Last Gasp of the Imperial Misadventure

SR -- thanks for the delights -- here is one that I have on my car bumper -- I am not the real president I only play one on TV.

from your list my favorit two:

5) If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran

21) So Many Christians, So Few Lions....:)

``Human behavior is so strange.``(Sri)

Human behavior is INDEED sooo strange -- when you talk to a plump clay figure that has an elephant head over its human neck -- the strangest when you talk to someone and there is nothing there......:)

For ALL you Bush lovers!


NEW POLITICAL BUMPER STICKERS

1 ) (On an infant`s shirt): Already smarter than Bush

2) 1/20/09: End of an Error

3) That`s OK, I Wasn`t Using My Civil Liberties Anyway

4 ) Let`s Fix Democracy in This Country First

5) If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran

6) Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber.

7) You Can`t Be Pro-War And Pro-Life At The Same Time

8) If You Can Read This, You`re Not Our President

9) Of Course It Hurts: You`re Getting Screwed by an Elephant

10) Hey, Bush Supporters: Embarrassed Yet?

11) George Bush: Creating the Terrorists Our Kids Will Have to Fight

12) Impeachment: It`s Not Just for Blowjobs Anymore

13) America : One Nation, Under Surveillance

14) They Call Him ``W`` So He Can Spell It

15) Which God Do You Kill For?

16) Cheney/Satan `08

17) Jail to the Chief

18) Who Would Jesus Torture?

19) No, Seriously, Why Did We Invade

20) Bush: God`s Way of Pro ving Intelligent Design is Full Of Crap

21) So Many Christians, So Few Lions

22) Bad president! No Banana.

23) We Need a President Who`s Fluent In At Least One Language

24) We`re Making Enemies Faster Than We Can Kill Them

25) Is It Vietnam Yet?

26) Bush Doesn`t Care About White People, Either

27) Where Are We Going? And Why Are We In This Handbasket?

28) Frodo Failed. Bush Has the Ring.

29) Impeach Cheney First

30) The Republican Party: Our Bridge to the 11th Century

..... a hint to the answer is that the Government death squads are only in Baghdad ....

But try the question anyway ..

#133 by sri

... it is a sad commentary on Sunnis and Shias that they are behaving worse than animals. Justifying or glossing over the Sunni-Shia carnage by saying that Bush started it is really lame.

I will pose the same question to you which I have posed many times before but never received an answer from those of your ilk who believe it is a religious conflict between Shia/Sunni:

Why isn`t it happening anywhere outside Baghdad in Iraq.

If you don`t have an answer, then desist from making shallow and sterotypical statements. In other words, shut up.

Though I see that now at-least many of your types are coming around to it being an illegal war thrust upon the Iraqi people.

Human behavior is so strange.

People immediately identify ( and magnify ) even the smallest of shortcomings in people who they consider as enemies. Whereas, they remain totally apathetic to the shortcomings of the people who they consider as their ``own``. Even to the point of covering up or justifying their own groups despicable actions. Examples are many - Indians glossing over the gut wrenching poverty in India, muslims justifying terrorism, mexicans thinking nothing of criminal illegal aliens, etcetra ...

The question is, is that a healthy attitude? Does it really help in the improvement of their lot ? These are simple questions and simple concepts.. but I guess in reality the basic impulse of peoples emotions take over.

Now, it is beyond argument that Bush waged an illegal war... but given that, it is a sad commentary on Sunnis and Shias that they are behaving worse than animals. You can only take a horse ot the pond but you cannot make it drink. Justifying or glossing over the Sunni-Shia carnage by saying that Bush started it is really lame. But alas, who said people think intelligently in all circumstances ....

Gill Saheb,

I second this question which HP has posed. I really think we deserve an answer from you:

.... show us the instances when Shia or Sunni were shedding blood before the Iraq drama. Please provide us some instances or the names of any war that these two factions fought on religious or sectarian issues. You don’t have to provide any links to support your claim just name a few of the incident and the periods would suffice.

The second question is over the battle of Ali and Ayesha.

....Both Aisha and Ali were not Shia or Sunni either.

I will just add to above HP`s statement that Usman was not Shia either ... so why did Ayesha rise against Ali to avenge his death (which Muwaiya had promised to avenge and failed to do at the appeal of no less than Usman`s wife? She had sent the severed finger of Usman to Muawiya from the hand he had raised to protect his face).

