BS: Shiite mosque bombing

Subject: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST,Lurcher
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 04:53 AM

I see that the Sunnis have bombed one of the Shiites most holy mosques, all we need now is the bleedin Danes to do some cartoons about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 06:22 AM

Nightmare scenario. Though the assumption that it's "the Sunnis" who were responsible is clearly the one the bombers would have intended to evoke, successfully, it appears. The aim being to ignite a civil war.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 06:39 AM

Are you sure it wasn't the Reichstag?

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Wolfgang
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 06:56 AM

Let's not always blame the communists.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 06:57 AM

Don't worry. Teribus says things are fine in Iraq, so it must be so.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:02 AM

How in hell's name can we ask Muslims not to hate non-Muslims, when they even hate one another? Weird kind of religion, but then they all are.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:17 AM

The problem in Iraq now appears to be the (perhaps justified) fear on the part of many Sunnis that after decades of their dominating the Shiite majority, it may be payback time. So in order to not support the insurgency, they need assurance that their interests will be protected by inclusion in the government. Of course they may have an unrealistic view of what their rights are. And now, the bombing of the Dome has strengthened the Shiite faction who feel the Sunnis have been coddled long enough.

And the US ambassador's recent threat that the US wouldn't support sectarian rule in Iraq (a statement probably geared to US domestic consumption) may well not have helped.

The Sunnis, concentrated in mid-Iraq, are only too aware their area is oil-poor, in contrast to the rest of the country.

And of course the Kurds want continuation of a de facto Kurdistan--and want oil-rich Kirkuk included.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: kendall
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:22 AM

I predicted two years ago that this would result in civil war just like what happened in Yugoslavia.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:27 AM

Kendall's parallel to Yugoslavia is very apt. In both cases a dictator whose rule had papered over sectarian splits is removed.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:57 AM

One major difference with Yugoslavia is that it broke up under it's own steam, and there hadn't been an outside invasion to tear things to pieces. That meant that it was at least in principle possible for outsiders to work constructively to try to help things get better once the civil war had erupted.

There is no way in which those involved in the invasion and occupation can play that play that kind of role in Iraq.

I can envisage a situation in which the Iraq government invites Iran to send in help to restore order, and tells the Americans and their friends to get the hell out. What then?

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 07:59 AM

Declare war on Iran, silly!

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST,Fred Dibnah
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:06 AM

"Shiite mosque bombing"


it didn't look that shitte an effort to me,
the bombers made a very good job of blowing it up !

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:14 AM

Once the civil war starts, there won't be much of a role for outsiders to play--except stay out of the way.

It's certainly true the US and its allies are not exactly credible "honest brokers", in contrast to the much-maligned (by both the Left and Right) UN. But of course, especially Bushites are not overly concerned with anybody who doesn't take Bush regime dictation--let' em go to hell, is their general view.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:20 AM

The media keep on raving about the age - but when did iron reo come in for concrete reinforcing?

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:43 AM

The really cynical would wonder if it was a set up job to enable the US to withdraw without having to admit defeat.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 09:27 AM

The dome itself was built in 1905.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: kendall
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 09:36 AM

Does anyone know the difference between these two factions? Are their differences really that important?

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 09:50 AM

About as significant as the difference between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, Black and White in the USA or Jews and Arabs in the Holy Land.

In other words, the actual religious (or physical) differences aren't significant, but they mark out different groups which have a history of oppression/repression/rivalry/antagonism.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 10:03 AM

sunni and shiites differences.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Paul Burke
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 10:14 AM

It's all about the caliphs, and goes back a long way. After the death of Mohammed, one group chose a new caliph for his ability, the other group a different one for his relationship (cousin) to Mohammed.

The latter group eventually lost, and generally since then the Shias have avoided a link between religion and the state, since political power was held to lack legitimacy. This was held right up to the time of the Iranian revolution. It's a sobering thought that a bit more flexibility by the west over the Shah's dictatorship could have avoided the whole horrible mess since.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 10:45 AM

Consider how many Americans have been killed in Mr. Bush's private war (over 2200--less than 200 of them, as I recall, before the "mission accomplished" so-called "victory") and how Mr. Bush has recently ballyhooed "bringing democracy to Iraq".    If, rather than democracy, civil war results, he will be hard-pressed to claim anything but removing Saddam--which was done years ago.

