The Shiites support the Hezbollah ??

[kentuck]

I had read somewhere that the PM of Iraq was thinking of canceling his trip to Washington because many of the people in Iraq are supportive of the Hezbollah because of their Shiite roots? Does anyone know more about this connection? What does this portend for the future if the Shia in Iraq support the Hezbollah?

[oberliner]

1. Hezbollah is a Shiite Group

Hezbollah's ideology is based in the Shi'a tradition of Islam. Hezbollah seeks to set up an Islamic government in Lebanon modeled after the one in Iran.

As to what this portends, that I do not know.

[rodeodance]

2. that was in one of the papers yesterday. I do not recall the reason why

he decided to go ahead and come to US (expect, i suspect bush said so).

[jobycom]

3. Shia aren't a group, it's a major division of Islam

Islam comprises two manjor divisions--Sunni, and Shi'i. It's a bit more bitter than Catholic/Protestant, but somewhat similar. Hezbollah is an organization formed by Shi'i Muslims. Al-Queda and Hamas are Sunni.

[Lerkfish]

4. forgive my ignorance, then, what is the brief explanation of the

difference between them?

[spindrifter]

5. One of the most significant differences lies in

the concept of leadership. Shi'a give greater authority to religious leaders, while Sunni are more supportive of the idea of leadership by a central king. Sunnis, worldwide, are the larger group. There are many other differences including what how Mohammed is perceived.

[Lerkfish]

6. thank you.

that helps broaden my understanding.

[Chico Man]

8. Sunni vs Shia..

In 661, Muhammad's cousin and son-in law, Ali, was assasinated. His followers were called Shi'ites. They felt he was the rightful successor to Muhammad based on family ties. The term means "Supporters" of Ali. They claim special religious knowledge deriving from Ali. Sunni Muslims, however, stressed the Sunna - "the account of the Prophet's sayings and conduct in particular situations". Sunni's follow the book, since Ali and his follower's special religious knowledge came from a hereditary source, not from the book, it is considered heretical to the Sunnis.

[Lerkfish]

11. thank you. you have all enlightened me.

[jobycom]

9. I can only really answer the historical difference

After the Prophet Muhammad died in 632 AD, some people wanted his son-in-law, Ali, to succeed him, while the majority chose Abu Bakr, Muhammad's father-in-law (he had a lot of wives). He lived two years, then Umar and Uthman followed, for ten years, then 12. The latter two were assassinated, and a group of Ali's followers pushed him as the rightful successor each time. Ali was then chosen, the fourth Caliph (just means successor). ALi was assassinated after four years, and there was Civil War for a while, even while Ali was alive (The empire had reached its limits and was going through growth pains). After Ali's death, Ali's followers put forth his two young sons, Hasam and Hussein. Both were minors. Both were killed in battles in Iraq within a couple of years of Ali's death. The followers of Ali became known as the Shia.

They believe that Ali was the rightful Caliph, and consider the other three before him as usurpers. They believe Ali was chosen by God, and there is a mystical quality to Shia that Sunni Islam doesn't have. Even though Muhammad was the last Prophet (for both religions), the Shia believe that God continued to bless and choose a series of leaders after this. I've forgotten the exact history, but eventually the Mahti emerged as the rightful heir to Muhammad, and I believe the literal heir of ALi and Fatima (Muhummad's daughter). The last Mahti is believed to have ascended into Heaven, and will return at the end of times, similar to the beliefs of Jesus. I think, thought I don't remember the details, that there is debate on who the last Mahti is, and therefore divisions within Shi'ism.

The Sunnis believe that Muhammad was the last Prophet touched by God, and consider the Shi'i wrong. I'm not sure of the current state of the two faiths (I'm more up on the history), but in the Middle Ages each religion considered itself the true Islam, and the other infidels, and each despised the other more than they despised Jews, Christians, or any other faith. In fact, Christianity and Judaism have favored status as religions of "The Book," meaning that Islam considers them true religions of God's revelation, but that both were corrupted somewhere along the way.

Iran is Shi'i, Saudi Arabia is Sunni. Ayatollahs are Shi'i. Iraq is split, which is part of the reason for the sectarian fighting. The Shi'i majority wants to rule, and the Sunni are afraid that if they do, the Sunni will be persecuted.

Obviously, many more nuances than that, and I don't know as much about modern Islam as ancient. Just a summary, from memory, so any mistakes are my fault.

[Lerkfish]

10. thank you, I had never studied this issue

so my understanding was limited.

