Ich bin ein Mussulman

re: war in Iraq
Field Marshal Romair says in his post # 79
``Apparently some of them are still going great guns here on this site. Giving one reason after another for this war. I am anxiously awaiting for their newest reason - the one after the dancing reason - now that even Rumsfeld has run out of reasons. ``

The real reason will never be told. It has to be guessed. But, let me digress for a moment.
American politicians have made a terrible miscalculation. They thought, since Americans are freedom loving, democratic people, every one else around this globe would be so. I mean, who would want to be under a dicatator like saddam Hussain who has done little for his country? Right? This is a potentially very prosperous country sitting on world`s second largest oil reserves. And what does the Damn Hussain do? He goes around building palaces for himself, has a museum with life size portraits of himself all over the place, has a larger than life presence everywhere, kills people who differ with his views with impunity. This is a guy, i think, who killed his own son-in-law for political reasons. This guy gassed his own people (the Kurds). The list of atrocities is long. Now, why would the Iraqi people support him. It is easy to imagine (as US does) that they must be living in tyranny and fear and the moment they are liberated, they will dance with joy and hug the american forces as liberators.
Here is where US politicians make a mistake. They do not understand the muslim mind. Muslims, for centuries, have been either rulers or the ruled. This idea of free speech, democracy, equality etc are all alien to them. To most Iraqis, Saddam Hussain is a ruler. It is their misfortune that he is an evil ruler. But then, those who have been obedient, who have not caused problems (the majority of common folks), he has left them in peace. So, the Iraqis would argue, what is wrong with him? He only kills people who threaten his power. Which ruler would not? Is this not the stale repetition of muslim history, from Chengiz Khan onwards?
Muslims take pride in their rulers, however tyrannical they may be. Americans often forget this. This is an ideological divide.
India was lucky to have democracy. Not just lucky but democracy was the only option. Having been repressed by muslim ruler for many centuries and subjugated by the British, democracy was embraced with gusto. There was no ideological problem here. But look at the Pakis. How long their struggle for democracy has been. Not all of them wanted democracy anyway. They had a bad precedence. Their glory came from muslim rulers (which is why Pakis name their missiles after muslim conquerers: Abdali, Ghazni etc all of who were outsiders)and democracy did not have the kind of appeal that it had for the Hindus. For hindus, democracy came as a great liberating force. With this democracy, they were able to bury the last vestiges of imperialism: the Maharajas and Nawabs, a bane on the Indian society.

So, the muslim perception of freedom differs from the American perception. That is why, while some Iraqis will benefit from the ouster of Saddam Hussain, some will even rejoice, most will be unaffected. To them, Americans may not appear as liberators but as another occupying force. Even if America were to usher in democracy, it will not be appreciated as muslims have no appreciation of democracy (look around the globe and count the number of islamic democracies and you will know what i am talking about). That is why they are not dancing in the streets as the Americans and the Brits are coming in. Iraqis simply do not know how to react. They, however, have had long struggle in the past with colonial rulers and they fear that this will be a similar experience. That is not the truth but it reflects the Iraqi mindset. That is difficult to change. Arab news networks only make it worse for them.
Now, to the main question: why are the US forces in Iraq. Is it for Oil? Possilbly. But not for themselves. Let us not forget that US has enough stock of oil and its main source is from countries like Venezuela. But, oil runs the mideast politics. One who controls Oil in middle east controls the pulse of that area. If US can control Iraqi oil (second largest in the world), it can control OPEC and oil prices. If US opens tap and allows free flow of Oil, oil prices the world over will come crashing down. Oil will become dirt cheap. What this will do to Saudi economy is anyone`s guess. What better way of hitting at the Saudis (a repay for 9/11?). Hit them where it hurts mostl. By impoverishing saudi arabia, US may make House of saud look very vulnerable and easy to control. Also, money going to militants the world over from Saudi Arabia will dry up. Whatever happens, middle east will never be the same. US does not care if Bush is hailed as a hero or not. US cares if controlling Iraq will bring middle east (and thereby terrorism) more under control. This is the real reason for invasion. Rest is all a facade.

Sridhar

i-am-the-cheese #61
You might like to elaborate (or not)?

