable.

    And any cost will gladly be looked upon as a future political investment in the region.

    The Shiite wont win, the US wont allow it, (its a nice way to fight and destabilize Iran without actually engaging them directly)

    America will pour arms into that region until its nothing but a crater so deep you can dig for oil with a spoon.(then you can guess who gets the contracts to rebuild)

    The US will (if necessary) instigate violent attacks if there are lulls in the battle.

    This is important to remember.

    Thats why they are funding the Sunni's (al Qaeda) and not the Shiite.(Iran)

    Wearing down and destabilizing the powerful majority in the region is a solid tactic, and a good way for the US to avoid a battle with Iran in the future.

    It wont end until events occur that call for the US to intervene, meaning the Sunni's gain the upper hand.

    This Gives the US political gains, because the future Sunni representatives, will already be good buds with America.

    http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=582835#post582835
     
  5. Toro
    Offline

    Toro Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    50,768
    Thanks Received:
    11,056
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    The Big Bend via Riderville
    Ratings:
    +25,103
    Does that mean al-Qaeda is now America's friend? Or America's friend is Iran?
     
  6. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    A pretty good analysis except for the fact that you completely ignored the role of the Wahhabist ( Salafis )
     
  7. Superlative
    Offline

    Superlative Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,382
    Thanks Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +109
    Its confusing to say the least.

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh
     
  8. hjmick
    Offline

    hjmick Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    16,178
    Thanks Received:
    4,680
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Location:
    Charleston, SC
    Ratings:
    +7,121
    Or are al Qaeda and Iran friends? Or potential friends?
     
  9. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
  10. Superlative
    Offline

    Superlative Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,382
    Thanks Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +109
    True, I guess I was lumping them in with Saudi Arabia. My bad.
     

Share This Page