And the retreat will be obvious.

Everybody wishes the best for "Coalition" soldiers. And the best, now, is to bring them home.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: robomatic
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 06:29 PM

The intolerance and eagerness to bring on fratricidal strife inherent in the cold blooded bombing of this sacred structure reminded me of the Taliban shelling of the Bamiyan statues of early 2001.

"Sow the wind, Reap the whirlwind."

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Feb 06 - 08:22 PM

Washington State Congressional Representative Jim McDermott knows the Middle East pretty well, and spoke out strongly against a war with Iraq. As a result, he wound up being labeled "Bagdad Jim" and "traitor" by Right-Wing blabbermouths. I've attended a couple of meetings where McDermott spoke. He said on the eve of the invasion of Iraq that this was almost certain to end up in a civil war, and "It would not surprise me at all if we wound up leaving Iraq the same way we left Vietnam:   frantically scrambling aboard helicopters on the roof of the embassy."

McDermott has been right about a lot of things. It looks like he might be right about this, too.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 07:21 AM

I would think it likely that the same people who blew up the Shiite mosque are orchestrating the massacres of Sunni workers and so forth.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Donuel
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 07:32 AM

Ye are still allowed to say civil unrest.

But ye shall be cursed should ye utter "Civil War".

We will in time spin it that IRAN is respondsible for the civil unrest, otherwise it will be very difficult to recruit troops for a foreign Civil War.

Opps I mean civil unrest...uh oh

HEEEEEElllllp

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: freda underhill
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 08:55 AM

The Sunni minority have been in control for decades under Saddam, courtesy of his military rule. They have held power over the Shiite Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Turkmen and other minority groups, a racial and religious minority in control, just as happened in Rwanda. Saddam Hussein's government was a secular government and he was a Muslim leader by convenience. He openly modelled himself on Stalin and was committed to achieving control of the nation by using whatever methods he could to subjugate all the different ethnic and religious tribal groups in Iraq.

By removing the tyrant, and holding elections, the Shias had more expectations of power as they are the more numerous group. But the Sunnis weren't ready to give it up - and no one there has ever experienced democracy. Destroying the mosque was a symbol of the battle for control.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 09:03 AM

Or a cynical attempt to stoke up a genocidal civil war by people who want to see that as a stage in achieving some wider goal.

I keep on getting an image of some horrible strategic computer simulation being played out in the real world. Ever since 911.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: freda underhill
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 09:06 AM

yes, it was oil that started it, and some men around a table.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 03:39 PM

For the first time some British politicians are beginning to question the "export of democracy" mantra.

Being by nature "left-wing" i hated the Saddam regime, but i notice that commentators on Iraq are starting say publically that the Saddam regime may have been a better option for the people of Iraq than the one which now confronts them in the aftermath of our ill-conceived and brutal invasion.

Civil War followed by Iranian style Islamic republic!!

Haven't we done well!! driving the Iraqi people into the hands of the mad fundamentalists, to satisfy our greed for oil...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: kendall
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 08:44 PM

William F. Buckley a staunch conservative, says the war is lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 24 Feb 06 - 08:51 PM

Ake, you said that well.

I could never figure out (if an average student such as myself) knew that democracy could not be exported, did Bush convince so many that it was a good plan. I learned that concept in high school.

It was doomed to failure.

Saddam was brutal but he was able to prevent civil war.

The only thing that Bush and Blair have given the people of Iraq is more pain and suffering.

If there is a hell, there is a special place reserved for Bush and everyone who supported his 'Crusade'.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 07:14 AM

And what an insensitive idiot to call it a 'Crusade' against countries with a Muslim population anyway in the first place!

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 07:22 AM

You spelled shite wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 07:47 AM

No you read it wrong.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Shiite mosque bombing
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Feb 06 - 07:49 AM

oh