Iraq and Tsunami

Shi`a vs. Sunnis

More on the Shi`a vs. Sunnis:

Please note that in theological discourse, the word "Sunni" is not helpful at all, because many schools of theology adhere to the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence. Indeed, members of one theological school can adhere to two, three, or all four of the Sunni schools. So let me run this by you again, since some people fail to distinguish between theology and jurisprudence (as ARC did).

Jurisprudence:
This is the religious law. Among other things, it mainly deals with the rituals of worship (prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, Alms, etc...)
It also handles questions about life affairs, such as politics, civil law (marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc...) and transactions (contracts, trade, banking, etc...)

The schools of Jurisprudence are: Sunni (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi`i, and Hanbali) -- named after the founder of each school -- and Ja`fari (the Shi`i branch).

It is more accurate to use Ja`fari instead of Shi`i because some Shi`a, like the Zaydis, adhere to sunni schools of Jurisprudence. If you use Shi`i, those who know understand that you mean Ja`fari (after Ja`far al-Sadiq, the sixth Shi`i imam).

The difference between these five school on any matter does not relate to heresy. Notice that the Sunni schools (there are four of them) differ on thousands of details, but they never call one another "unbeliever" or heretic, if like to use this word. Here is an example of a disagreement:

The Hanafi school does not mandate alms=Islamic tax (zakat) from the money of a minor orphan, while the Shafi`i school mandates it.

As you see, neither opinion constitutes a basis for belief or unbelief. Even within each school, there are differences among scholar, but I will not go into that.

On theology, Muslims are:

1. Shi`a - they are about 72 sub-sects, theologically speaking. The main link for them is their belief that Imam `Ali is the best person after the prophet and that he is the lawful imam after the Prophet. They disagree with one another on hundreds of other issues. My forthcoming translation of the Sects of the Shi`a has it all. My publisher gave my his word that it will be released later this month. It also has my study on this genre.

2. Mu`tazila - they are about 20 sects. They all agree on five pillars: unity of God, His justice, the certainty of fulfillment of His promise and threat, the intermediate position of grave sinners between belief and unbelief, and that encouraging good deeds and prohiniting evil deeds is mandatory on all Muslims.

3. Kawarij - they are about 20 sects. They agree on the belief that the sinner is unbeliever and they believe that the Fourth Caliph, `Othman was unbeliever in the last six years of his life and thus illegitimate ruler. They held the same belief about Imam `Ali after he accepted the arbitration between him and his rival Mu`awiya.

4. The Murji'a - A collection of schools, holding a range of doctrines, not necessarily common among all of them. Among their doctrines: Some of them refrain from making judgment on anyone. They say, "it is up to God to decide on the Day of Judgment who goes where, and it is impossible to tell before that." All of them do not allow any discussion of the events that occurred after the death of the Prophet and the disputes among his companions. They consider all their deeds to be right, even when they fought against one another and caused bloodshed. Many of them consider it unlawful to engage in theological debates (Kalaam = dialectic theology). Ahmed b. Hanbal (founder of the Hanbali school) falls in this group, in his views on theology.

5. The Ash`ari school - named after Abu al-Hasan al-Ash`ari (d. 324/935). He was one of the Mu`tazila and abandoned their school to articulate his own school. It rests its theology on a literalist interpretation of the text of Qur'an and Hadith.

Example of a theological disagreement has to do with the status of a sinner before repentance:
Shi`a: he is a believer. He deserves reward for his belief and punishment for his sin. God may forgive him or he may also receive intercession from the Prophet or the Imams.
Khawarij: he is unbeliever.
Mu`tazila: he is in between. They call him "fasiq"
Murji'a: leaving his status for God to decide on the Day of Judgment. They hope he may be forgiven.

On these issues, certain books come to mind:
1. Tilman Nagel, History of Islamic Theology (if you wish, you can read its German original: Geschichte der islamischen Theologie)
2. Henri Corbin, Histoire de la philosopie islamique.
3. Al-Ash`ari, Maqalat al-Islamiyyin (Arabic)
4. Al-Shahrastani, al-Milal wa al-Nihal (Arabic)
5. Al-Nawbakhti, Firaq al-Shi`a (Arabic; my English translation is forthcoming).

# posted by Abbas : 11:37 AM

Abbas, i am definitely interested in picking up your book when it comes out or your translation of a book, i hope you will advertise it here.

I have a question for you about the post you posted yesterday about the Iraqi election and the left-wing. I agree with you that it was Sistanis work that lead to the elections and not Bush or the occupation but most of the world don't know that and even if they did my point is that by supporting this election (even if there are positive things to it) is giving legitamicy to the occupation. I'm not saying Sistani is intentionally giving legitamicay to the occupation but i think by supporting the election it does. I hope Sistani calls for their withdrawal but i hope you see my point about legitamizing the war through supporting the elections whether the US wanted it or not, it would not have happened without an invasion, bombing and murder of Iraqis.
عربي | Email | 02.02.05 - 6:33 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also doesn't the resistance have some good points as well, not all of them are former Baathist or saddam loyalist or Salafi types, many of them are regular Iraqis who have allegiance to their nation and saw the occupation as wrong and want the troops out, why should we delegitamize the resistance by claiming it is only zarqawi or Saddam loyalist, also the resistance would not be dominated by those groups if Sistani and the shia were part of the resistance or led their own resistance, they would overshadow the few fanatics but they chose the election route.
عربي | Email | 02.02.05 - 6:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I look foward to reading your book, Abbas. And thanks for this post.

Just saw an item in the Lebanese press reporting that the vote count is going to take ages....that the count is progressing at 11,000 ballots a day!
Nur al-Cubicle | Email | Homepage | 02.02.05 - 8:48 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am still confused. Into which of these theological schools fall the Wahabi? Is it not true that the Wahabi consider the Shia to be infidels and deserving of death? (See, e.g., this article from Shia News.)

Are the Shia not oppressed and forbidden many of their religious practices in Saudi Arabia?

Thank you for clarifying some of these matters.
ARC | 02.02.05 - 8:51 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ARC,
The Wahhabis follow a skewed form of Hanbali Jurisprudence.

On theology, they form a school by themselves (it can be placed under the range of the Murji'a, in my opinion).

Algar's book is the best I have seen in English on the topic.
Abbas | 02.02.05 - 9:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Just saw an item in the Lebanese press reporting that the vote count is going to take ages....that the count is progressing at 11,000 ballots a day!"

Ah, tricked again by those treacherous Yanquis. They let you have an election, but you may not count the ballots!
h2 | 02.02.05 - 9:10 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Definitely let us know when the book comes out Abbas.

Related request (as you didn't have enough to do.) A recommendation for a few basic texts (or some good sites for those of us who want unbiased info.)

Thanks.
Mark from Ireland | 02.02.05 - 9:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"On theology, they form a school by themselves (it can be placed under the range of the Murji'a, in my opinion)."

That's surprising to me, since you describe the Murji'a as: many groups who refrain from making judgment on anyone, while the Wahhabis are popularly characterized as strict, stern and judgmental.
h2 | 02.02.05 - 9:34 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2,

They fall under the Murji'a because:

1. They hold that Allah is under no obligation to keep a promise or act on a threat.

2. They refuse to discuss any dispute among the companions of the Prophet. They consider all their acts legitimate.

3. They reject the theology of the Shi`a, the Ash`aris, the Khawarij, and the Mu`tazila.

Although on their dealing with other Muslims they behave exactly like the Khawarij. They are quick to call others unbelievers.

That is why I called them a school by themselves, and had them under the Murji'a; because the Murji'a do not have one theme in which they all believe. The beliefs I placed for the Murji'a each belongs to a group. I should have highlighted that that, maybe. I will revise the posting.
Abbas | 02.02.05 - 10:34 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Ash'ari school does not rest its theology on a literalist interpretation of the text of the Qur'an and Hadith. It is the middle path between Literalism and Rational Intellect -- i.e. what Sunni Islam is all about.
Anonymous | 02.02.05 - 10:38 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

abbas, was my question to big to answer?
عربي | Email | 02.02.05 - 10:42 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbas, thanks for the clarification.

Any insight as to the origins of doctrine point #1 you list there?
h2 | 02.02.05 - 10:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2,

I assume that you mean the doctrine saying that Allah is under no obligation, right?

It comes from the belief that claiming any obligation on Allah would necessarily limit his omnipotence. Therefore, they reject the Mu`tazili and Shi`i notion of any thing that is mandatory (wajib) on Allah, even in a voluntary sense. Their Qur'anic evidence is:
"He (i.e. God) is not to be questioned, but they (i.e. People) will be questioned/held accountable." (Q. 21:23)
Abbas | 02.02.05 - 11:03 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Ash'ari school does not rest its theology on a literalist interpretation of the text of the Qur'an and Hadith."

Anonymous,

Please refer to the list of his doctrines in Maqalat al-Islamiyyin, vol. 1, pp. 320-25 (Cairo 1950). If this is not literalism, I don't know what is.