Apparently the last myth on which this war was based has been broken, i.e. there is no dancing in the street. There must be absolutely no dancing, since CNN hasn`t even been able to show even a small minority of the people dancing - other than the two kids giving the thumbs up signal and the toothless fat Iraqi guy who keeps showing up dancing again and again.

Donald Rumsfeld said there is no dancing because Iraqi units have threatened to kill anyone who dances. I am begining to feel sorry for Rumsfeld. Even he himself seems to be getting tired of lying. He must be thinking life was much better when he was shaking hands with Saddam twenty years ago. He had less wrinkels, darker hair, and wasn`t forced to lie so much. And the lies he did have to tell then, were more to make Saddam popular in America, not to make him the enemy.

First it was the WMD. None were found. Then it was Iraq threat to the whole world. Not a single country other than Israel and USA believed that. The US govt. itself doesn`t believe it (one doesn`t attack a country that is powerful enough to threaten the whole world. Then it was the Iraqi history of invading neighbors. Even the neighbors that were invaded aren`t too worried about that. Though it is kind of ironic and hypocrisy-filled that Iran is simultaneously on the, US ``axis of evil,`` and its historical rights (against invasions by Iraq) are being defended by the USA.

Then it was the Kurds. However, the US is still too scared to declare an independent state for them. And it will never get its old ally Turkey angry by doing so. So the Kurds are still in limbo. Interestingly, around 50% of the world`s Kurds actually live in Turkey. If they should have a separate state (which they should), then shouldn`t everyone be attacking Turkey first. The only place where they do have some form of independence is actually Iraq. Iran, Turkey and Syria have completely crushed their independence movements.

Then it was world opinion - a corrollary of the, ``threat to the world`` reasoning. However, according to Newsweek, out of the 192 countries in the world, only the population of two countries supports this war. 90% of the French don`t support it, 66% of Canadians don`t support it, 82% of the Spanish don`t support it, 98% of the Pakistanis don`t support it etc.

So finally, the liberation of Iraq scenario emerged. Dancing in the street was going to be the event that was going to justify the killings of this war. Well, no dancing happened. Even the suppressed Shias aren`t dancing. Infact, no uprising of any sort. Not only are they not dancing, they are fighting against the US and UK forces. Considering that the Iraqis have little resources, they are putting up quite a fight. Rumsfeld is now talking of seige of Baghdad, rather than just rolling over it in a few days. So much so that 120,000 new soldiers are being sent (that is more than 1/4th the size of the whole US Army). Such was the miscalculation about dancing in the streets and the welcoming party that would be given to US troops, that the US underestimated the military strength required by 120,000 soldiers.

What reason is left now that there is no dancing?

Should people who push countries to attack innocents, based on false reasons about which they have no proof, be tried for war crimes? Should the people who kept saying the US should invade Iraq, and the civilian casualities should be ignored since most people will be dancing in the Iraqi streets, be considered enablers of this US state terrorism? Should they at least be asked to apologize? At least on this website.

Apparently some of them are still going great guns here on this site. Giving one reason after another for this war. I am anxiously awaiting for their newest reason - the one after the dancing reason - now that even Rumsfeld has run out of reasons.

Obviously, the whole, ``war of liberation`` nonsense has been proven wrong. Iraqis (or any other Arabs) seem to want to be liberated by Americans, about as much as they want to be liberated by Israel. If Israel attacked Iraq stating it was liberating it, no one buy such nonsense. I don`t know why people buy such nonsense when the US invades an Arab country. According to opinion polls, out of the 192 countries in the world, Arabs hate Israel the most, and America the second most. Thus, they probably want to be liberate by the US only slightly more than they want to be liberated by Israel. Interestingly the country third on this list is UK.

Saddam Hussein was completely isolated in the Arab world and in the whole world before this war. Had their been no sanctions, the Iraqi people would have eventually gotten rid of him, or he would have been forced to reform his ways, eventually. All said and done, Iraq was actually a much better place to live than India and Pakistan, before the Kuwait war, i.e. Pakistanis (I assume Indians also) migrated to Iraq, while Iraqis never migrated to Pakistan or India. Maybe Saddam would have returned to his, ``non-invading`` days of the 70s and early 80s.

