Holy Shrine nearly destroyed in Iraq

[southsider2k5]

So if publishing a picture of Muhammed is worth people dying over, I wonder how incredibly tough the protests will be against those who bombed a Muslim holy shrine? With it looking like an Al Qaeda attack, does that mean all of these same people and countries will finally cut off funding and support of these groups?

 

Somehow I doubt it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4740010.stm

[Balta1701]

So if publishing a picture of Muhammed is worth people dying over, I wonder how incredibly tough the protests will be against those who bombed a Muslim holy shrine?  With it looking like an Al Qaeda attack, does that mean all of these same people and countries will finally cut off funding and support of these groups?

 

Somehow I doubt it.

The countries which fund and support Al Qaeda are mainly the Sunni nations, like Saudi Arabia. This was an attack on a Shi'ite shrine. The Shi'ites will respond with protests, likely a lot more targeted killings of Sunnis by Shi'a militiamen, and maybe even some additional bombings of Sunni mosques. The Sunnis will respond in kind. This sort of attack on the Shia will only serve to build support amongst the Sunni population that we've helped radicalize.

[kapkomet]

Yea - the thing is - now the civil war junk is really starting to be pressed. It amazes me how far these "peace loving" Muslims are going to try to start the Civil War - and then blame the Americans for it, and more specifically George W. Bush.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Yea - the thing is - now the civil war junk is really starting to be pressed.  It amazes me how far these "peace loving" Muslims are going to try to start the Civil War - and then blame the Americans for it, and more specifically George W. Bush.

 

You know what? I don't blame the administration responsible for the sectarian conflicts we are seeing now. What I do entirely blame the administration for is for being so naive (at best) or unconcerned with reality to have dismissed outright the possibility of such conflicts from the outset. It comes as a surprise to nobody except the administration and the intel agencies (at least that is the party line) that civil war has essentially erupted.

 

As for the mosque destruction itself, it is the third high-profile attack on a Shiite site in as many days and is a step closer to all out civil conflict. The tombs of two Shia' holy men are located there, and it certainly won't do the cause of Iraqi unity any good.

[southsider2k5]

You know what? I don't blame the administration responsible for the sectarian conflicts we are seeing now.  What I do entirely blame the administration for is for being so naive (at best) or unconcerned with reality to have dismissed outright the possibility of such conflicts from the outset.  It comes as a surprise to nobody except the administration and the intel agencies (at least that is the party line) that civil war has essentially erupted.

 

As for the mosque destruction itself, it is the third high-profile attack on a Shiite site in as many days and is a step closer to all out civil conflict.  The tombs of two Shia' holy men are located there, and it certainly won't do the cause of Iraqi unity any good.

 

The "conflicts" are almost completely manufactured by terrorists. For the most part this isn't Iraqis killing Iraqis, this is other arabs killing Iraqis, in trying to get Iraqis to kill other Iraqis to cause a civil war. It flies in the face of everything that the Isalmic religion stands for, yet they have no problem doing it.

[Balta1701]

The "conflicts" are almost completely manufactured by terrorists.  For the most part this isn't Iraqis killing Iraqis, this is other arabs killing Iraqis, in trying to get Iraqis to kill other Iraqis to cause a civil war.  It flies in the face of everything that the Isalmic religion stands for, yet they have no problem doing it.

Could you give me the evidence that this is not Iraqis killing iraqis? We've had dozens of reports of Shi'a militia run death squads targeting Sunnis in Iraq, and we've had dozens of reports of Iraqi resistance units targeting the Shi'a.

[Rex Kickass]

Yea - the thing is - now the civil war junk is really starting to be pressed.  It amazes me how far these "peace loving" Muslims are going to try to start the Civil War - and then blame the Americans for it, and more specifically George W. Bush.

That's ok, because after that someone will try to blame Bill Clinton for it.

[FlaSoxxJim]

The "conflicts" are almost completely manufactured by terrorists.  For the most part this isn't Iraqis killing Iraqis. . .

 

But that is not really the case even though it has previously been presented this way.