He does use rational arguments, but reason for him is secondary to, and dependent on, tradition. His doctrines on the attributes of God and the visibility of Allah on the Day of Judgment, among many other doctrines of his, show absolute literalism in interpreting the Qur'an. Please also review his major work, al-Ibanah.
Abbas | 02.02.05 - 11:37 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbas Khadim

Abbas –

Thank you for a very informative and interesting post. If you have the time, I was wondering about these aspects:

(1) According to the Shia, are the teachings of Imam Ali equal in weight to that of the Prophet Mohammed? What happens if they clash on doctrinal points?

(2) Does the authority of Imam Ali extend down to the clerics that followed him? If so, do their fatwas carry weight comparable to his?

(3) Is the hatred that people like Zarqawi (Wahhabis, I think) bear towards the Shia based upon the grounds that they view the Shia not only as unbelievers, (because of their belief in the teachings of Imam Ali) but also as somehow mocking ‘true’ Muslims by claiming they are believers? Or are there other differences?


عربي –

With respect, (you do make interesting comments and points) it is not quite clear as to what your question IS. Perhaps that is reason for your lack of reply.
Bruno | Email | 02.03.05 - 10:11 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I assume that you mean the doctrine saying that Allah is under no obligation, right?"

That's the one. Thanks.

"He (i.e. God) is not to be questioned..."

Sounds like a good policy.
h2 | 02.03.05 - 10:13 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ARC,

Abbas chose not to address your other questions, but the Wahhabis are known for "takfir", the pronouncing of other Muslims as unbelievers if they find their practices or beliefs objectionable. The Shia' are a prime target but not the only ones.

And yes, I have met Saudi Shia' who have attested to severe repression being inflicted on their population in Saudi Arabia.
Haydar | Email | 02.03.05 - 12:02 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbas,

At the end of this article is a claim that the Ibana you speak of has been interpolated by Hanbalis, and that Ash'ari's actual views on literalism have been distorted. Curious on your opinion.

I hope your book isn't going to be real expensive, as it should make for some interesting reading. This kind of stuff just isn't talked about much, but historical context is so valuable in illuminating our present condition. Just from this post alone I am seeing a strong connection between Mu'tazali and Shi'i belief.
Haydar | Email | 02.03.05 - 12:23 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

عربي,

Also doesn't the resistance have some good points as well?

No.

not all of them are former Baathist or Saddam loyalist or Salafi types, many of them are regular Iraqis who have allegiance to their nation and saw the occupation as wrong and want the troops out

So what? They want the same thing the Baathists want. They want the same thing the Tehranists want. They want the MNF out because they do not like the direction democracy is taking the country.

why should we delegitamize the resistance by claiming it is only zarqawi or Saddam loyalist

They are delegitimizing themselves by struggling against democracy, law, and order in their country.

also the resistance would not be dominated by those groups if Sistani and the shia were part of the resistance or led their own resistance, they would overshadow the few fanatics but they chose the election route.

But Sistani has shown more good sense than those groups.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 1:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

also the resistance would not be dominated by those groups if Sistani and the shia were part of the resistance or led their own resistance, they would overshadow the few fanatics but they chose the election route.

But Sistani has shown more good sense than those groups. One blogger reported having her father told by Sistani (when the terrorists attack Shi'a mosques and such to start a civil war) "I don't care if they blow up the whole city. Don't strike back." Sistani (whatever his motives) has his eye on the ball. These imaginary rejectionists are at the very least contributing to the continued occupation since MNF will not leave until their job is done.

If their upset that foreign troops deposed Saddam are maintaining order until a new government is set up, then how are they different from the Saddam loyalists? I don't care how they nuance it. They look the same from here.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 1:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"They look the same from here."

And I don't care whether they look the same or not. If they have murdered and terrorized voters and then taken up arms against the elected government, rout them out and lock them away.
h2 | 02.03.05 - 2:14 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"They want the MNF out because they do not like the direction democracy is taking the country."

No, they want to rid Iraq of the American occupation because they want self determination for Iraqis. the recognize very well that democracy is not what is happening, but rather foreign dominance.
Shirin | Email | 02.03.05 - 2:30 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I speak with a variety of local citizens on an almost daily basis. Many will tell you straight out that they do not want "occupation forces" in their country. I really think it is neat that they can say that without fear of being detained. Anyway, these same people will also state that they want us to stay until the country is stable. If the "resistance" were to lay down their arms serious reconstruction could and would take place. Look at what has happened in Al Thawra. True there is still a lot of work to be done, but millions of dollars are being spent to clean up the sewage, restore power lines (placing IEDs on powerpoles was common there), and restore water service. It will take a long while, but progress is being made.

Have a nice day.
Baghdad Soldier | 02.03.05 - 2:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, they want to rid Iraq of the American occupation because they want self determination for Iraqis. the recognize very well that democracy is not what is happening, but rather foreign dominance.

...which if done immediatly, as everyone (but Shirin) knows, will lead inexhorably to civil war.

Meanwhile, if they let the troops do their jobs and identify Ba'athist and Islamsist terrorists, then the foreign dominators will soon be out of the way.

Assuming these imaginary non-Ba'athist, non-Tehranist terrorists are not simply insane, then they want the troops to leave precipitously so that the civil war will ensue. Why? I don't care, and neither does Sistani or Alawi or Yawir.

I don't see how that is too hard to work out. Soooo, they should be treated as one treats ticks on her dog.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 3:20 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad Soldier, the US occupation of Iraq in all its ways is still the main problem in Iraq. Give a set date when you will fully leave, and there will be less angry Iraqis.

What would you do if your country was taken over by a foreign country, sure they say to you they are there for your best interests Bush was a bad guy, but you know from your own experience that they still tortured you and killed your family. What would you do, smile and lay down your weapon? Go and celebrate the new sewage system?
Nadia | 02.03.05 - 3:48 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a very good link for those who don't want to wait for Abbas' book to come out. Ayatullah Muttahari gives a fairly short but thorough examination of the different schools of kalam. He is a renowned Shia' scholar who worked closely with Khomeini and was assasinated in the early days of the Iranian revolution. A number of short treatises by him have been translated into English. I find this topic much more interesting than circular arguments about Iraq.
Haydar | Email | 02.03.05 - 4:03 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AP today: "In the deadliest incident, insurgents stopped a minibus south of Kirkuk, ordered army recruits off the vehicle and gunned down 12 of them,...
The assailants identified themselves as members of Takfir wa Hijra, the name of an Islamic group that emerged in the 1960s in Egypt, rejecting society as corrupt and seeking to establish a utopian Islamic community. "

Sounds non-Tehranist and non-Ba'athist to me, unless this is an impersonation. There are all sorts of trigger happy folk out there. If you enjoy killing, join or start your own group. It's a free country.
h2 | 02.03.05 - 4:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad Soldier says:
"I speak with a variety of local citizens on an almost daily basis. Many will tell you straight out that they do not want "occupation forces" in their country. I really think it is neat that they can say that without fear of being detained."
Just what is the mind-set here, what assumptions underly this statement?
The implication is that, if they weren't so tolerant, the occupation troops would be quite within their rights to "detain" citizens of the country they are occupying, simply for speaking their minds.
What right do the troops of country A have to exercise control over the words or thoughts of the citizens of country B, which they are occupying. Surely only the "right" of conquest, of the victors over the vanquished. Is this the "New American Century" in action?
Anon | 02.03.05 - 4:17 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Give a set date when you will fully leave, and there will be less angry Iraqis."

I see no reason to think that anything we do will make a significant number of people happy at this point. But setting a date makes sense to me, conditioned on the ING and IP showing they can handle things before we go. Then if the people really want us to leave, they can put pressure on the security forces to get up to speed. I would give them about nine months, which would let them have elections without us around. I would also drop hints that if things got out of hand after we leave, "We'll be back, and no more mister nice guy this time." (Of course, this would be a bluff.)
h2 | 02.03.05 - 4:18 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2,

Looking through the filter of Islamic theology, they might be modern day khawarij.
Haydar | Email | 02.03.05 - 4:19 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Looking through the filter of Islamic theology, they might be modern day khawarij."

Religion makes people do funny things, don't it?
h2 | 02.03.05 - 4:29 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for the link Haydar - looks to be a great site.
Mark from Ireland | 02.03.05 - 4:33 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What would you do if your country was taken over by a foreign country, sure they say to you they are there for your best interests Bush was a bad guy, but you know from your own experience that they still tortured you and killed your family.

If I lived under a regime like Saddam's, I would not care if Saddam himself drove tanks down my street to depose my rulers if within 22 he had set up the free elections I had had in half a century, if he were training my own military to defend my country, repaired my collapsed infrastructure, etc. And if any red-blooded American took a pot shot at one of my liberators (even Saddam himself), or my military, or my police, I'd blow his worthless head off.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 4:35 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Give a set date when you will fully leave, and there will be less angry Iraqis

That would only mean that the terrorists could continue to disrupt up until the named date and then demand the forces leave anyway whether the country was secure or not. And when they didn't, terrorists would say, "See? We knew they would never leave!"

