Islam unites Shi'ite and Sunni rebels against U.S.

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/KHA142138.htm

NAJAF, Iraq, May 21 (Reuters) - Under the dome of the Imam Ali shrine in Najaf, guerrilla Salah Jbouri says it makes no difference whether he fights America in the spiritual centre of Shia Islam or in his Sunni hometown of Falluja.

"The Muslim who wants to defend his country's honour doesn't care if the battle is in Najaf or Falluja. We are fighting the same enemy," said Jbouri, a Sunni fighter standing outside the Imam Ali shrine, one of the holiest mosques in Shi'ite Islam. snip

Some senior Shi'ite guerrillas say they see a broad-based Iraqi resistance emerging, composed of a joint leadership.

"We are brought together by one religion, one faith and one enemy," said Abu Zahra, a Shi'ite guerrilla leader in Najaf attending the funeral of a comrade.

"Allah Akbar (God is great) -- America is God's enemy. Sunnis and Shi'ites are brothers," chanted mourners as they carried the dead fighter's coffin, adorned by the old Iraqi flag -- now a symbol of the united anti-American resistance.

more

[Just Me]

1. Yup. I anticipated that this would happen.

Meanwhile, the neocons still swear a civil war is breaking out. Of course, neocons often engage in wishful thinking so that they can have their stupid world war over the ME.

[Dhalgren]

4. Right, I've noticed all this talk about a "civil war", too.

Is the "fear" of a civil war a fear for after they unite and kick the US asses out of their homeland? Hey, sometimes there must be civil war; in Spain, England, the US, Russia, France and on and on. If the only way the Iraqis can get their house in order is with a civil war - it's their business. Every other nation that has experienced a civil war would have been (or was) resentful of any interference and rightfully so.

When the US Second Civil War actually goes hot (and it will), I only hope that the US People are supported by freedom loving nations around the globe. But I wouldn't want the Chinese to invade and set up torture camps as some kind of "solution" to our troubles (this was a poor stab at a comperable situation vis a vis US/Iraq).

[Minstrel Boy]

5. Yes. When are people, even here, going to stop crying "CIVIL WAR!"??

It flies in the face of everything we see, and panders into the hands of the neocon agenda to divide Iraq along sectarian lines. (The better to manage, doncha know.)

[paulk]

18. The Iraqis have historically done a pretty good job

of dividing themselves along sectarian lines. If anything, the neocon bungling is bringing them together.

BushCo was repeatedly warned that destabilizing Iraq would lead to civil war - this is not an idea owned by the right wing.

What we're seeing now are SOME Sunni and Shi'ite factions banding together to fight the occupation. Whether this movement will grow or survive a Coalition defeat - that's the real question, isn't it? Who will fill the power vacuum? Will this current unity survive the struggle for control of Iraq?

[Dhalgren]

23. Interesting questions

from an academic standpoint, but none of our buisness in any event. Once a civil war starts any nation can offer support and encurragement to either side, but otherwise should not intervene. The Iraqis are quite capable of sorting out their own differences. Not saying that you are advocating anything, just putting my 2 cents worth in. :hi:

[David Zephyr]

27. Uniting Temporarily to Oust An Occupier Is Hardly A Love Fest

Even the bitterest of enemies, such as Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek who led the pro-Western Kuomintang government and Mao Tse-tung who led the Communist "Red" Army agreed to a "truce" during the great Chinese Civil War --- in order to fight back at the invading and occupying Japanese Army during World War II.

That Chinese Civil War picked up just where it had left off after the Japanese were defeated.

You believe, for whatever reason, in the imaginary "nation" created by the British that our maps call Iraq. That's your prerogative.

However, your desire to see Iraq continue as a nation is, I believe, very naive and also deprives the Kurds of their right to self-determination.

The "evidence" of a handful of Shiites joining with Sunnis in defiance of America's illegal and vile invasion and occupation of their territories does not extrapolate out to a harmonious Iraq where 60% of the population is Shiite, who will wind up running any nation called Iraq after the U.S. leaves. This will never be acceptable to the Sunnis or Kurds.

The example I have provided you of the brief respite between Chiang Kai-shek and Mao Tse-tung in their Civil War -- just long enough to fight off an occupying army -- is something you should contemplate. Civil War began again after the occupier had left. The same will happen in the land you call Iraq.

[leftchick]

10. The Reality is a REVOLUTIONARY war is about to happen.....

and they have already named it....

"the united anti-American resistance"

It has a nice ring to it too!