After Iraq`s stand agaisnt the Americans, Saddam`s stock has shot up. He is no longer isolated. Even the Iraqis seem to be stating that he may be a bad dictator but he is still our dictator - we will take our dictator over an American dictator any day. The US has thus turned Saddam into a hero, no longer isolated, and no longer considered blot on the Arab world by Middle Easterners. Good work, Mr. Pearle.

On the other hand, Bush was at the peak of world popularity after 9/11. Now he is considered a bigger threat to world peace in European polls than Saddam. Martin Luther King Jr. will be remebered for, ``I have a dream.`` Thomas Jefferson will be remembered for, ``We hold these truths to be self-evident that all Men are created equal.`` What will Bush be remembered for.

Bush will be remembered for, ``You are with us, or against us.`` He has overplayed his cards. The peopel of 190 countries out of 192 have given him the answer. They have told him they are against him. So much so, that the whole Clash of Civilisaitons theory has been turned on its head.

And his last hope of dancing in the streets hasn`t materialized either.

The seige of Baghdad will be a historical moment. The US will eventually win. But with no internal Iraqi uprisings, the US will now have to bomb the crap out of the city, to be able to conquer it.

I wish the Iraqi people good luck and Godspeed. May you be safe from the bunkerbusters, the MOABs and the Daisycutters that are about to be launched at you - each one as destructive as the airplane(s) that flew into the WTC. And may you always be proud enough to take out your dictators yourself, and not allow US to use your, ``liberation`` as an condescending and patronizing excuse to invade your country. Any may the supporters of this unjust war, someday develop the conscious to apologize to you, for your civilian deaths.

pmishra2 #70
An implicit underlying assumption, which many of us Indians(Hindus and nonHindus) miss in these Indo-Pak discussions is, for many here(this is my assessment) firstly, a Muslim is better than a nonMuslim. So for instance

-a rude Muslim is better than a rude Hindu, a Farzana being rude and unreasonable is only saying what the other person deserves to be told, Urstruly is a liberal, but a Hindu being rude is a bad person.

-a hatred for Hindus is legitimate and natural, numbers of chowk articles and posts are written on this, its the basis of nationality, but a hatred for Muslims is a travesty of justice, no Hindu can show even dissent with Muslims without being accused of being anti-Muslim. An article on how a Hindu has problems with Muslims when it EVER appears will cause Muslims be justified in crossing the nuclear threshold.

-a Muslim dictator is better than a elected nonMuslim leader. So Pakistanis, Bahrainis and Jordanians will rail against all nonMuslim leaders and governments but will not go out and vote for their own leaders.

Secondly, in any issue or conflict, its always the nonMuslim responsible. So if Hamas is a extremist Muslim organisation which kills civilians with extreme cruelty, its either because it was forced to be that way by Jews, or its a Jewish plant. Muslims donot have extremist organisations, if they do, the US, Jews or Hindus forced them to be that way.

If there is a massacre of Hindus, show us proof that jihadis did it. If a nun gets raped by tribals, Hindus definitely did it, no proof required. Muslims never fund terrorist organisations, these organisations either donot exist, or operate simply by eating air and no real money or public support from ordinary Msulims, while Hindus on the other hand are not so metaphysical, their extremist organisations function with real money and Hindus have to be held responsible.

The only reason why some Muslims are extremist, is because the US props up dictators or Indians donot hand over Kashmir or Palestine problem is not settled or Hindus are rude on chowk. The reason why some Hindus are extremist is that thats the way all Hindus really are, the rest who seem otherwise are actually crypto-extremists, or hypocrites.

And etc. Nehru was a wise man.