Grow up, Nadia. When the terrorists are pacified or dead, and when the Iraqis can protect themselves from criminals and foreign insurgents, then the forces will leave. The sooner the better, this American says.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 4:40 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Haydar:

Thank you for your response to my questions. I strongly agree with your position that "I find this topic much more interesting than circular arguments about Iraq."

Perhaps we could encourage Abbas to make more posts of this type. Some of us might actually learn something.
ARC | 02.03.05 - 5:23 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes please.
Mark from Ireland | 02.03.05 - 5:42 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely! Kudos, Abbas.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.03.05 - 6:06 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nadia:

"Just what is the mind-set here, what assumptions underly this statement?"

There are no underlying assumptions. I will spell it out for you. What I have been told by many Iraqi's is that they did not have the right to publicly denounce anything within their country without fear of being imprisoned, tortured, or killed under Saddam. When an Iraqi tells me he is against the occupation, he also usually prefaces the statement with "I am going to exercise my liberty and tell you what I think". Many Iraqi people are very proud that they can now speak their minds and exercise that right on a regular basis.

Have a nice day.
Baghdad Soldier | 02.03.05 - 6:16 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

عربي

Al Sistani does not adhere to anyone's agenda. Not even yours. My opinion is that he says and does what he feels is right. I don't know him, but I respect him.

Who here really sounds like a fanatic?


Have a nice day.
Baghdad Soldier | 02.03.05 - 6:25 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty crappy stuff this عربي
is spouting, Abbas.

Off with his head? Whatcha think?

Certainly you would not blame his presence on the pardoning of poet! You would not, right!

Really, is there a comparison to your rash of poet vs the insanity of عربي
boyintheworld | 02.03.05 - 9:33 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Iraqis have lived together before America as a nation existed, they do not need the U.S of A to keep the peace, they do not need America to stablize the situation..."

Not only do Iraqis not need the U.S. to "keep the peace" and "stabilize the situation", it is the U.S. that what peace there was by bringing its bombs and guns and tanks and attack helicopters. It is the U.S. that has progressively destabilized the situation to the point that every day is worse than the one before, and the one thing we can be sure of is that tomorrow will be worse than today.

The only hope for restorationa of peace and a return to stability is for the U.S. to give up its plans, and get out and leave Iraqis to mend their lives and their country.
Shirin | Email | 02.03.05 - 9:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"
Shirin | Email | 02.03.05 - 9:59 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The only hope for restorationa of peace and a return to stability is for the U.S. to give up its plans, and get out and leave Iraqis to mend their lives and their country."

I think the only hope is for the new government to be allowed to do its job.
h2 | 02.03.05 - 10:53 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let the New Democratic Iraqi Government™ do it's job. As I recall, you actually believed in the Handover of Sovereignty™, to, didn't you?
Shirin | Email | 02.04.05 - 12:09 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You demonized the vietnamese resistnce, you demonize the palestinians resistance and now try to demonize the Iraqis.":

I'm afraid that our only defense is that we are not the first to do this. For instance the Germans had exactly the same attitude towards the Italian, French and Soviet resistance during WWII. So, lets blame the Germans (and not Canada!).
Peter | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 1:59 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad Soldier
That wasn’t Nadia who questioned your underlying assumptions, it was me.
"What I have been told by many Iraqi's is that they did not have the right to publicly denounce anything within their country without fear of being imprisoned, tortured, or killed under Saddam."
Typical avoidance of the question. The whole reason you went there (forgetting inconvenient initial reasons like WMD) was supposedly to liberate these poor Ragheads, to bring them "Freedom and Democracy." You were supposed to be infinitely better than Saddam, so what is the point in referring to his crimes?
I repeat, why should Iraqis have the slightest doubt about, or fear of, expressing their dislike of your presence? Why should it be "neat" that they don’t? Shouldn’t it just be natural and right?
If you aren’t conquerors, just liberators, shouldn’t you expect nothing but gratitude?
John | 02.04.05 - 3:43 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CMAR 2 --

Good old CMAR2, back again to peddle his confusing and contradictory views once more …

Firstly, it is enlightening for us (illuminating your poor grasp of the situation) to see you lump the Baath and the Iranian clerics together in one basket. Naturally, you must be unaware that these ideological ‘kin’ recently fought an extremely bloody war amongst themselves that killed hundreds of thousands of each others citizens. You must be likewise unaware that the Baathists stood for secularist government, and the Khomeni (you do know who HE was, right?) doctrine stands for direct religious rule. And, you are also unaware that the original Baathism was not *necessarily* against democracy, but more pro pan-Arab.

The way that you feel that the Resistance (not necessarily consisting of only Al Zarqawi) is delegitimised by the opposition to what passes for ‘democracy’ these days in Iraq, I feel that this ‘democratic’ process is delegitimised by the extreme flaws in the elect
Bruno | Email | 02.04.05 - 5:42 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(grrr) ... electoral process, the fact that it has taken place under occupation, and the fact that substantial foreign assistance was given to some favoured candidates like Allawi.


Tell me CMAR2, how would you feel if some US expatriate came back and campaigned for president in the US with some 100 million dollars in Russian cash backing him? (Forget an actual occupation, for now) Tell me, CMAR2, does your country even allow foreign countries to fund parties / candidates there? Come, tell us about hypocrisy, CMAR2.
Bruno | Email | 02.04.05 - 5:45 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shirin --

“ "They want the MNF out because they do not like the direction democracy is taking the country."

No, they want to rid Iraq of the American occupation because they want self determination for Iraqis. the recognize very well that democracy is not what is happening, but rather foreign dominance.”

I think that statement bears repeating. Thank you, Shirin.


عربي --

“So let me get this straight, you people recognize the right of America to invade Iraq, bomb it, kill thousands but you don't recognize the right of the occupied to fight occupation and the right to self defense.”
Bruno | Email | 02.04.05 - 5:46 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No, no, عربي, you don’t understand. If you are against the US, you are evil. If you are working with them, even if you are a terrorist like the Contras or Saddam, you are good. That’s the way it works …
Bruno | Email | 02.04.05 - 5:47 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tell me CMAR2, how would you feel if some US expatriate came back and campaigned for president in the US with some 100 million dollars in Russian cash backing him?

Umm...are we still assuming (as in the "what if someone invaded your country?" question that these expatriots were driven away from my country by a soul-crushing tyrant? That this tyrant considered these expatriots so dangerous that ordered assassinations against these expatriots after they had left?

I wouldn't mind. But then, if my liberators (we'll continue to suppose this person is Saddam) began instituting free elections and free civil speech, then I could soon campaign to put someone else in that expatriot's place. Are you suggesting that if the MNF had let M. al-Sadr or Chemical Ali assume the presidency, then you would not count that as an injustice as well. I think you would.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 9:20 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good report about the fraud and corruption in Iraq.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/noscript.shtml?/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/fileon4
Nadia | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 9:21 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

fraud and corruption in Iraq
Hmmm...well, I guess that means we should bring back Saddam and that he should never have been driven from power.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 10:02 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It is the right of every occupied people to kill his occupier."

You get no argument from me on this. There could be more intelligent alternatives, though.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 10:05 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"As I recall, you actually believed in the Handover of Sovereignty™, to, didn't you?"

I believe in the US obligation to this, yes.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 10:07 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CMAR II, you could not have listen to the radio report because if you did you would not have written your comment. I suggest you listen to the whole report and you'll hear what they have to say about Saddam's fraud too. It's interesting to see how your logic goes though, in my world two wrongs do no make it right apparently it does in yours.
Nadia | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 10:17 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sgrena's Iraqi translator and a security guard at the university said the kidnappers appeared to have been waiting for her, blocking her path with a car...An Italian diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said about eight kidnappers were involved in the assault. "

Eight guys against one woman. All hail the brave Iraqi resistance!
h2 | 02.04.05 - 11:20 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

in my world two wrongs do no make it right apparently it does in yours

I don't agree with that math, however, in some people's minds (I know you'll find this hard to believe), the fact that corruption exists in liberated Iraq means that "New Iraq = Saddam's Regime" = "removing Saddam and constructing a democratic system and free society has not changed anything."

\sarcasm on
But I know from your posts here that you don't believe that.
\sarcasm off
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 11:22 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So what did you think of the report then CMAR II?
Nadia | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 12:04 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nadia to find your perfect world you will have to leave it. No garantees then either as far as I'm concerned. Lets get real.
Anonymous | 02.04.05 - 1:09 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I cannot install, Realplayer at my office, so I will have to wait.

But why bother? I know the song. I read this this morning.