Ball`s in your court Sir!

#125 by PewResearch

``...who had predicted two years ago that Iraq will be fully democratized in six months and the insurgency over...`` Any references? Otherwise go to jahanum!!

I`m not likely to go over the archives of NY Times over two years to fulfill your wish. However as for your other wish, My Lord, I am on way!

#127 by freethinker

“I have read the history of Islam and it pained me every time when I read about the violence which existed between these two sects (including other bloodsheds for different reasons) at varioue periods of time.”

That is what I have been asking. If you have read the history, I am very much interested in finding out when and where the blood was shed and in what periods of time. Just saying various is perhaps not enough here. Since you wrote this article and made some unsubstantiated comments, you owe it to us to show us the instances when Shia or Sunni were shedding blood before the Iraq drama. Please provide us some instances or the names of any war that these two factions fought on religious or sectarian issues. You don’t have to provide any links to support your claim just name a few of the incident and the periods would suffice.

“I wish what you are implying were true because if we cannot resolve our religious differences peacefully even after the passage of fourteen or fifteen centuries, it is really a shame.”

For a mature person like you, who claims to have read the history and dabbles in political issues, this statement is somewhat below par and just emotional. Why is it a shame? People fight all the time. The history is full of such examples. People living in the same country and the followers of the same religion have fought many battles in human history. What is so shameful about it? It is a reality and a person of your knowledge must analyze the causes and understand why these fights cannot by stopped by good wishes alone. Religious differences exist in every religion some fight over them now and some others fought over them just a few centuries ago. I am kind surprised that after writing an article about a volatile issue you are now cowering under some really juvenile wishes.

“It is Shias who are killing the Sunnis and Sunnis killing Shias in Iraq. Why can`t they stop this carnage and work together for emancipating their country from foreign occupation?”

Now please tell me how you propose to stop this fight. Just asking why they can’t stop is downright childish. They were fighting for their country but now the fight has been diverted by forces that are way powerful than the common man on the Iraqi street. As I said before the diversion has been created by a much powerful occupying army and the situation may not change immediately. It is not like somebody would go up on masjid minar and announce the ceasefire. The situation like this takes time to resolve.

“The first battle that pitted Muslims against Muslims was between Aisha and Ali and the seeds of continuing strife were sown.”

I have no idea what do you mean by this. Ali and Aisha fought a political battle for the control of power in Mecca and I don’t see that as some thing different than many other battles for political power in every part of the world. This is ridiculous to assume just because they fought a war, whole generations are condemned. Both Aisha and Ali were not Shia or Sunni either. I think you need to have a better look at the history and frame the issues in a better context and with a different perspective.

Re: # 126 Islamabad Bob

[...The occupation army has created this situation…..]

Ha ha... Islamabad Bob never gives up... :)

Dr. Gill:

Iraq is over – at least as far as the USA is concerned.

Yes, we are still there. And yes, we may even have a temporary surge in forces, but there is no doubt that we have lost it.

The loss – as in case of Vietnam, is not due to any of US military mistakes (although one can debate endlessly how long the US should have stayed in) – but strictly from the lack of public will back home – the fuel that is necessary to keep this machine going.

But who are the real losers – the people of that country – and not just because they are getting killed in droves.

They are the losers because the light of democracy burns so close to them that they can practically touch it yet they have chosen to close those eyes and turned their attention inwards and they have succumbed to ancient calls of hate and they have become hostage to that old embrace of the killer instinct – the worst of the dark knights – which, once it grabs hold – will seldom let go.

There lies the country of Iraq – dying of its self-inflicted wounds when it was so close to a recovery due to forcibly-administered medicines – with every neighbor looking on without the slightest empathy and only counting what THEY can get for themselves when the patient dies – how they can best divvy up the proceeds!

And everyone coolly blaming the ONLY Good Samaritan who took the trouble to come from far away and offered his own blood to help them live and breathe freedom!

It is indeed a grievous mess – and not just for that country – but for that whole region – because it has established once more that only brute force prevails in that region and not reason or compassion or common-sense but fear is what the population responds to!