[denverbill]

2. Yep, Shrub's a uniter. n/t

[sushi]

3. That's good news

The Sunnis and Shiites unite to fight the occupation. They must not allow foreigners to divide and conquer them.

[maddezmom]

6. Thousdands march in Lebanon ready to defend Iraqi holy shrines

Thousdands march in Lebanon ready to defend Iraqi holy shrines


Daily Star Online edition staff
Friday, May 21, 2004


Beirut: Tens of thousands of Lebanese Shiites in white shrouds marched in a Beirut suburb on Friday in a collective show of willingness to die in defense of holy shrines in US-occupied Iraq.

Chanting "death to America, death to Israel", a white sea of men, women and children swept across the streets of Beirut's mainly Shiite suburb in a massive show of strength by the Islamic group, Hizbullah.

Hizbullah Secretary-General Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah had called the march "to give notice to America that we are ready for martyrdom" and to denounce attacks by US forces in Karbala and Najaf, the holiest Shiite cities in Iraq.

Al-Manar TV, the mouthpiece of Hizbullah reported that over 150,000 people took part in the march.

People traveled from across the country to take part, in what some analyst say, “a serious warning” to the US administration to stay away from Iraq’s holy sites.

Sunni and Shiite Muslim clerics and Palestinian refugees also took part in the march, witnesses said.

~snip~
more:http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=4131


They are showing video of the march on CNNI....

[Just Me]

7. Oh, dear. n/t

[Aidoneus]

22. my ex-gf's cousins were at that

It was HUGE.. biggest thing they'd seen in years.

[ze_dscherman]

30. Iranians were marching as well, also today

I saw pictures of police in full riot gear using batons against demonstrators - in order to protect the British embassy in Tehran.

[David__77]

8. Sistani better get with the program or be left in the dust.

Sistani is already suspect in many Iraqi's eyes for not supporting resistance against the Baathists under Saddam Hussein. He is revered as a figurehead but not a political leader. I am certain that if he seeks to block groups like Sadr's, he will fade into obscurity. The "excitement" is clearly surrounding the Sadrists. I have no idea where the SCIRI is at with things.

[jayfish]

9. But, But, But, Didn't You Hear?

Sadr is marginalized and the only Iraqis who like him live in Sadr City. I thought CENTCOM got the memo out to everyone.

Jay

[David__77]

11. They only listen to the elites, not the people.

It's true that Sadr is more marginalized among the upper clerics and some accomodationist clerics. But among the people his image has been greatly raised. It poses an interesting dilemma for the occupation--martyr him or continue to attempt to isolate him?

[jayfish]

14. You Forgot An Option.

Reach out to him. Instead we used the judgment of an Iraqi, Kangaroo, court (a court I'm sure we wouldn't want our own soldiers tried in)to shut him down. Blundering fools.

Jay

[0007]

26. I read two or three days ago that Sistani

wanted the U.S. forces out of the holy cities. Then came the Chalabi flap......and then the tin foil hats were put on by some.

[bloodyjack]

12. OK, so maybe America IS God's enemy

but you'd think He'd be a bit more self-sufficient

still and all, it's heartening to know that they've put aside their old differences and seen the big picture

civil war my foot

[Randers]

13. As much as I would like to think that our military & it's actions

were MEANT to unite Iraq, in a good way.

I sadly don't.


:(

[BrotherBuzz]

15. Will Peewee Bush* Herman take credit for this?

"I meant to do that".

[JCMach1]

16. I have been warning of this... my inside sources tell me Iraq

is 100% united against the occuptation...

[Just Me]

17. I believe my anticipation of this was called, "myoptic" *LOL*.

The violence in Iraq certainly isn't decreasing. To the contrary, it appears to be on the rise and united against the occupation.

Meanwhile, the neocons are building over a dozen bases for "occupation" by the US military for at least five years. That indicates to any person with an ounce of common sense an intention to continue an "occupation" in face of an assertion that "power will be returned to the Iraqi people" on June 30th.

This administration,.....makes my head hurt with all its convoluted and persistent bullsh*t.

[paulk]

19. the word is "myopic"

a "lack of discernment or long-range perspective in thinking or planning".

I made that post - you misunderstood what I said then and you continue to misunderstand.

You seem at times to be almost rooting for Mr. Sadr and the success of the more radical elements in Iraq. You seem quite pleased that the American efforts are faring so poorly. Granted, the Neocons must fail - but there are better alternatives with that failure than a future Iraq ruled by Sadr and the Islamic fundamentalists currently streaming to his banner.