Maybe it is all true or maybe it is all false innuendo and politicking.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 2:46 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would just like to go on record as noting that I found this post both interesting and informative. The initial discussion was mostly on point and added to my understanding of the subject.

Unfortunately, led by the usual suspects, the discussion has degenerated into vituperative attacks on the United States as the source of all evil and Americans as stupid, ignorant, racist monsters.

I really hoped for better.

Is there any way in which we can improve the situation, or should I just give up? The incessant hatred and vilification are just driving out rational discussions. Are such discussions wanted here?
ARC | 02.04.05 - 4:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second the motion above. Incessant personal attacks lead nowhere.
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 4:14 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Unfortunately, led by the usual suspects, the discussion has degenerated into vituperative attacks on the United States as the source of all evil and Americans as stupid, ignorant, racist monsters"

ARC, when you are the "cop of the world", you have to expect some trash talk.

"Is there any way in which we can improve the situation, or should I just give up?"

Why do you need to do either? It's fine here, as long as you are not looking for respect or admiration from people you don't know.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 5:21 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ARC may I butt in here?

1) The answer re: to the hate posts you've cited as I'm sure you know is possibly both. IP addresses are traceable and Abbas is a host who takes such things seriously.

2) The type of discourse: I've reached the point with some posters here where I am reverting to my original decision to ignore anything they say. (Irrespective of whether I agree with them or not.)

3) The topic alas raises passions. I've lost my temper on occasion as you well know. Ultimately it depends upon self-policing and a willingness if not to be convinced, at least to try to remain polite.

Interested in your comments.
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 6:13 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4) Self-policing to include trying to stay OT

Sorry 'bout that hit submit button by accident.
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 6:14 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark:

Perhaps the matter could be addressed in part by adhering to the topic of the original post. Abbas's post addressed Islamic schools of jurisprudence and theology. The comments diverged rather widely from those subjects as the usual group of haters began to spew their venom. As I said above, I found the topic interesting and wished to explore it further. Other commenters, particularly Haydar, contributed to that attempt. They were soon silenced, however, by the flood of vituperation.

It is certainly possible to skip over a few comments. It becomes less attractive to continue when one must search for nuggets of rationality in a heap of irrelevant abuse.
ARC | 02.04.05 - 6:25 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You do realise that we may be causing one or two people who "Know" us to keel over in shock don't you?

Diverged puts it mildly. Completely agree re Haydar's postings. I also am interested in the topic and want very much to learn more.
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 6:37 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incidentally that site Haydar linked to is a goldmine
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 6:49 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbas's mindset plays a part in those type of attitudes gravitating to this blog. A strokfest some days of hate speak to the blueprint. I come to challenge the basis of the kind. A basis weak at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.
poet | 02.04.05 - 6:52 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Please refrain from using any language that insults others and/or calls for anything beyond the realm of civility and proper criticism. Any comments that degrade others' opinions, or their religious beliefs will be deleted if I come across them and think a comment is inappropriate. Examples of objectionable language are (among others): foul language; calling people cowards, idiots, and so on."

There's a difference between freedom and license. YOur comments to Bagdhad soldier were way outside of what is acceptable. They were also an abuse of the hospitality shown to everyone here by our host.
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 7:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"So then, h2, do you find these two posts to represent acceptable discourse? Are they just "trash talk" or are they in fact actionable death threats from a possibly deranged person?"
"...do us all a favor and come home in a body bag", etc.

He's just repeating what his wife says to him when he goes off to work in the morning.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 7:23 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not going to contribute further to this useless argument. I trust that Abbas will address the problem as he sees fit.
ARC | 02.04.05 - 7:38 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agreed ARC.

Abbas - you put up with a hell of a lot.

Thanks
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 7:42 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To quote United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24 of 29 November 1978:

"2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle;"
عربي | Email | 02.04.05 - 7:43 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To quote General Assembly Resolution A/RES/3246 (XXIX) of 29 November 1974:

3. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the peoples' struggle for liberation form colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation by all available means, including armed struggle; ...
عربي | Email | 02.04.05 - 7:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark, this is nothing. He has put up with worse.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 7:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(you should see what such comments look like in real English!)
h2 | 02.04.05 - 7:45 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1st 2 Br. عربي, i recognize what ur going thro: Anger and frustration at US foreign policy. Undoubtedly the US has been very unjust esp in the mideast and esp wrt the israeli Palestinian issue (the whole world minus america knows this) but i dont think u should vent yr anger at Bhagdad soldier. 1stly i dont think he chose to go to Iraq, Bush and rummy (i am tempted to say dummy) fooled this nation into risking the lives of its young men to acheive their own agendas. furthermore araby, u hv 2 realise a lot of the ppl on this blog hv not been to the mideast and the news (nay fiction) they get on US media does not make them realise what injustice the US has done. However many of them are open minded and once they realize this they will of course object to unjust US foreign policy...When u start pesonal attack, people immediately go on the defensive and then u can't convince them of yr point of view. Its counterproductive. besides whatever people do as a whole e.g.
Aunali | 02.04.05 - 7:47 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2 - I know. But we all like to be told "thank you" sometimes
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 7:48 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

besides whatever people do as a whole e.g. america attacks iraq, we cant deprive the individuals of their humanity like i think u did to Bhag soldier...similarly 2 the americans, the word terrorist has become so sensitized that today if u use this wrd its almost like ur talkin abt an animal. U have to understand the reasons why these people carry out thes acts, and not deprive them of their humanity too. (ps this does not mean i condone the terrorists nor do i condone the unjust american. araby i am presuming ur muslim, read whatbu said and ask yrself does islam allow this? i.e. wishing death for someone/ extreme hatred? a cursory reading of the quran will show u that this is not the case. So while it is true that these rogues have wreaked havoc in "our" countries, we can't go against the principles of islam to extract revenge frm them (like kidnapping innocents: this is misplaced anger and rage and is again counterproductive) (hpe this made sense)
Aunali | 02.04.05 - 7:52 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How do you know that all Americans posting here are white? At least 25% of Americans are nonwhite. Actually, most of them are to at least some extent of mixed race and/or culture. The Middle East is far more racially and culturally homogeneous than is America.
ARC | 02.04.05 - 7:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aunali - Thanks as always you're a voice of reason.

G' night.
Mark from Ireland | 02.04.05 - 7:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sorry it seems my 1st posting cut some remarks and then i reposted and it kinda messed up but what i meant to say is the resistance so to speak is kidnapping innocents and blowing up innocents which is against islam and against logic. true iraq has been occupied and its inhabitants have the right to fight off the invaders (like palestinians hv th right to fight off israel) but the resistance is not doing that its only giving itself a bad name. know what i mean
Aunali | 02.04.05 - 7:56 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...weak at best, intellectually dishonest at worst....
poet | 02.04.05 - 7:58 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that he said he lives in the states. We have got to tighten up on immigration policy.

Abbas must be out for the weekend.

Haydars site is informing, Mark.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:03 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It looks as if some of the Sunni opposition is having second thoughts:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/la-020405sunnis_lat,0,7052921.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Sorry I forgot how to do links. Haloscan is no help AFAICT.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 8:11 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hah... I know who you are. Sleep with one eye open, sadeeqy.

I'm wondering if you think the resistance would better serve themselves if they came to the table and discussed along with the shia how to procede from here.

Is this resistance a matter of pride with you?

Would you have as much pride if armed conflict in favor of voting continued?
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:16 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Try this page. Scroll down to Sept 7/04. Don't use the brackets.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:27 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Would you have as much pride if armed conflict were discontinued in favor of voting continued?
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:28 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Beg for Zarqawi? Interesting..

Honestly, I think the Shia are just as self-interested as anyone else. However, that self-interest might be better served by other methods.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:30 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets get back to topic for a moment.

What can you teach us about Wahabism? Anything? Would you want your daughter to marry one? I'm being serious. How are they viewed in your world?
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:32 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you Shia or Sunni?
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 8:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"h2 if you recognize that right than much respect to you, than i was not addressing you, i am addressing everybody who supports this war and occupation."

My point was that no one here that I know of has denied that the Iraqis have a (legal) right to resist occupation. The disagreement is mainly about whether resistance is in their best interest or not, and also whether Americans are entitled to have an opinion about this or not.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 9:01 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This disturbed person does not comprehend we are not there to put down the Iraqi people. it is our mission to put down Saddam and his thugs and return the country to the Iraqi's. It is evident you are one of those and you will be put down in time yourself.
poet | 02.04.05 - 9:06 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LA Times

boy, thanks. Wonder if it worked.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 9:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes.. you've got it.

Welcome.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 9:13 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

boy, I've bookmarked that message. Thanks.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 9:21 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Poet: do u know that ur annoying by posting the same line over and over and spouting absolute nonesense...gees u need to get a life
Aunali | 02.04.05 - 9:45 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"americans have no right to judge what or what not is in the best interest of the Iraqis"

I guess this means I should not care if any Iraqis live or die or suffer. But, I'm sorry, I do.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 9:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is your attachement to Iraq? Any? Is being Arab enough?

