gurpaul88 Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Rob Ford. The markets haven't priced Rob Ford in. It would be impossible, since he's priceless. But still... ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turar Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 The messes the US "created" on either side probably make it less likely Iran would be attacked by a nation state which could be disuaded by nuclear capability. You think they can work better with malaki or sadaam? The afghans aren't attacking anyone, they couldn't organize a light bulb change. The kurds could take over the whole country in a month. We are bombing the radicals in wasiristan back even further into the stone age. We basically built them buffers. I meant more that Iran has a deployed US military or US-guided military on both its sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorpRaider Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Maybe, but it looks like we might be exit stage left in afghanistan and I don't think the Iraqis are going to be attacking Iran anytime soon. The military is largely comprised of Shiites (which we liberated from a brutal regime), isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmichaud Posted November 30, 2013 Share Posted November 30, 2013 Thanks to Cardboard for putting the Iran situation onto my radar - still struggling to figure out myself how the recent deal ultimately affects the market, but here are a couple of good articles from this week's Economist: http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21590959-encouraging-interim-deal-iran-makes-permanent-check-its-nuclear-ambitions-easier http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21590958-deal-between-america-and-iran-would-have-big-repercussions-shifting-sands Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary17 Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 Perhaps the market is also ignoring the territorial dispute between Japan and China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palantir Posted December 1, 2013 Share Posted December 1, 2013 The messes the US "created" on either side probably make it less likely Iran would be attacked by a nation state which could be disuaded by nuclear capability. You think they can work better with malaki or sadaam? The afghans aren't attacking anyone, they couldn't organize a light bulb change. The kurds could take over the whole country in a month. We are bombing the radicals in wasiristan back even further into the stone age. We basically built them buffers. I meant more that Iran has a deployed US military or US-guided military on both its sides. I agree with this. Can't help but wonder if part of the deal with Iran is to set them up as a potential partner for Afghanistan. (We'll withdraw from around you and let you spread your weight, if you don't make nukes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now