 

The non-al-Qaeda, armed Sunni organizations there are by and large indiginous Iraqis.

 

And despite the new softer administration line on the insurgency (they are "nationalists" and rejectionists" now), US military operations are still aimed primarily at Sunni insurgents and not al-Qaeda.

[southsider2k5]

Could you give me the evidence that this is not Iraqis killing iraqis?  We've had dozens of reports of Shi'a militia run death squads targeting Sunnis in Iraq, and we've had dozens of reports of Iraqi resistance units targeting the Shi'a.

 

The article I read today about this very bombing said it was most likely done by foreigners connected to Al Qaeda. There are thousands of foreign arabs in Iraq with the sole purpose of killing innocent people to incite a civil war. As a matter of a fact the porus borders allowing these very people into the country has been one of the many rips against Bush in this very war.

[samclemens]

i dont have any impirical evidence to back up southsider2k5, but it is widely known over in Iraq that many insurgents are not iraqis anymore. iran and syria are substantial contributors, along with most other arab nations.

 

again, i cant find anything to back it up, but i remember reading about how when an insurgent enters Iraq, their passport is taken so that they cannot leave the country and they have to stay and keep fighting even if they want to leave.

[Balta1701]

i dont have any impirical evidence to back up southsider2k5, but it is widely known over in Iraq that many insurgents are not iraqis anymore. iran and syria are substantial contributors, along with most other arab nations.

 

again, i cant find anything to back it up, but i remember reading about how when an insurgent enters Iraq, their passport is taken so that they cannot leave the country and they have to stay and keep fighting even if they want to leave.

I find it utterly impossible to believe that the Sunni insurgents which are fighting the U.S. and government forces come in any significant numbers at all from Iran...who's people are overwhelmingly Shi'a and who's nation stands to benefit extraordinarily from the presence of a Shia dominated friendly state right next door.

[Rex Kickass]

i dont have any impirical evidence to back up southsider2k5, but it is widely known over in Iraq that many insurgents are not iraqis anymore. iran and syria are substantial contributors, along with most other arab nations.

 

again, i cant find anything to back it up, but i remember reading about how when an insurgent enters Iraq, their passport is taken so that they cannot leave the country and they have to stay and keep fighting even if they want to leave.

 

They're sneaking in the country without going through a border, why wouldn't they just sneak back out?

[Balta1701]

The article I read today about this very bombing said it was most likely done by foreigners connected to Al Qaeda.  There are thousands of foreign arabs in Iraq with the sole purpose of killing innocent people to incite a civil war.  As a matter of a fact the porus borders allowing these very people into the country has been one of the many rips against Bush in this very war.

The Washington Based "Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS)" issued a report last fall estimating that only about 4-10% of the insurgents in Iraq are actually foreigners. The other 90-96% are Iraqi nationals. Link. They have been particularly emphasized in significant part because the U.S. doesn't want to admit that the insurgency is home-grown...the U.S. wants to make people think the insurgency is being imposed on Iraq from outside the nation by Al Qaeda, thus giving us a reason to stay there instead of a reason to consider departing.

 

That doesn't mean that it wasn't "Al Qaeda in Iraq" (Zarqawi's group) that did this attack. But what I think it does mean is that you have to take it with a gigantic piece of Halite when the U.S. says that an attack seems like it was done by "al Qaeda in Iraq" or by Zarqawi's group, given that they're a major minority within the guerrilla movement, and there are dozens of different groups which could have different motivations for such a strike. Beyond that, I'm not sure we yet have a good idea fo the makeup of Zarqawi's group itself...given the makeup of the insurgency, it's entirely possible that he has plenty of recruits from Iraq itself. If your family member was killed by a Shi'a militia's death squad...that's the sort of action you might take in reply.

[Balta1701]

Gunmen on Wednesday targeted 27 Baghdad mosques and killed three Sunni imams in the wake of a bomb attack at one of the holiest of Shiite sites.

 

The wave of attacks followed a bombing at the Al-Askariya "Golden Mosque" in Samarra. The strikes, involving small arms, rocket-propelled grenades and mortar rounds, all happened between 11 a.m. and 5 p.m., police told CNN.