Do your views come more from some pan-Arab pride?

How did you grow up viewing the US?

I have a very dear Lebanese friend in UAE. Her views are much more moderate than yours. I also have a very good Syrian friend that lives in Slovenia and grew up in Kuwait. She is a little more extreme and hardheaded. Fisk is a soothsayer to her...Ughhhhh

Often we view events based upon our past experiance. The US does not have the best of histories in the ME. But we are not altogether corrupt and self-serving either.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 10:02 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes the policy of freedom and prosperity just kicks the hate merchants in the nuts. You have no straight answer for these so called policies you wail about. You look at what you have built and then look at what we have built. It is simple ignorant jealosy and the distortions of religious extremisms that feed barbaric hatred.
poet | 02.04.05 - 10:25 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our country will not wallow in the ancient fervent Jew hate so become the enemies of that same festering swollen infected boil that will not lance.
poet | 02.04.05 - 10:31 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What would you suggest we do after 9/11?

In whose interest would it be for events like that to continue?

Do I sound middle-class?

Listen, you have much reason for pride. Also, you have much reason to be concerned about the people of Iraq. You are right that historically we have slanted our policy towards Israel. During the cold war, we were obligated to do this. Things have changed now.

We did not however, deserve 9/11 or so many other events of terrorism.

In the best interest of all, we must have change. The extremities of the ME are out of it's control.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 10:31 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It shouldn't have put Saddam in charge of such a beatiful country. By doing that your country was betrayed. Now millions welcome a new future. You are bound by large hate of little reason, maybe till you die.
poet | 02.04.05 - 10:34 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"what you care for what change nothing, if you care about Iraqis, protest against your gov't, educate your fellow citizens that imperialism is unjustified, speak out against war and occupation, this is how you can show you care if you really care.'

Done that. What else would you like, Mr. Lebanon Spokesman for Iraq?

"they are not kids, they know what is in their best interest, they do not need me nor you to tell them what is in their best interest."

I'm not telling them anything, I am exchanging ideas with whoever comes by this blog, which I have every right to do as long as I don't use language like you do.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 10:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our policy has always been against ignorant hate and always will be.
poet | 02.04.05 - 10:40 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Symbol name, we have already BEEN warned about ignorant hate.
poet | 02.04.05 - 10:46 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't believe policies were as extreme as you think. Substantial efforts were attempted to broker peace between Isreal and Palestine. There is no reason to think that the policy slant would not become more favorable in your view over time. Though, I'm not sure what you would be satisfied with. Quite a few Arabs would only be satisfied with the demise of Israel.

Whatever the case, again, we did not deserve this escalation in terrorism. We had to make changes. The ME does not seem to be able to control it's own extremities.

Have a good evening.
boyintheworld | 02.04.05 - 10:47 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The warning has been heeded and now the world has been shook up. Thankfully we didn't have a liberal pillow talk nancy in the whitehouse. The hate mercahnts are doing the rethinking now.
poet | 02.04.05 - 10:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Whatever the case, again, we did not deserve this escalation in terrorism. "

Well, boy, "deserve" may be too strong a word, but we certainly helped bring it on by interfering all around the world and especially getting in bed with Israel. It's all about money and making the corporate interests happy. I don't see that we have learned any lesson, either, if anything it is getting worse and more arrogant and bellicose, so of course we will see worse in the way of terrorism. The corporate hats won't care much. They can insulate themselves quite well. Mostly only little people will die. (That will give them more of an excuse to outsource our jobs.)
h2 | 02.04.05 - 11:11 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Again, an Amerian middle class person is saying "we". This has nothing to do with you, you have no say."

This is a democracy, so we are all responsible for what our government does, right or wrong. If we lost our "say", so to speak, that is still our responsiblity because we did not choose our leaders properly.
h2 | 02.04.05 - 11:14 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2 said:
This is a democracy, so we are all responsible for what our government does, right or wrong. If we lost our "say", so to speak, that is still our responsiblity because we did not choose our leaders properly.

That was very well said h2 - we do have acertain amount of responsibility for our government's actions. However, when our government goes around invading other countries, that is a pretty sad thing to reflect upon.
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 11:35 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Araby said: Aunali, some actions may have been extreme and i do not support the zarqawi elements of the resistance or Saddam loyalist but if the resistance beheaded an American soldier, do you think i care, i think it is justified.

greetings Araby, I think that this statement is going a bit overboard. While resistance might be justified, the wanton killing of helpless prisoners wouldn't be.(presumably de-capitation is only feasible with a prisoner - not in combat).

I personally think that it is important to distinguish between the question of whether resistance itself is justified (I say yes in this case), and whether a particular method of resistance is justified (I say no in this case).
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 11:45 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2 said Well, boy, "deserve" may be too strong a word, but we certainly helped bring it on by interfering all around the world and especially getting in bed with Israel.

Again, very well said h2, although I disagree with you that there was/is a corporate profit motive behind US policy in the region. Personally, I think it kis based on the sordid game of ethnic power politics, with a bit of racist sense of our superiority, which leads us to invade countries for their benefit - LOL
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.04.05 - 11:50 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There aren't enough of the hate merchants to win. You shoot your foot in your mouth.
poet | 02.04.05 - 11:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Join the world and start letting it go.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:05 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To resepct Israels rights does not make hanky h2.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:07 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's disect hate and see which is more palatable kind.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:17 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Araby said:
gregpotemkin why do you exclude corporate and profit motive behind this war, there are corporations benefiting from this war, that can't be denied.

I don't deny that certain corporations profit by wars, but I think that the primary purpose behind this war, was because the Zionist lobby will always encourage the US to attack Arabs and/or Muslims.

And if the Arab world is completely subjugated there won't be the possibility of another arab oil boycott.

But this is very different from going to war simply because arms merchants want a war. I don't think that the military-industiral complex is that powerful.
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 12:17 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iraqi's put on unifoms for the same purpose of creating a new country. Shoot those in the head in ignorance.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:19 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

excuse me poet, but I am having trouble apprehending your meaning.

Does this:
To resepct Israels rights does not make hanky h2.

actually mean anything?
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 12:21 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are no favors for our respect of their rights as h2 would put us in bed with them. Shallow zionist conspiracy theories of hate view any respect as policies picking on that petty Arab hate.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:27 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The world is making steps to outgrow lunacy such as that.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:29 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It cannot be jusified any more than childish playground bullying.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:30 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have free speech to try.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:32 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comes down to this. Arabs want to get in our business (and they did). We are now in your business, and we mean business.
poet | 02.05.05 - 12:40 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comes down to this. Arabs want to get in our business (and they did). We are now in your business, and we mean business. - poet

oops, wrong country. again.

terrorists came from Saudi Arabia mainly, and are now in Pakistan mainly.

If the terrorists are as geographically challenged as poet, Canada is in big trouble. So is Panama.
Susan - USA | 02.05.05 - 1:49 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

nice literal try
poet | 02.05.05 - 1:52 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can have more guesses though as to where the real deals are.
poet | 02.05.05 - 2:11 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LOL @ Susan's comments.
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 2:13 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lebanese Shia: The US intervention in Afghanistan was legal because of the shelter and aide the Taliban regime provided our common enemy Osama Bin Laden. The attacks on civilian targets in New York, Nairobi
and Dar es Salaam bring the same sanctions for self defense as any you claim for the Iraqi resistance. I wouldn't be so quick to defend the Taliban if I were you. They have no more mercy to Shi'a than their fellow religious bigots in the Israeli Likud.
Baghdad soldier: Its nice that Iraqis you meet and those interviewed by polling companies can speak freely. But individual dissent doesn't accomplish much. When Iraqis
gather to hear an anti-occupation
Friday sermon in a mosque or publish an anti-occupation newspaper American soldiers with guns appear.
The people issuing your orders still depend on the world believing that all anti-American Arabs collaborate
with each other; the fact is Qadaffi,
Assad and Hussein all despise Bin Laden and Bin Laden despises those and other
multisect | Email | 02.05.05 - 2:35 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...non cooperative Sunnis and all Shia as well. Remember the tyrant and plane bomber Qadaffi dines with American oil men today, as do the bankrollers of Hamas in Riyadh. Its not where the terrorists are that is priority: it's which way the oil flows. Exxon, Chevron, Conoco and BP
don't mind if the price goes up, they just add an increase of their own. They do want to guarantee supply, that they do care about.
multisect | Email | 02.05.05 - 2:55 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Poet seems to be developing a pattern of making about three almost intelligible utterances before relapsing into ungrammatical incoherence for several more. Interesting syndrome.
The subject of Abbas' post, and the contributions of Arabic commenters, underlines the fact that this war is basically a matter of a clash of cultures. The neo-cons assumed that the citizens of Baghdad would react to events (and intimidation) in the same way as the citizens of Bumfluff, Idaho. They got that wrong, but then they got everything else wrong too. Consistent.
It feels like a lifetime, but this nonsense has actually been going on for less than two years, hasn't it? And the result, after Najaf and Fallujah, is that the US will no longer be welcome or trusted anywhere in the Middle East for a very long time.
So much for the New American Century!
John | 02.05.05 - 2:59 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad Soldier
You are not at war. You won the war back in May 2003. You are the owners of Iraq, by right of conquest, and you assisting the Iraqi people to regain their independence from you. That shouldn't be an ugly thing.
John | 02.05.05 - 5:38 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"...I disagree with you that there was/is a corporate profit motive behind US policy in the region."

