My source does back up that statement.
Quote:
|
What do you make of the recent furor over the Iran government supposedly arming the militias and killing 170 American soldiers?
|
That means both the government officials and the media.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TheMercenary
I say that there is evidence which is surfacing that such a notion is false.
|
This is where it becomes very complicated. No one is going to deny Iran involvement but then why do we pick them out when there influence, even if it has been growing, is much less than Saudi influence.
I have read your sources and they seem to imply that the Iranian influence is getting stronger, which makes sense to a response and equalizer of stronger Saudi support. I am not saying that there is no Iranian support or denying that it is getting stronger, just that it has no comparison to Saudi support and your sources don't compare it to Saudi support.
Lets take a hypothetical example (the number mean nothing except representing support):
Month 1:
-Saudi Support: 10
-Iranian Support: 2
Month 2:
-Saudi Support: 20
-Iranian Support: 5
Now if the media just comments on Iranian support it seems that Iranian support has greatly increased but as long as they don't compare it to Saudi support, that is very misleading since Saudi support has increased by 10 when Iran has only grown by 3.