InYourFace #66 Your suggestion is a good one. While I would like to see peace between India and Pakistan, no doubt, I will have to take a pass on this for the following reason: I dont care enough about India-Pakistan relations to take to the street on this (There are indeed people who feel strongly about it, and who hold candlelight peace rally`s on the India-Pakistan border I understand, but I am not among them).
I dont mind airing my views on chowk on such issues since it is so convenient and I enjoy the interactions, but that is about as far as I am prepared to go. While the killings of innocent people like the hindus in Kashmir you mention is indeed an outrage, unfortunately it is neither the first time nor (sad but true) the last time that innocent people will be murdered by vicious killers in the name of some ``cause``. Where does one get the energy and the time (and agreed that I waste more time on chowk than I should) to take to the streets every time a innocent person is murdered somewhere in the world?
The one issue that I care about far more than India-Pakistan relations is poverty. Whether in India, or Pakistan or anywhere else. Whether India or Pakistan have good relations or bad, while important for people in both countries, is ultimately not as important as poverty alleviation. Since poor people (90% in both countries) have far more important worries than whether politicians and military men in the two countries are talking to one another or threatening one another with weapons and militaries that represent an obscene misuse of scarce resources in both countries.
It is in this area of poverty that I can say that I spent many years doing my part in the war against poverty. I went to places where government officials were afraid to go, and I worked hard with the deep sense of satisfaction that I was working ultimately not to make some rich man richer, but to do a little bit for the most important issue of all: ending poverty once and for all. Thus ensuring that one day every individual will get to not just never fear for food and shelter and clothing and transport again, but also live a full life, to learn to use his mind in a rational manner.
So, some people feel strongly about issues like India-Pakistan peace, and I wish them well and am glad that we do have peace activists in both countries. I am not ready to join them. At least not yet.
PS: Long post, and lots of goody-goody stuff that may offend some people as being moralistic. But I can write what I like on chowk. :-)

re:#71 by Urstruly
How come you are still in US? How come INS has not knocked at your doors yet? After all, your loyalty to US, the country of your adoption, was always in question. Your past posts are proof enough.
And, now you are supporting the terrorists who are killing innocent people in Kashmir. Did you hear what the State dept recently said about the massacre of innocent Pandits? By accusing Hindus of actually doing this heinous crime for political purpose, you have exposed your jehadi mind. A jehadi mind is always a jehadi mind. Regardless of how accomplished in other spheres that mind may be. It is quite possible you belong to one of those Taliban sympathisers lurking around and now that you are unable to accuse USA openly, you do the second best: accuse hindus since you know that will always go unpunished.
But not for long, my friend. After Iraq, it will be time for stocktaking. Pak and people like you will figure prominently in that stocktaking. What fate awaits your country and people like you is anyone`s guess.
Sridhar

Sri

Mullah Urstruly is the ultimate winner. No matter how much their ass gets kicked, they think they win. Good for them

#71 by Mullah Urstruly

It is my mistake to try to put some sense in to a Mullah`s dense skull. Totally unneccessary use of my energy.

Mullahs like you are a doomed failure because you have no sense of the big picture. You friggin` jihadi idiots use some stupid logic and create troubles all over the world. In the final equation you fail to see the ultimate looser.

Jihadis might have thought they are inflicting damage on kafir hindus but what is the ultimate result ? you friggin` idiots got kicked out of Kargil and now you are not going to get your neonderthal hands on kashmir. An election process has happened in Kashmir and India has already used that as successful tool to deligitimize any paki arguments in any international arena. As far as paki aspirations on Kashmir is concerned, paki sponsored jihadis are on their own. No UN, no OIC is going to take panga with India. You see dear mullah, it takes a ``strategy`` to win..... not thick skulls and big bones.

But alas, Mullahs like you fail to understand the big picture. Your thick headed intelligence is not that much of a big help either. You think you have an exclusive claim on god`s blessings and fail to realize how many of ``infidels`` curse this jihad crap of yours. You might have been gleefully watching the 9/11 but you failed to realize the American wrath as a result of it. Just ask your fellow countrymen who are asked to register/ deported and thousands others who got visa doors shut on
their faces back home. Take a look at how many of your kinsmen are sent to fondle with 72 prostitutes.

So my dear Mullah, bury your head in sand as much as you want, you will be the ultimate looooser..... hear that ..... looooser.

We all know what FOX news can do to ones thinking and braincells if watched more than 20 mins. Now think about Iraqi public going through official ritual of hero worshiping of Saddam Hussain for the last 30 years on TV, radio, print media and his bigger than life size murals with a gun in hand on every chowk in Iraq.

Some people can easily understand and internalize how Indian govt can kill its own people in Kashmir to blame on jihadis but it does not sink to the same people how Saddam Hussain might be doing that right now..with much more urgency and need.

