cultural civil war? sunni vs. shia?

[bishop]

we've already seen very clear signs of a cultural civil war in iraq between sunni and shia populations. here's just one of the many examples of cultural civil war in iraq..

there are also signs of the same amongst palestinian terrorists and their shia counterparts in lebanon... these differences will likely grow since there is no effective government in either place. the only reason why is seems that groups like the PLO and hamas are allied with hezbollah is because of a common enemy: the israelis whose military always catches their attention.

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w060306&s=peretz030906

Ghanwanmeh asserts that he has had contact with Iran and with "Shiite elements" in Lebanon, presumably Hezbollah. This has given both Palestinian Authority security forces and Hamas the willies. They want to liberate Palestine from Israel, and they are eager to have the aid Hezbollah and Tehran can provide. But they don't want Palestinian Shia as comrades. And that's exactly what their leader says they are. Fatah and Hamas have distributed leaflets warning the Sunni faithful against the heretics: One of them asserted, "We already have too many groups and militias in Palestine. There is no room for another one, especially a Shiite council." The fact is that there is a hatred greater in the Middle East than the Muslim hatred of the Jews. It is the Sunni hatred of the Shia, and vice versa. The ferocity now once again unleashed in Iraq, a ferocity echoing the historic brutality of sectarian conflict in Mesopotamia, is neither the beginning nor the end of it. (See pieces by Annia Ciezadlo and Larry Diamond in our last issue.) It expresses itself in Lebanon and Syria, and is right now only barely repressed in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

it's even confirmed in al jazeera:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...EFBED61924.htm

Some Arab countries have criticised Hezbollah and its backers for the recent crisis but Iran and some fighters in Iraq have firmly stood by Hezbollah. Could we see a more extensive Shia-Sunni conflict on the sidelines of an Arab-Israeli war? Yes, the Saudis have now officially endorsed a Shia-Sunni conflict in the Middle East. And this plan has the support of the US and Israel. This can easily, however, affect stability of several Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia. So trying to manipulate the Sunni-Shia divide is like playing with fire. We saw the fruits of American sectarian manipulation in Iraq.

anyone care to comment on what seems to be a widening regional war between sunnis and shia?

[Nono]

Divide and rule, man, it's a tried'n'true tactic.

Still on topic, here's an interesting figure provided this weekend by the blogger Juan Cole: Every single month since February has seen more victims of terrorism in Iraq than there were in the US on 911.

Take a bow Boy George!

[bishop]

and it's a tactic apparently endorsed by muslim regimes. this tactic would likely benefit their regimes, but it certainly won't benefit our situation in iraq.

the inability of muslims to live together with other muslims is an undeniable historical fact - adding to their historic inability to negotiate and compromise.

since there seems to be a cultural divide growing in the middle east, it's interesting to see how the various regimes take sides. on one hand, you have the sunnis led by saudi arabia, egypt, jordan and syria.. on the other, you have iran and its proxy army and terrorist group, hezbollah.. syria seems to be in quite the position - as it's a sunni country that actively assists a shia terrorist group. it's also united with iran solely, imo, due to the threat posed by the u.s... should we somehow be able to restore normal relations with syria, it could be possible to further isolate iran and pressure them into making concessions over its nuke program. or, these sunni/shia conflicts will grow and produce internal wars in all middle eastern countries with mixed populations.

[Trotsky]

Sunni and Shi'ite are akin to the split in Christainity. Same basic and fundamental principles but some minor differences, which one side says they'll be saved and the other damned over. I think the split in Islam is either from two of Mohammed sons, or his grandsons...can't remember which. There was also a third Islamic sect which was more akin to Christianity, but the advent of Wahhabism in the 11th century put an end to it, quite literally.

[Nono]

Quote by: Trots Sunni and Shi'ite are akin to the split in Christainity.

Akin, perhaps, but much-much more serious in recent times (apart from Ireland).

[Trotsky]

Quote by: Nono Akin, perhaps, but much-much more serious in recent times (apart from Ireland).

genuinely, nobody either side of the border bar perhaps, Adams and some of his mob, inbred bogger and jackeen gobshytes, Paisley and his mob, and some die-hard orangemen actually give a shyte about what shade of religion you are in Ireland.


But back on topic, the Sunni/Shia split has been intensified over the last 150 years, especially since the rise of the House of Saud and their perverted form of Wahhabism. Seriously the House of Saud has far more to answer for in a lot of things than say Iran or Syria, including the first Gulf war, the rise of Saddam, the Iran-Iraq war and the rise of the Taleban, Taleban scholars were all Saudi educated, returning to Afghanistan after the end of the last civil war, and eventually taking over.
Wahhabism is also responsible for many if not all of the steps backwards Islam has taken regarding women, religious and poltical freedoms.

[Mia]

Quote by: bishop should we somehow be able to restore normal relations with syria, it could be possible to further isolate iran and pressure them into making concessions over its nuke program. or, these sunni/shia conflicts will grow and produce internal wars in all middle eastern countries with mixed populations.

That's what I'm thinking. Gain Syria and Lebanon, Iran loses.

[Ghumanto]

Quote by: Trotsky Sunni and Shi'ite are akin to the split in Christainity. Same basic and fundamental principles but some minor differences, which one side says they'll be saved and the other damned over. I think the split in Islam is either from two of Mohammed sons, or his grandsons...can't remember which. There was also a third Islamic sect which was more akin to Christianity, but the advent of Wahhabism in the 11th century put an end to it, quite literally.

Sunnis and Shiites are 2 broadly divided parties in Muslims. But Sunni itself is an umbrella for many sects ( same as Shiites ).
Sunnis thought the Khilafat ( the 4 rullers after the death of the Prophet ) was correct way to select a ruler . But Shiites thought it should have been Hazrat Ali ( 1 of the 4 rulers , the husband of the Prophets daughter Fatima ) . Hazrat Ali was the ruler ( 3rd in the row ) .

Then there were attempts to divert the teachings of the Prophet , misrule etc. The 2 sons of Hazrat Ali ( Hazrat Hossain and Hazrat Hasan ) protested. Thus they were killed by the infamous Yazid ( the son of Muabia - the ruler after the 4 rulers ).
Muabia was a shrewd man and Yazid was very bad man .

This whole story can be an example of a classic battle between good and bad . The good lost the war and so Islam took a different path than what it should have been.

It is forbidden to have luxurious life styles - yet the Arabs are doing this and trying to preach Islam .

The biggest problem in dealing with Islam is - very few knows about the relegion ( even the muslims ) . Thus misinformation or mis teaching is feeding the crowd. Some Westerners read a few books on Islam ( written by none other thugs ) and boast to be knowing everyhting . Some Mullahs preach Islam as per their own agenda .

It's a horrific situation.

In short, if anybody wants to live a life as a true muslim -many of the things we should not have been doing. There should not be any Arab Sheikhs , Al Qaeda , Shia - Sunni conflict ( which actually is created and breed by Islam's enemies ) .

I'm not a well learned person about Islam but I know a bit about the relegion and so tried to give you a hint .