I over-simplified I admit, though I wasn't talking just about this region but our general approach around the non-Western world.
h2 | 02.05.05 - 7:18 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"the fact is Qadaffi,
Assad and Hussein all despise Bin Laden and Bin Laden despises those and other"

multi-
And did they cross their hearts when they told you this, and promise that they would never support each other against the US? LOL!
h2 | 02.05.05 - 7:23 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"why is it that the majority of the fire fights I get into start with my coming to the aid of Iraqi citizens, rather than a direct attack on US forces?"

Because you are basically up against cowards and fools?
h2 | 02.05.05 - 7:30 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John:

I see your point. My opinion is that we (Iraqis and the U.S.) are still at war with the AIF. To clarify the previous post: The "resistance" targets many Iraqi citizens, most of whom are just trying to earn a living. Most citizens are afraid of the "resistance". This fact and the bleeding Iraqis to which we render first aid is terribly ugly business.

Have a nice day.
Baghdad Soldier | 02.05.05 - 7:33 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abbas

Your enumeration looks exhaustive and a little overwhelming.

What I'm interested in are the "social" implications of the various theologies.
For instance, would a man or woman in the street who identifies them self as a Kawarij also identify themselves as belonging to one of the 20 sects?

How do people within a classification relate to people within another?
Peter | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 8:23 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad Soldier
Sorry, AIF = ?
When you say the resistance targets Iraqi citizens, are you excluding those they regard as "collaborators," ING, translators, etc? Are they accepting incidental innocent deaths as "collateral damage" just as the Coalition forces do?
I'm not on either side, just watching. But I feel the clash of cultures aspect I mentioned above is perhaps more important than we think.
Imagine the carnage in Japan after WW2 if the Emperor had ordered his people to fight on rather than submit!
John | 02.05.05 - 12:21 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

US support for Israel has really damaged the US image in the middle east because it makes the US look so hypocritical when it tells other nations to do the right thing while its allies are the most corrupt in the region, and its allies are jordan, saudi arabia, Israel and the egyptian gov't.

You mention several ME governments. What is it about these particular governments that you seem to hate? You believe that these are more corrupt than other ME governments? In your mind, was Saddams a corrupt regime?

Would introducing some self-empowerment to the peoples of your examples be helpful?
boyintheworld | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 12:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When you say the resistance targets Iraqi citizens, are you excluding those they regard as "collaborators," ING, translators, etc? Are they accepting incidental innocent deaths as "collateral damage" just as the Coalition forces do?

The fact is that the terrorists and those that support them are a small minority of Iraqis. If it weren't so, the MNF and Iraqi government would be contending with rebellions like the one in Najaf all over Iraq and the forces would have little choice but to retreat to the Kuwaiti border and Kurdistan and watch the ensuing civil war.

Soo...do the majority of Iraqis have the right to tolerate the "occupiers" until the new government is stable?
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 1:12 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or are the "rights" of the minority of regectionists and terrorists paramount? Should everyone in Iraq be forced to put up with the terrorists until THEY are pacified? If a minority of South Africaners were unhappy with the end of Apartheid, is that any reason not to trudge forward and have elections and embrace a South Africa that acknowledged all the people?
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 1:13 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John:

AIF = Anti Iraqi Forces

The polling sites are a recent example. Civilians were targeted as they went to vote. Anyone who did not agree with boycotting the election was a potential target. I can understand the ING and IPs because we actually work very closely with these groups. The reason many of these brave men cover their faces is to protect their families. If your nephew is a member of the ING or IP, you as his uncle are a "valid" target. It is usually only the immediate family that is threatened and/or killed though. I could go on and on. Like I said before, it is really ugly business.

Have a nice day.
Baghdad Soldier | 02.05.05 - 1:19 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Baghdad Soldier
OK, further to clash of cultures, is the AIF something new in guerilla warfare, not a force like the Viet Cong operating under a unified and disciplined command but a collection of many different forces ranging from "freedom fighters" to "foreign jihadis?" If there is no head to cut off, no chain of command to disrupt, does this make your job easier or harder?
John | 02.05.05 - 1:44 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John:

I apologize, some questions I must refrain from answering.

Have a nice day.
Baghdad Soldier | 02.05.05 - 2:25 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good grief, who would I tell?
The only terrorist I know is my neighbour's cat.
John | 02.05.05 - 2:50 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sure...you tell the cat, the cat gets drunk at a party, and soon Zarqawi has us dancing on a string.

CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 2:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it is a British cat, it is not to be trusted.
Anonymous | 02.05.05 - 2:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AIF??? What on earth is AIF?
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 2:58 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Must be why he lies on the doormat five times a day. I won't say a word to him.
John | 02.05.05 - 3:04 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Meowrrrrr. Hisssssssssssspit!
Fluffy | 02.05.05 - 3:10 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ARC u do live up to yr name. Nw the poor cat because it originated from the ME is a Jihadi. Did you know that jesus Christ (may peace be upon him originated from the ME as well! so did Moses! and so do so many Jews, Christians, and many peole of other faiths...

Poet: this blog is in English, please do us a favor and use English. And for heavens sake dont post the same nonesense 10 times, we heard u the first time. and please post all yr comments in one post so we can just ignore the whole thing, its harded to ignore small bits intersperesd everywhere. (Actually do us all a big favor and drop dead (abas this is a joke, please dont kick me out
Aunali Khaku | Email | 02.05.05 - 4:06 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shirin wrote:
AIF??? What on earth is AIF?

In the wacky world of Pentagon double-speak, those Iraqis and others who are opposed to the US sponsored governemnt in Iraq, are referred to as the anti-Iraq forces (AIF).

It is actually kind of funny, when you think about it.
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 4:13 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Most citizens are afraid of the "resistance". "

And you know this because of your very, very close daily contact with "most citizens", of course. Funny that you do not seem to know that most citizens are even more afraid of the American occupation forces.
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 4:29 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Greg,

Okay, I get it. Iraqis who oppose the occupation of their country are anti-Iraqi. How frightening if this actually makes sense to anyone.
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 4:31 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aunali Khaku:

It is interesting that you are offended by my obvious joke about jihadi cats. Are you then a tool of the feline conspiracy?
ARC | 02.05.05 - 4:33 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to my contacts in Iraq, and supported by polls and interviews, Iraqis are afraid/resentful of armed groups in this order:

1. The New Iraqi Military Forces™.
2. American occupation forces.
3. "Insurgents".

Incidentally, the Iraqi police, unlike The New Iraqi Military Forces™, get fairly high marks from a couple of my contacts in Iraq. They perceive the police as being polite and committed to protecting the people.
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 4:37 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But then Shirin only converses with Ba'athists (forgot to mention that).
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 5:02 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

shirin stated:
According to my contacts in Iraq, and supported by polls and interviews, Iraqis are afraid/resentful of armed groups in this order:

1. The New Iraqi Military Forces™.
2. American occupation forces.
3. "Insurgents".

Incidentally, the Iraqi police, unlike The New Iraqi Military Forces™, get fairly high marks from a couple of my contacts in Iraq.

Hi shirin, can you get me some links, etc that amplify on the differences between the police and the Iraqi military forces.
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 7:53 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not disputing what you are saying shirin, just looking for some more info, preferably from a source other than centcom, and such.
GregPotemkin | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 7:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Okay, I get it. Iraqis who oppose the occupation of their country are anti-Iraqi. How frightening if this actually makes sense to anyone."

The ungrateful cocky teenager syndrome could bring the whole thing down....... but won't....it's easy and not scary at all to make sense of the larger picture, and most Iraqi's are doing it.
poet | 02.05.05 - 8:02 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This lack of perspective walks a close line to the ba'athist. Have to wonder..
poet | 02.05.05 - 8:19 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incidentally, the Iraqi police, unlike The New Iraqi Military Forces™, get fairly high marks from a couple of my contacts in Iraq.

I hope this is good news in your mind.

Who trained these forces? Who gets the credit?

Are your contacts biased to one outcome or another? Or is this a response to security?
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 8:20 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Have to wonder how mind traps get so tight.
poet | 02.05.05 - 8:28 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Must be the sea of holes.....
poet | 02.05.05 - 8:31 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the best of all possible worlds, the Iraqis find a way to peace and prosperity without anymore loss of life

and Americans bury the Bush Doctrine along with their dead.