 

Three of the mosques were burned down, and in addition to the imams, three mosque guards were also killed. One imam was kidnapped.

 

Security was being beefed up around all mosques in Baghdad, police said.

 

The Iraqi Islamic Party, the largest Sunni Arab party in Iraq, condemned all the violence and said that Shiites had taken over Sunni mosques in the southern town of Diwaniya and arrested worshippers.

 

Meanwhile, gunmen stormed the party's southern Baghdad office, evacuated its employees and torched the place.

 

Iraqi and U.S. leaders urged citizens to remain calm and united, amid fears the sectarian violence could escalate into civil war.

Uh-Oh.

[kapkomet]

They're getting exactly what they want - a bloodbath 'at the hands of the Americans.'

[Rex Kickass]

And we exactly let it happen.

[kapkomet]

And we exactly let it happen.

Yep. We "let" it happen. Uh huh.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

So if publishing a picture of Muhammed is worth people dying over, I wonder how incredibly tough the protests will be against those who bombed a Muslim holy shrine?  With it looking like an Al Qaeda attack, does that mean all of these same people and countries will finally cut off funding and support of these groups?

 

Somehow I doubt it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4740010.stm

 

 

Religon of peace...................

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Yep.  We "let" it happen.  Uh huh.

 

 

Following Rex's logic police in this country "let" 20,000 people a year get murdered, they "let" i dont know how many thousands of women get raped, they "let" thousands more than that be physically assaulted or robbed.

 

 

:rolly

Edited February 22, 2006 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[NorthSideSox72]

Religon of peace...................

And the Catholic Church has such a sparkling record itself.

 

Can we focus on the guilty, please, instead of taking the lazy and dangerous road to bigotry?

 

Every time, Nuke. Every time.

[Rex Kickass]

Yep.  We "let" it happen.  Uh huh.

 

Well, what did we do to prevent this as the occupying power? I'm not talking about this specific incident, but sectarian violence in general. What kept us from enforcing a rule of law?

[samclemens]

They're sneaking in the country without going through a border, why wouldn't they just sneak back out?

 

because they'll probably be shot by their compatriots. not to mention the network they have joined probably knows where their family is.

 

thats the same thing as saying to an inner-city gang member, "why dont you just leave the gang? its that easy, just leave."

 

you and i both know its never that easy.

[Texsox]

According to Paul Harvey, the average Iragi is 65,000 times more likely to be a victim of a violent crime now then when Saadam was in power. I didn't hear what source he was quoting, but I assume Paul checked it out.

 

Not certain what conclusions we can draw from that. I'm certain however, that the average Iraqi is grateful we are there protecting them and making the world a better and safer place. They'll just have to tolerate living in a war zone for a little while longer.

[Balta1701]

Wire reports are saying 75 Sunni Mosques were attacked in response today. 27 in Baghdad.

 

Ayatollah Sistani, in what is reportedly a rare moved, called for street protests, but asked that they be "peaceful". Iran is also pretty angry. Both Iran and Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, head of SCIRI, one of the main political parties in Iraq, have blamed the U.S. for not protecting the Shrine. al-Hakim is specifically citing comments by the U.S. ambassador to Iraq made last week which suggested that the Iraqis should try to avoid "Sectarian" influence in the government...a code word for saying the Shia should be more willing to accept Sunni influence in the government. USA Today.

[G&T]

Well, what did we do to prevent this as the occupying power? I'm not talking about this specific incident, but sectarian violence in general. What kept us from enforcing a rule of law?

 

Occupying powers usually enforce their law by killing anyone who looked at a soldier the wrong way. The U.S. could prevent these things from happening, but, frankly, this country won't stand for a 10 or 20 year occupation where every night we see news of suspected terrorists being tortured. The world doesn't work the way it used to. The U.S. isn't imperial Britain who set up their own governments around the world.

 

In todays world, I don't think anyone knows how to enforce the law as an occupyer while the whole world watches on tv.