[jobycom]

14. Don't feel alone, remember the story last year about Bush's appointees

in either Iraq or Afghanistan who were in charge of improving relations with Muslims in the region? I can't remember their titles, but they were high ranking officials, the representatives of our country. A reporter asked them the difference between Sunni and Shi'i Islam, and neither had any idea.

Wish I could remember that story more completely...

[kentuck]

12. This would help explain why Saudi Arabia criticized Hezbollah

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/norm-ornstein/what-to-watch-in-the-midd_b_25513.html

<snip>
The most fascinating-- and little-noticed story of the past ten days has been the response by Saudi Arabia to the Lebanon situation. In every previous incident where Israel was involved-- including when Israel has been bombed or attacked-- Saudi Arabia's reflexive response has been to blame Israel for it. This time: not a word about Israel, but a strong condemnation of Hezbollah for instigating this crisis.
The same reaction has come, albeit less unpredictably, from Egypt and Jordan. In fact, the contrast between the strongly anti-Israel language of Spain, Venezuela and France and the mild response and strongly anti-Hezbollah reaction of these three Arab League opinion leaders makes one worder if we are in a parallel universe.

So what is going on here? For the Saudis, the Egyptians and the Jordanians, Iran is a bigger threat by far to the survival of their regimes than Israel-- and Hezbollah is not only a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iran, but an agent working to undermine them as well. Hezbollah or its surrogates have supported the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt, allied with anti- Saudi extremist fundamentalist factions in Saudi Arabia, and agitated against the King in Jordan. Iran's radical fundamentalist regime wants to spread its version of revolution and to cement Iran's role as the dominant player in the region.

Of course, this does not mean a new alliance in the Middle East, with the Saudis suddenly finding virtue in Israel. But it does suggest that the rash move by Hezbollah, its patron Iran and its enabler Syria to try to damage Israel at a vulnerable moment may create new dynamics in the region. The Europeans may be blind to the dangers posed by Iran and its posse. A whole lot of people who live in their neighborhood are not. If Israel is successful at doing major damage to Hezbollah in the coming days and weeks, there will be a lot of grateful people not normally associated with glee at Israeli military success.

[jobycom]

13. I don't understand it all, but there are many factors.

Jordan, Egypt, and Saudia Arabia, and even Syria to a lesser extent, are all predominately Sunni. So you would expect them to unite against Hezbollah and Iran. But, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt all follow Muslim law, whereas Syria and Iraq under the Ba'athist party are secular and socialist, and something of a threat to the other three.

Ba'athism (as little as I understand it) basically is secular and Arabic nationalist, more than Muslim, so it's almost like Cuban communism to the monarchies in the Middle East. It appeals to Sunni and Shi'i Muslims, and a lot of smaller groups like the Druze. So Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt are worried about the effect this would have on their populations, I think.

So you have Sunni/Shi'a divisions, then you have secular/Sharia (Muslim law) divisions, then you have national/pan-national divisions. And then there's a sort of terrorism--populist--radical change versus a monarchy--status-quo division, where some people support their governments and some people want change now, so you wind up with connections like Hezbollah and al-Queda working together.

So you wind up with fundamentalist Shi'i Iranian governments allying with Ba'athist secular Sunni to support a militant Shi'i organization. Then there are things going on in Yemen, Kuwait, and other Persian Gulf regions that I have no clue about. Oh, then there's the fact that the Ba'athists in Syria and the ones in Iraq didn't get along, so that even groups you would expect to ally don't.

And even half of what I said may have changed since this morning. I'm not close to an expert on any of this, mind you, so I'm sure it's far more complex than that, and some of what I've said may even be outdated, but that's a taste of it. Oh yeah, I forgot ethnic stuff like Kurd vs Arab.

Keep in mind that all most people want is peace. They join these factions because they thing their faction is the best chance for that. Then they wind up fighting the other factions who oppose them. There's a lot to be said for a simple two-party system, you know.

So, now you understand how Bush is going to defeat terrorism by bombing children in Iraq, right? He took one government and turned it into about 13 different warring factions. He's genius, that man.

[Marie26]

7. Sure they do.

Hezbollah is a Shiia militia, supported by a Shiia country - Iran. Hizbollah gets its members from the Shiia population in Lebanon & its training & weapons from Iran. The Shiite majority in Iraq also have a Shiite militia through Al-Sadr. So, who's the big winner here? Iran. Through the Iraq instability & various militias, they've extended their influence across most of the Mideast.