Article

2006-08-12 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2006-08-12 00:00|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I would disagree over his statement "we must do something now".

On the contrary, we have stopped the insurgency, but now the Iraqis must hash out among themselves how they want to live. Like battling siblings, we have kept them out of danger until they were mature; but now it is up to them to find their own path.

The vast majority of Iraqis will determine their fate. If they want peace and prosperity, we have given them all the tools they need to achieve it. But if they are obstinate and combative, then the bright future they are offered cannot survive.

In the future, either path may be a good one. If they unite, it means that they have it within them to be a single nation. If their differences are too great, which may be the case, then it may be better for all if they part company.

Ironically, the greatest danger of a split is not from the feuding Shiite and Sunni Arabs, but between those two and their peaceful coexistence with the Kurds.

If Iran falls before the US, Kurdish Iran will be irresistably drawn to Iraqi Kurdistan. They could not become part of Iraq, because Kurds would then far outnumber the Shiites. So it would be the easiest thing in the world for Kurdistan to become an independent nation.

This would still leave the Shiite and the Sunnis in the situation they find themselves today--needing to figure out where they stand with respect to each other. Even if their own territory was enlarged by the addition of the Iranian Arab southwest, its religious split mirrors their own. Still Shiite and Sunni having to get along with each other somehow.

It was the situation before the US arrived, and it will be when the US has left.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-08-12 10:42|| 2006-08-12 10:42|| Front Page Top

#2 'Moose, I think I'm with you on this. Saddam was sitting on top of a particularly hideous basket of vipers, and it looks as if they'll need to hiss themselves out.It is growng increasingly clear that it's not "us" vs. "Iran" or "Soddy Arabia", but "us" against "Ummah". We'd best rearrange our thinking, and our strategies in a similar fashion, since "Ummah" does not issue passports or yet have a Bejeweled-Turban-In-Charge.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2006-08-12 11:50|| 2006-08-12 11:50|| Front Page Top

#3 I wouldn't say that, because this is not a religious war. I have long said it is a war between civilization and barbarism, or more properly, vandalism.

More than anything else, the Moslems we are fighting hate modernity. Though they are surrounded by it, and even have to use it, they hate all technology not mentioned in the Koran. And not just technology, but knowledge, as well.

The Moslem philosopher al-Ghizali and his peers formalized the rejection of innovation and learning, and stopped cold Moslem intellectual progress, though it took many years to spread through the Ummah. It was done for short-sighted nationalistic reasons.

Only with the rise of the British Empire did this stagnation finally start to end. And in truth, it has been a slow war ever since.

But Islam is facing a crisis, as the large number of Moslems who can and do accept modernism are being forced to face the vandals. According to the Wall Street Journal of a few days ago, Islam is losing so many people so rapidly, that if it continues unabated, by 2050 there will be 3 billion Christians.

These are people who believe that Islam cannot have a reformation. But there must be an equal number who believe it can, and must. There only needs to be one strong advocate, one reformer, for them to rally around, for a massive split to take place.

And one in which the vandals are consigned to the wilderness, to embrace their beloved primitivism and die out.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-08-12 18:08|| 2006-08-12 18:08|| Front Page Top

#4 #3: "There only needs to be one strong advocate, one reformer, for them to rally around, for a massive split to take place."

One reformer, and hundreds of bodyguards....

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2006-08-12 18:44|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com] 2006-08-12 18:44|| Front Page Top

#5 Very interesting comment Anonymoose, didn't know about the WSJ article.

Interesting comment at the Belmont Club;

I would support a candidate who introduced a bill in congress saying that Islam is not a religion recognized by the United States, but rather a "philosophy" and thus not protected under the 501 tax code section, be it 501c3 or whatever.
Then I would encourage the congress to remove the hate crime laws relevant to Muslims.
Then we could all follow our conscience on how to deal with them.
Whup comes to mind.

Posted by Tony (UK) 2006-08-12 18:54|| 2006-08-12 18:54|| Front Page Top

00:00 mcsegeek1
23:58 Zhang Fei
23:52 Odysseus
23:44 Abdominal Snowman
23:43 Odysseus
23:40 Thoth
23:28 Zhang Fei
23:27 Kalle (kafir forever)
23:25 BA
23:23 Kalle (kafir forever)
23:20 Kalle (kafir forever)
23:19 BA
23:07 Zhang Fei
23:06 twobyfour
23:05 Whising Joluque7603
22:57 Zhang Fei
22:55 the Twelfth Imami
22:55 Fordesque
22:42 49 Pan
22:39 49 Pan
22:38 bombay
22:37 j. D. Lux
22:36 bombay
22:31 j. D. Lux
Merry-Go-Blog