As long as the "wisdom" of the Bush Doctrine is measured by the dead or lack of dead in Iraq -- or by "democracy" or the lack of democracy in Iraq

there will be circular arguments.

Iraqis can live in peace and prosperity and the world can tell George Bush to go to hell.

In the best of all possible worlds.
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 8:46 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Greg, I am not aware of any information publicly available about Iraqi Police vs troops. I have only heard this from two Iraqis I know and communicate with regularly. I don't even don't know how widespread this feeling is, really, or whether it is the unique view of just these two people.

Sorry.
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 8:51 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Poet, you take alot of flak from some. I'm glad that you have the fortitude to come back and continue letting everyone know how you feel.

There are times that I don't understand what you are trying to convey, but, at other times you are raw, to the point and very clear.

Which likely is why you receive so much flak. Raw and to the point is difficult to handle for some.

As you know though, you must be careful with to much raw and to the point. Otherwise poet sir, you will lose your head.
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 8:52 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Iraqis can live in peace and prosperity and the world can tell George Bush to go to hell.

It's going to be one helluva ride if Mr. GBush goes down in history as the man who gave democracy to the ME.

Oh, would that we all could be there 100 years from now.
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 8:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"It's going to be one helluva ride if Mr. GBush goes down in history as the man who gave democracy to the ME."

I hope we can confer that honor on the dead.

But there's no doubt in my mind that GWB is itchin to claim it.
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:03 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh ya, he would love to have that as his legacy. In view of history, that accomplishment would stand very tall.

WoW, the ME.. self-empowered, State by state... slowly, reluctantly but surely.. over time.

And bloody historians trace it back to now.
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 9:08 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The freedom of the mind, freed from narrow bands of tribalistic thought, will bring peace, freed from including the delusion it will never be a fight or a struggle to bring it about. The enemy ignorance has many soldiers.
poet | 02.05.05 - 9:11 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush doesn't seek your approval dorsano, or does he need it. It is evident you allow things to get between your minds eye and history. History will bear itself out.
poet | 02.05.05 - 9:18 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



"Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing
and rightdoing there is a field.
I'll meet you there"

http://www.khamush.com/
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"there's no doubt in my mind that GWB is itchin to claim it"

Itchin? He has already claimed it. Of course the basis for this claim is as solid as the basis for his other claims regarding Iraq, but he never lets that like of thing stop him.
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:22 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hope you get there dorsano.
poet | 02.05.05 - 9:25 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is evident you allow things to get between your minds eye and history. History will bear itself out.

Actually poet, at this stage of my life I'm more concerned about what God thinks of me than "history"

And I don't give a rat's ass about what GWB thinks of me.
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:28 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Typical politician, Shirin. It's the same the world over. Thought you don't have to be a politician to seek approval and recognition.

If we are lucky, Iraq will have it's choice of these soon enough.

Already, the Shia are asking for the PM position. And the Sunni are saying that they will help in forming a constitution. You are well on your way towards real politics.
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 9:29 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therein lies your problem.....
poet | 02.05.05 - 9:32 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therein lies your problem.....

Turn away from the mirror poet and join me in the field.

The view is blessed.
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:35 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

probably already been there and moved to another..theres time enough to gather many views, and time is what you need to do it.
poet | 02.05.05 - 9:42 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ARC the reason i was offended is we Muslims consider Jihad a virtue. and when the media and uninformed people and jerks like ussama bin laden reduce it to merely killing, it irks us. to us its a much bigger and loftier concept. it is the fight against ones own inner desires, and against all forms of tyranny whether they be within or without...
Aunali Khaku | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:48 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" and did they cross their hearts when they told you this and promise never to support each other agqinst the US LOL! H2"
I prefer to learn from facts and not indulge in that ancient hominid tradition of assuming all enemies are united.
Fact: Qadaffi publicly commended the US for attacking Al Qaeda.
Fact: It is widely believed Bin Laden sent a suicide bomber squad to try to kill Qadaffi.
Fact: Assad's father battled thousands of Sunni theocrats in the Syrian city of Homs.
Fact: The 9/11 Commission stated in the final report that the Hussein government rejected cooperation with Al Qaeda.
Baghdad Soldier: "most Iraqis..."
Fact: Even the Gallup poll reported that 70% of Iraqis want the US out by this month.
multisect | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:53 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I'm glad we had this time together, Robert Frost and boyinpampers.

Perhaps a free and prosperous Iraq is sufficient penance in God's eye for not being able to tell the difference between a Pushtun, Arab, Persian

and the men who attacked us.

Perhaps the thousands dead would have chosen to fight for their freedom in the way that we chose for them and we will be forgiven.

How typically American - we fight our battles "over there", you and I, so we don't have to deal with the concequences here

or on a blog that deals with "Reflections on the Middle East, Islam, Politics and Theology"

so as not to disrupt prime time TV.
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 9:56 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

uninformed people and jerks like ussama bin laden reduce it to merely killing, it irks us.

It irks us also. Many of us need help in understanding why he thinks that his viewpoint is correct. How can he and those that follow him justify this viewpoint? Why is it allowed? And why cannot thiw viewpoint be marginalized long before it arrives in our world?
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 9:58 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, I'm glad we had this time together, Robert Frost and boyinpampers.

We have come far tonight, Dorksano. I see that clearly.
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 10:01 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We have come far tonight, Dorksano

I doubt that very much.

But whatever ground you and I (and Robert Frost) may have gained was bought with someone else's blood and at the expense of our country

And if you don't understand that, you've gone nowwhere.
dorsano | Email | 02.05.05 - 10:16 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ice ice baby
poet | 02.05.05 - 10:18 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I doubt that very much.

Yes but, at least we have passed some time. And each moment is a lifetime to those whose moments are near an end.

Those who shed their blood would appreciate our time.

Good Night.
boyintheworld | Email | Homepage | 02.05.05 - 10:24 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Even the Gallup poll reported that 70% of Iraqis want the US out by this month."

A recent poll (Zogby, as I recall) found that 82% of Sunni Arabs and 69% of Shi`i Arabs wanted the U.S. to leave immediately after the elections. Every poll conducted in Iraq starting with the first one in 2003 has found that the majority of Iraqis have wanted the U.S. out sooner rather than later.
Shirin | Email | 02.05.05 - 10:34 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now sense would prohibit that. This blind hate is eating you up. We are there now to insure the path to law.
poet | 02.05.05 - 11:26 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You may think they are ready, yes ready but not prepared to stand up the rule of law. Let spitefull impatience go.
poet | 02.05.05 - 11:42 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The marigolds of war shall blossom in the blue sky of the shopping mall.
Poet | 02.06.05 - 2:10 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I lay me down to sleep
I pray to wake up as a creep
Poet | 02.06.05 - 2:11 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's done I am transmogrified, Iraqi sun my brain has fried, my fractured prose is Bushified
Poet | 02.06.05 - 2:13 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some of the preceding posts were not actually by the real Poet. Problem is, which ones?
Anon | 02.06.05 - 2:15 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Fact: Qadaffi publicly commended the US for attacking Al Qaeda."

After we bought him off, yes.

"Fact: It is widely believed Bin Laden sent a suicide bomber squad to try to kill Qadaffi. "

Ditto.

"Fact: Assad's father battled thousands of Sunni theocrats in the Syrian city of Homs."

Even pragmatists have their limits.

"Fact: The 9/11 Commission stated in the final report that the Hussein government rejected cooperation with Al Qaeda."

Hindsight is 20/20.

"Baghdad Soldier: "most Iraqis..."
Fact: Even the Gallup poll reported that 70% of Iraqis want the US out by this month."

Interesting that those who would dismiss the Iraqi elections as a mere plebiscite are quoting polls of people with no accountability whatsoever for their poll choices.
h2 | 02.06.05 - 12:04 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A recent poll (Zogby, as I recall) found that 82% of Sunni Arabs and 69% of Shi`i Arabs wanted the U.S. to leave immediately after the elections."

Shirin-
I'm confident the new government will take these sentiments into account, and apply the same requisite wisdom as they have shown to date, though I do not know what they will decide. That's one reason why we have real elections in addition to polls, and republics instead of direct democracies.
h2 | 02.06.05 - 12:16 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aunali - ARC's joke was quite funny but I take your point. There's a hadith about going from the lesser to greater jihad - 'Nuff said?

A few things come to mind here. There is an image in the west that Islam is an inherently violent faith. I disagree but no doubt that's just me pandering again *g*. When one has been at the butt end of a stereotype one can get overdefensive no?