HP: 126

Your observation that there was always peace between Shias and Sunnis (gives me pleasure if it were really true) in the Muslim history is very general, I have read the history of Islam and it pained me every time when I read about the violence which existed between these two sects (including other bloodsheds for different reasons) at varioue periods of time. The first battle that pitted Muslims against Muslims was between Aisha and Ali and the seeds of continuing strife were sown.

I wish what you are implying were true because if we cannot resolve our religious differences peacefully even after the passage of fourteen or fifteen centuries, it is really a shame.

What is happening in Iraq was truly triggered by the war but tell me why the Shias are killing the Sunnis and Sunnis killing Shias, if they are historically peacefull people? It is always the third party which is responsible for our shortcomings. We refuse to take responsibikity for our misdeeds.

It is Shias who are killing the Sunnis and Sunnis killing Shias in Iraq. Why can`t they stop this carnage and work together for emancipating their country from foreign occupation?

The recurring troubles almost every year between Shias and Sunnis particularly near Muharram in Pakistan are not caused by the Americans. I wish we could kive peacefully among ourselves. We don`t have tolerance for differing religious viewpoints.

Mohammad Gill

#114 by freethinker
“It was not my intention here to outline why the U.S. army is in Iraq and continuing its occupation.”

I think I never asked for the reasons....this appears to be a case of sawal gandum jawab channa.

I did ask to show me instances of Shia Sunni violence from the Arab History. Instead you quoted Iqbal’s couplet.

I think it is time you get your history straight.

There was no Shia Sunni divide when Hussain was murdered. The group that was then known as Shian-e Ali or friends of Ali took up Hussain’s cause and that group was later known as Shia. It took almost 100 years for this group to snatch power away from the Ummiads. The shia Caliphate was known as the Abbasids. They ruled Iraq for a long time but there is no history of their taking any revenge or even making life difficult for Sunnis. Btw, even the Ummiads for as long as they ruled Baghdad never murdered the Shian e Ali group even though they were political opponents.

The level of the reported violence between the Sunnis and Shia is a new phenomenon despite a long history of political disputes. Having political dispute does not necessarily mean that Shia and Sunnis were chopping each others heads off in Iraq before the US got there.

This is the newest implantation of the age old colonist policy of divide and rule….So don’t get caught up in the so called violence and start saying that the US army is haplessly mired in the conflict. The occupation army has created this situation…..

Re: # 123 Zeenuts

``...who had predicted two years ago that Iraq will be fully democratized in six months and the insurgency over...``
Any references? Otherwise go to jahanum!!

Re: # 122 Bulleya
``...hence the defeats in lebanon (of Israel)...``

That is sick analysis showing just what Kakul teaches! Israel winswhen Warren Buffett`s company* there is fully back in business - not when Nasrallah is out of business. Because that will only happen, not by war, but when Arabs wake up and realize that he is just another fraud, just another Nasser, whose strategy would condemn the flower of Arab youth - who deserve and need so much better - to another decade of making potato chips, not microchips. Nasrallah can win in the long run only if he can condemn the flower of Israel`s youth to the same fate.
Israel has the most companies listed on NASDAQ (except Canada). Its GDP is more than that of any Arab country (except Saudi Arabia) - and Nasrallah won! It has more high tech companies than the rest of the Arab world combined - and Nasrallah won!



*The most important thing you need to know about Israel today and how it has performed so far in the war with Hezbollah is Warren Buffett. Say what? Well, the most talked-about story in Israel, before Hezbollah started this war, was the fact that on May 5, 2006, Mr. Buffett, the Berkshire Hathaway chairman and the world`s most successful investor, bought an 80 percent stake in the privately held Israeli precision tools company, Iscar Metalworking, for $4 billion - Mr. Buffett`s first purchase of a company outside America.

#117 by PewResearch

Just some rhetorical observations:

``Tom Friedman``

This must be the same Tom Friedman who had predicted two years ago that Iraq will be fully democratized in six months and the insurgency over. I mean, he is a real expert on Muslim and Middle Eastern affairs.

``Great powers should never get involved in the politics of small tribes.”

That is exactly why Americans are so disgusted with them that they want to leave these insignificant `small tribes` of ingrates to their own primitive ways, and to head back immediately. The additional 20,000 are there to just help with the packing :)