#60 ali87

I was not commenting in any way on indian muslims in general. I was commenting on the various crocodiles who infest this list and are always ready to write a poem for the sufferings of the Iraqis or Palestinians. But will never acknowledge the hatred and suffering of non-muslims.

I am glad to hear that there was a indian muslim demonstration against the kashmir killings. We all have to take responsibility for all our peoples. Saying that I am proud to be X but I dont take any responsibility or interest what other X people are doing is not the way to go. I also accept that muslims are being victimized in North India and that there are some of the most hateful and ugly people targetting them.

BTW, there were recent riots and firing in Bangalore after Friday prayers. Apparently this had something to do with US deployment in Iraq. Do you have any helpful information about it?

Sri

The correct statement is that one Muslim is enough for ten infidels, when he fights for truth and justice. History has a proof to that. All one needs is an eye to see. Take for example Kashmir. The number of freedom fighters, who are fighting against the foereign aggression and oppression is estimated around 6,000, whereas the Indian army who is occupying their land has a strength that variates between 600k-700k. It is the greatest concentration of an occupation force versus the resistence or even that of local population in the history of mankind. You only need eyes to see the result of that for 12 years. And then take Paksitan. It is probably 1/10th of India in almost all respects. India tests its nukes and its Prime Minister vawes sword in the Parliment vowing to teach a lesson to Paksitan, and it took just a little Kargil to put the Hindus right where they belong and to tell them what we think of their nukes. Same thing has happened in Afghanistan during soviet invasion, and is happening right now in front of our eyes after American invasion.

Don`t you see, that is exactly the reason, when those who committ agression against Muslims, cannot fight them, unleash their frustration on the most vulnerable. What supposedly a professional hindu army does in Kashmir is known to all. It rapes women and children; it sets the villages on fire; it even shoots its own people to give freedom strugle a bad name. And when India cannot break the will of Paksitan, it turns against its own vulnerable Muslims. The Hindu doesn`t spare an 80 year old women or an eight year old child, sets them ablaze, and cries that ISI did it. And similarly, this coalition of baby-killers, attacks Iraqis with the weapons of mass destruction of such power and ferocity that mankind has never seen before, and when cannot break the will of Iraqis, starts killing women and children and cries that Iraqis are killing themselves.

Like I said Sri, all it needs is an eye to see.

ali87 #59
``Lets see, this victimhood after upteen roits still cant be calimed``

ali87, please read my post #58 again, you have misunderstood it. I said Indians Muslims ARE real victims and are under very real physical threat. In other words, victimhood CAN be claimed, according to me.

MORE OM KILLINGS,

Various pakistanis have condemned the recent killings in kashmir. What is significant is that no one has dared to point out that this is not jihad, killings are not jihadic killings. The tahmeds of pakistan really believe that the killings are part of jihad, and support it by their silence.

Pakistan has emerged as the land of the pure, the true islamic stste where mulsims from all over the world have assembled enroute to heaven and 72 houris. With taliban and al quida widely distributed in pakistan, and with the arrival of 2000 ex-taliban from afghanistan, the killings in kashmir can be expected to multiply.

What is unfortunate about india is the presence of the likes of amit and stuka, who cannot see the fundamental change in pak society, who cannot decern the tahmed maulanas with beard in the belly, who provide the cover of modernity to the bsic instincts stemming from jihadic upbringing.

The results of the recent elections in pakistan, the sharia law implementation in NWfp, the utterences of mushy about the futility of simla and lahore talks and the kargill invasion, makes no difference to the blinkered views of the ilks of amit and stuka. The contribution of jaichands in the indian history should not be forgotten.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#46 by dost-mittar:

``For example, I am waiting for someone to claim that these Kashmiri Hindus were killed by Raw agents to give a bad name to the Kahmiri freedom fighters.``

Not to worry. Amnesty International is already there. Farzana will be there in three weeks. Saminashaw will cite Amnesty statement and Farzana`s (future) article as a proof and convince herself it was indeed indian army`s operation because terrorists were wearing Indian army uniforms. Reading Samina, scout and subdry of paki liberals (?) will become self-righteous and start talking about rapes committed by the army. Shanker will chime in with his psycho-babble in support of everything and anything a paki women says. Tahmed will continue bashing chowk Indians (remeber he is not bashing Indians in general ... only the chowk indians and that makes it ok).