It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. pays $300 billion to make Iraq into Iran

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Welcome to the New Middle East, worse than the Old Middle East.

It appears that now with Al-Sistani and his cronies with most of the power, the USA is concerned.


www.chron.com...



Iraq's Shiite leaders grilled by U.S. on nature of Iran ties
The questioning reflects a concern over the coalition's independence

By HAMZA HENDAWI
Associated Press
RESOURCES

BAGHDAD, IRAQ - With a Shiite coalition set to take power in Iraq, American officials have begun grilling top Iraqi Shiite politicians to try to gauge the extent of their relationship with neighboring Iran, a predominantly Shiite nation ruled by its clergy.


The nature of the Shiite coalition's ties to Iran has become a crucial issue now that the cleric-backed alliance has emerged as the leading faction in the new Iraqi parliament and at a time when the United States and Iran are engaged in a war of words over Iran's nuclear program.

In recent talks, U.S. diplomats have bluntly asked the leaders how a Shiite-dominated government would react if Iran came under attack by an outside power because of its suspected nuclear weapons program, according to a high-ranking member of one Shiite party.




posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
I have to say that I am just waiting to see where all this is heading, with Shiites in power in Iran and Iraq.

I wonder sometimes is it's pure genius or just stupidity what motivates our leaders in the white house.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 01:31 PM
link   
I wonder if Bush is taking this well?
He free's Iraq only to become a state run by a group whos hatred of America runs deeper than Saddams. Good job Georgy!
I cant wait till this blows up in his face like a 4 week old rotten egg



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I have to say that I am just waiting to see where all this is heading, with Shiites in power in Iran and Iraq.

I wonder sometimes is it's pure genius or just stupidity what motivates our leaders in the white house.


i cant wait to see what will happen when bush takes on Iran
( would like to see how big the uprising in Iraq will be
)



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Don't be to quick in judging the situation


BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Talks on who would get what in Iraq's newly elected National Assembly were under way even before the final results came in, but the clergy-backed Shiites, whose winning margin was less than what they expected, may now have to compromise more than anticipated.

With barely 50 percent of the final vote in the 275-member National Assembly, the United Iraqi Alliance will not have control over the assembly, leading to speculation it may soon form a coalition with the independence-minded Kurds who won 26 percent of the vote. A two-thirds majority is needed to control the legislature.

Dealmaking

The job of this legislature is to elect a President, two Vice Presidents and set up a national constitution - this is by no means the final form the Iraqi government will take.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:26 PM
link   
The people of Iraq have voted. Not the people of Iran. Just because two adjoining countrys have the same political party doesnt mean they are the same country.

The mere fact that they have process means that should the governing body not do well, that the voice of the people will speak. Out with the bad, and in with change. A choice they formerly did not have.This is round one.

This is not an Iraqi or Iranian Political party versus Bush. This is the wants of the Iraqi people thanks to Bush like it or not.

The existing government is in power due to his efforts and despite my not accepting the method, the result is good. Enjoy your democarcy Iraq, for your neighbor Iran does not have one.



[edit on 14-2-2005 by HIFIGUY]

[edit on 14-2-2005 by HIFIGUY]

[edit on 14-2-2005 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:29 PM
link   
I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

If you give people in the middle east democracy, they will democratically CHOOSE a theocracy.

I've said it till I was blue in the face since there was even talk of invading Iraq, and I hate to be proven correct on it, but there you go....

This isn't as bad as it appears though...(despite the fact that the guy looks SO eerily like Khomeni, it's insane, hehe...)

You can bet that there are some built in safeguards to make sure all of this wasn't for naught. The Bush administration may be insane, inept, and ruthless, but they aren't THAT stupid....

[edit on 14-2-2005 by Gazrok]



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by HIFIGUY


The existing government is in power due to his efforts and despite my not accepting the method, the result is good. Enjoy your democarcy Iraq, for your neighbor Iran does not have one.

[edit on 14-2-2005 by HIFIGUY]


Yes I see your point, Great Ayatollah Al-Sistani the leader of the Shiites not only in Iran but also in Iraq thanks the US for re-installing the theocracy in a "democratic" way and due to be "democratically done" the US will no go against of the wishes of the people in Iraq, and the fact that that their theocratic leader is Iran and an Iranian.

Just genius.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Let time tell.

The man at the top can be voted out. He and the governing council make the decisions based on majority. I personally think this is an overeaction and simplification of something where the dynamics have yet to play out.

And if one looks back in our own history, God knows America struggled. This is not an easy process and it is going to be a blend of their culture, and democracy. And if you really want to get down to brass tacks, we really dont have a true democracy here in the US...now do we. I think we can all agree that our system has been manipulated to serve the partys, and not the voters.



[edit on 14-2-2005 by HIFIGUY]



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
I've said it before, and I'll say it again...

If you give people in the middle east democracy, they will democratically CHOOSE a theocracy.


not unless one party has 2/3 of the vote which i doubts unni's and kurd would give their vvotes to allow shiites that kind of power.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   
We will pay another 300 Billion to make Iran into a parking lot.

I cant wait!

It might have taken 25 years, but payback will be a bitch.