[bemildred]

20. Mr. al Sadr is an Iraqi patriot.

That is what he thinks he is and that is what a large number
of Iraqis think he is, and since they are Iraqis, it is their
opinion that matters, not anyone elses.

I do indeed want the US effort in Iraq to fail. To the degree
that it does not fail, we risk some half-wit politician being
tempted to try the same bonehead thing again. It not like
invading other countries is a novel idea in US foreign policy.

[paulk]

24. The US effort in Iraq is doomed to failure,

this is true. But there are degrees of failure. The US created the conditions that failure is now taking place in - the very least we could do is avoid the worst case, IMO. I see the rise of an Islamic Fundamentalist state as that worst case - and, for me, al-Sadr is the face of radical fundamentalism in Iraq.

It's unfortunate that our current leadership seems to be doing everything in it's power to bring a worst case scenario about.

[bemildred]

25. You assume that we are potent, that we can effect positive change.

This assumption is contrary to reason (military force never
effects positive change, military rule is ipso facto bad.)
and recent history (we show no evidence of being any good at
fixing anything in Iraq).

It appears to me that we had a short window after the fall of
Baghdad in which, had we arranged free and fair elections and
then removed our troops, we could have left with the trust and
gratitude of the Iraqi people and their new legitimate government.
But that was it. There will be no end to the war until we leave,
and nothing will be fixed while the war continues.

[paulk]

28. It's ironic

that the stated goals of the Neocons (removal of Hussein, democracy in Iraq) could have actually been achieved, if, in fact, those had been their real goals. Let me amend that - I don't think "democracy" was a realistic goal, but it's not improbable that a situation preferable to Saddam's dictatorship was in reach.

The real goals of the Bush junta were, of course, a military platform in the Middle East and control of the Iraqi oil fields, with the opportunity for top campaign contributers in the military industry to feed at the public trough as a bonus.

There are still positives we could affect - we can control who the money we're pumping in goes to. Instead of SCIRI and Chalibi's group, there surely must be more deserving factions we can support. We can stop aggressively going after insurgents. We can stop the absolute stupidity of carrying on military operations that endanger the most important religious shrines in the Shi'ite world. We could back off and devote our resources to training an Iraqi police and military force capable of defending themselves.

The incompetence of Bush's handling of all this is too large to even comprehend. His failure in Iraq affects all of us, and will continue to affect us for a long time - which is why I continue to hope for better solutions.

[bemildred]

32. Agreed mostly.

I do not agree that democracy is or was infeasible in Iraq.
It is essentially what they are fighting for. Islam is not
a totalitarian religion, the Taliban are hardly typical, and
Arabs are not generally obedient or totalitarian in their
thinking. They are tribal. Iraq was a very secular country
before we fucked with it, and there is little evidence even
now that the religious leaders there want to assume political
power, as happened in Iran. If you browse around in foreign
web sites and read their statements in translation you find a
good deal about sharia law and such, but that is simply the
basic historic legal system there, and it is only a fraction
of the law. What they want is to govern themselves, and allowed
to do that without meddling there is every reason to expect a
democratic government and progressive social development.
Turkey is a good example of what is possible, and there are
historical examples of democratic governments in Iran and
Iraq that WE destabilized to install dictators more convenient
to our economic interests.

Regards.

[Just Me]

21. I stand corrected. Now, allow me to correct your perception,...

What I try to offer is a perspective from another's shoes.

From the shoes of a people whose nation is being invaded, I "imagine" that many may very well view Sadr as an Iraqi Patriot and hero because he is standing up to an occupying force that the vast majority of people do not want in their country. His father was murdered for standing up to Saddam. Now, he is being demonized by US for standing up to an occupying force.

Maybe, ten or twenty years from now, you and I can read about how Sadr is actually viewed by both the Iraqi people and people around the globe, and we will find we are both wrong, or both somewhat right. But, I would appreciate if you would avoid mischaracterizing my intentions when I share perspective that differ from yours as being somehow "bad".

Presently, I am not pleased at anything that is happening in my country or in Iraq. I am not pleased that this war even took place. I am not pleased at the tremendous sacrifices, the loss of life and treasure and extraordinary destruction, which have been forced upon everyone by an administration that is greedy, "myopic" and despotic in many ways.

[damnraddem]

29. Dubya was warned that invading Iraq could lead to an Islamic theocracy ...

He not only invaded, but his minions have been doing everything possible to make that outcome more likely.

[bpilgrim]

31. even worse than what everyone had feared/predicted, Civil War... it's now

REVOLUTION

we need to declare victory, hand over power and IMMEDIATELY thereafter BRING OUR TROOPS HOME.

peace