ARC - for crying out loud don't get started on cats wouldya? Every time virgin tigress passes me in the corridor or comes into my office she says "miaooowwwww" and makes a scissors gesture. I collapse into incoherent laughter and the students are beginning to find it disconcerting. Don't you start please........
Mark from Ireland | 02.06.05 - 2:32 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so u want to marginalise UBL s views and so do we: lets start by identifying his rallying call: The israeli palestinian issue: lest try to solve that with Justice, and he'll lose most of his support. if u must know no one in the islamic scholarly universe recognises UBLs views as any kind of authority. Both traditional schools of shii and sunni learning have unanimously condemened him, in fact hes not even an islamic scholar let alone a mufti to qualify to give fatwas
Aunali | 02.06.05 - 4:49 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"if u must know no one in the islamic scholarly universe recognises UBLs views as any kind of authority. Both traditional schools of shii and sunni learning have unanimously condemened him, in fact hes not even an islamic scholar let alone a mufti to qualify to give fatwas"

Key point.

Also don't forget that when Ayatollah Khomeini Iran was left isolated. 44 out of 45 muslim countries condemmed it.
Mark from Ireland | 02.06.05 - 4:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sorry bad copy and paste

Also don't forget that when Ayatollah Khomeini issued his fatwah againstr Salman Rushdie Iran was left isolated. 44 out of 45 muslim countries condemmed it.
Mark from Ireland | 02.06.05 - 5:00 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

the reason i was offended is we Muslims consider Jihad a virtue. and when the media and uninformed people and jerks like ussama bin laden reduce it to merely killing
Aunali Khaku

Well, it was reported that "Osama" had become the most popular name for boy babies born in the months after Sept. 11th. If this is true, then it is not really the media or even Osama bin Ladin who is to blame for "Jihad" or even Islam being boiled down to "killing". Arabs are to blame. Albeit not all of them, of course.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.06.05 - 6:42 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"the reason i was offended is we Muslims consider Jihad a virtue. and when the media and uninformed people and jerks like ussama bin laden reduce it to merely killing"

If Muslims are serious about dialogue with non-Muslims, I would suggest expanding the vocabulary a bit. Fairly or unfairly (and jihad was of course originally violent) the word "jihad" is forever tainted with blood in these parts.
h2 | 02.06.05 - 8:46 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2, are you suggesting that because non-Muslims have a mistaken notion of jihad, Muslims are supposed to erase that word from the vocabulary after centuries, and invent a whole new one just to accommodate the ignorance of others?
Shirin | Email | 02.06.05 - 10:04 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"That's one reason why we have real elections"

The New Iraqi Government™ will not be chosen by the people in an election. The New Iraqi Government™ will be chosen by three men who will in turn be chosen by the assembly that was chosen in a very unfair and unfree and corrupt election. Calling it a real election is stretching the concept quite close to its limits.

And h2, if you refuse to see the difference between opinion polls and elections, real or otherwise, I am not going to try to explain it to you. I have already wasted to much time trying to explain to you how the balance of power can shift with the circumstances over the course of a very eventful year.
Shirin | Email | 02.06.05 - 10:13 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"h2, are you suggesting that because non-Muslims have a mistaken notion of jihad, Muslims are supposed to erase that word from the vocabulary after centuries, and invent a whole new one just to accommodate the ignorance of others?"

We Westerners have a similar problem with the word "crusade", do we not? When writing or speaking for the understanding of Muslims, we now tend to avoid this word even when referring to what we consider a virtuous social struggle.
h2 | 02.06.05 - 10:52 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The New Iraqi Government™ will not be chosen by the people in an election. The New Iraqi Government™ will be chosen by three men who will in turn be chosen by the assembly that was chosen in a very unfair and unfree and corrupt election.

Shirin, in my admittedly limited understanding, these three men are accountable to the elected guys, are they not? The elected guys and gals are therefor the "government". The others are administrators or at most leaders among equals.

" Calling it a real election is stretching the concept quite close to its limits."

A real election as opposed to some moronic Zogby poll is what I meant.

"And h2, if you refuse to see the difference between opinion polls and elections, real or otherwise, I am not going to try to explain it to you."

On the contrary, I was trying to highlight the difference.

" I have already wasted to much time trying to explain to you how the balance of power can shift with the circumstances over the course of a
h2 | 02.06.05 - 11:09 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" I have already wasted to much time trying to explain to you how the balance of power can shift with the circumstances over the course of a very eventful year."

Shirin, I'm sorry, I may have missed that post, but I don't see that you have tried to explain any such thing, merely asserted. I still see it that Sistani can get almost anything he wants within the limitations of internal Iraqi politics, while US leverage is limited to withholding financial aid, or as a desperate last resort, withholding protection.
h2 | 02.06.05 - 11:12 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the US is going to dialogue with Muslims or anybody else it is going to have to quit following a president who blithely lies about everything from the quality of Canadian drug imports to mothballed Iraqi nuclear reactors to a supposed "Axis of Evil" between
Iran and Hussein's Iraq.
You didn't refute my premise, H2.
In fact you reinforced it, showing that the biggest oil addict in the
world will subsidize tyranny in one oil source and spout democracy in another. I'm sure Bush will support democracy in the Arab world as much as his friends at Exxon-Mobil, Conoco-Phillips, Chevron, Shell and British Petroleum tell him to.
A word of caution here. Those liars you admire, those liars that have attracted uncritical followers throughout history, often end up betraying everyone by lying to themselves. And yes, the preliminary Iraqi election returns
show the polls were accurate: SCIRI
and Dawa are beating Allawi 67% to
18%.
multisect | Email | 02.06.05 - 11:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

multisect, I would like to respond, but with the disclaimer that you seem to have changed the subject entirely from what I was responding to.

I don't know if Bush lied or was hoodwinked, but I agee he is culpable for the misinformation that supposedly supported the war.

I agee we are somewhat disingenuous with regard to supporting some tyrannies while pressing democracy where convenient.

I agee there are rich and powerful people with inordinate influence over US policy.

There is no one in this government I "admire".

I agree and am fine with SCIRI and Dawa getting 67%. What does that have to do with the significance of the polls in question? As Shirin has pointed out, SCIRI is not calling for a US pullout in a month.
h2 | 02.07.05 - 12:00 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"We Westerners have a similar problem with the word "crusade", do we not?"

Crusade is a word related to historic events that has come into common usage in the general vernacular. It is not a word with religious significance, and it is very easy to find a substitute word. Jihad is an important religious concept for which there is no substitute word.
Shirin | Email | 02.07.05 - 12:58 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

h2, why do you characterize the Zogby poll as moronic?

The polls have been very consistent. Starting with the first ones, they have shown that the majority of Iraqis wanted the Americans out, and sooner rather than later. They have also shown a progressive increase in the number of Iraqis with this desire.

And there is nothing in any aspect of the "election" that contradicts these results. As a matter of fact several journalists and other observers have found that voters they spoke with almost unanimously felt that voting would hasten the Americans' exit.
Shirin | Email | 02.07.05 - 1:03 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"As Shirin has pointed out, SCIRI is not calling for a US pullout in a month."

They were, however, until two days before the "election". At that point they suddenly reversed their position on that question, apparently as a result of being informed by the Americans that their previous stance was not acceptable.
Shirin | Email | 02.07.05 - 1:07 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Or perhaps because they figured they were about to win and would like to have a country left to run.
CMAR II | Email | Homepage | 02.07.05 - 3:00 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps I'm here by mistake, but...
I notice NO ONE upset here (in these posts) about the suppression of the ChaldoAssyrian vote in the villages around Mosul.
The references ( aina.org , bethsuryoyo.com , zindamagazine.com ) are not anti-American, but as their focus is on Assyrian and Chaldean issues, their viewpoint on issues in their homeland differs from the 'typical American' viewpoint (if there is one).
----
For those who think the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is just something the Palestinians are inflicting on themselves---read about the controversy over Martin Buber's politics during the 1930s onwards.
BobGriffin | Email | Homepage | 02.08.05 - 6:15 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----
How often in this dance of words,
the dancers seek to pierce each other's hearts.
---
Each deed leaves its shadow,
From which all draw distorted pictures.
So, poet, learn the past,
See the shadows from which the monstrous distortion of our face is formed.
----
Putting the above in plainer English
1) how often I see ad hominem arguments used to berate fellow humans
2) We (humans) learn to interpret each other's intents and behaviors based on past behaviors. Thus the negative images of 'crusade' and 'jihad', thus the readiness of both oppressor and oppressed to attribute the worst aims to the US.

Be Well,
BobGriffin | Email | Homepage | 02.08.05 - 6:15 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My apologies to all,
In the vituperation shown regarding the Iraqi elections, I spoke of my own frustrations [not yet of my fears, however].
On reviewing, I discover that such discussions are out of line with the basic topic here.

Be Well,
BobGriffin | Email | Homepage | 02.08.05 - 6:25 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" h2, why do you characterize the Zogby poll as moronic?"

There is no context for the question asked in the poll and no accountability or responsibility on the part of the polled. Thus such a poll means essentially nothing, except what we all know - it would be better if the Americans weren't there and weren't needed.
h2 | 02.08.05 - 8:55 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------