Advise to Iranians living in the larger cities in Iran, consider moving to less populated areas, and you might survive.

The Coming War in the Gulf: A Weapons Analysis of the Iran-Russia-US strategic Triangle

www.stevequayle.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   
Gazrok, I saw that episode of Daily Show, it was great!

Oh wait, this isn't a topic on Gazroks sig........

Anyways, I bet they have a plan b. The "insurgents" kill off the government so Bush&Co can put the current VP of Haliburton in power of Iraq, like how one of Bush's oil buddies controls Afganistan instead of getting a politician or someone who knows about politics.(Other then giving bribes to republicans)



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 04:08 PM
link   
I don't think is going to be that easy to have another poppet of the administration in Iraq.

Why, because like Gazrok said Iraq is a theocracy now, and is going to be more to come from that in the future.

We all know that Saddam was a dictator, but what Saddam was doing was making sure that Iran power did not reach the Shiites across the borders, Saddam was minority Sunni and he was very good at keeping the Shiites under his food, and their Iraqi religious leaders out of site and in house arrest.

He had a reason see.

Now the oppress is free, and the oppressor will become the oppress.

But Iraq will have his own home made Great Ayatollah, he is young fierce and keeping low and quiet.

He will divide the Shiites and take power from Al-Sistani, he is gathering support and he is to become again well known by the next elections, he is for the poor and he sure will bring Sunnis to join his quest.

People meet Al-Sadr, he holds the next in line for Ayatollah by birth right.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Iraq, which once used to be the most open and Western of the Middle Eastern Arab nations, now will be a new Iraqi state based solely on Islamic law, with restrictions on women's rights, restriction on freedom of expression, free association, plus, if Al-Sistani gets his way, bans on music and dancing.


Hey, money well spent, right?

Pfft.

jako



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Insults And Assumptions

What I'm seeing far too much of in this thread are false assumptions about and denigrations of the people of Iraq.

It's an ugly sight, and I recommend those indulging in bashing Iraqis find some other way to amuse themselves.

The contempt of some contributors to this thread for the people of Iraq -- Shiites in particular -- is disgusting.

Count me out of ethnic and religious bigotry.


The people of Iraq have voted, and will implement the government they choose.

That may bother some people, but it doesn't bother me.

But bagging on people you don't even know for what they might or might not do?

That's just lame, and that does bother me. A lot.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Majic:

But bagging on people you don't even know for what they might or might not do?

That's just lame, and that does bother me. A lot.


Read a little then, and educate yourself. Al Sistani is an Iranian cleric, and the dangers of iraq becoming an Iranian style government are REAL, whether it pisses you off or not.

jako



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 12:14 PM
link   
I think the results of the elections practically seal the deal on the matter of Iran getting nukes. No wonder the level of rhetoric coming from them seems to be going up. They must be feeling fairly confident that in the event of an invasion their fellow Shiites in control of Iraq, led by an Iranian national will not side against them.

Only time will tell if they are right or wrong. What I do know for sure is that unless the Iranians are coerced into compliance it’s unlikely that they will honor the NPT no matter what the Europeans may think.







[edit on 15-2-2005 by transient]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   
The Need For Education About Bigotry


Originally posted by Jakomo
Read a little then, and educate yourself. Al Sistani is an Iranian cleric, and the dangers of iraq becoming an Iranian style government are REAL, whether it pisses you off or not.

I recommend that you re-read this thread, and save me the effort of having to block quote half of it and point out the obvious for you. Please re-read it with my points in mind.

As for the situation in Iraq, you are free to speculate on what I know about the situation there, and thus base your point on a false assumption.

I know what I know about Iraq, you don't. Disadvantage: you.

Choose your battles wisely.

Don't expect my cooperation in your attempt to change the topic to me.

I'm saying knock off the bigotry, or earn my disrespect and distrust.

People are talking in this thread like they can see the future, and I know none of them can, which is not a very honest way to discuss any issue.

Hence my objection to the fraudulent basis for the claims based on them.

What Freedom Means

If the people of Iraq freely choose an Islamic government, then more power to them.

The assumption that they will choose to become a theocracy like Iran is insulting. It is possible to have an Islamic republic that operates under genuine democratic principles.

You're putting words in people's mouths and disparaging Iraqis, Shias, Islam and the democratic process all in one breath.

Why? Can't you see how wrong that is?

There is no way I could ever possibly embrace such positions, and I am truly disappointed that people are doing so here.

Please, my fellow members, think about who you are knocking here, and what you are knocking.

It's just wrong to do that.

Please don't. Please reconsider.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
People are talking in this thread like they can see the future, and I know none of them can


If Prophet Yoshiel can see the future why can't we as well? Maybe the only reason we make predictions is to draw attention to our real message.


Just kidding man you make some great points.


[edit on 15-2-2005 by transient]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Saddam was the major impediment to instituting an Islamic State that spans from Lebanon to Afganistan. In his wildest dreams, Osama could not have wished for a better outcome than for Bush to remove Saddam for him, while at the same time, increasing the hatred of America in the Muslim world. All on the U.S. taxpayers dime and blood! Such a Bargain....FOR OSAMA!

Being of Now



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join