[moodymonster]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspap...545849,00.html

As the Iraq insurgency appears to be turning it's attention much more toward attacking each other, would it make sense just to let them get on with it.

In this article:
'The jihad now is against the Shias, not the Americans
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...src=rss&feed=1
they state they're not so much interested in fighting the Americans, but each other:

In Ramadi there was still jihad against the Americans because there were no Shia to fight, but in Baghdad his group only attacked the Americans if they were with Shia army forces or were coming to arrest someone.

"We have been deceived by the jihadi Arabs," he admitted, in reference to al-Qaida and foreign fighters. "They had an international agenda and we implemented it. But now all the leadership of the jihad in Iraq are Iraqis."

So if we were to pull out, would it leave AQ up against their nemesis, the Shia dominated Iran. Therefore playing our current enemy, AQ against a potential future enemy, Iran. Moving from our current position of being pawns in a larger game to being an outsider watching our enemies fight and weaken each other.

If it were to bring in other Sunni countries to the war, maybe that's not a bad thing?

[Macrobat]

This is what Robert Spencer at JihadWatch has been advocating for more than a year.

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

This is what Robert Spencer at JihadWatch has been advocating for more than a year.

What a surprise that that bigot and racist wants more dead Muslims.........

[Uncle Skeleton]

Isn't this the exact strategy that lead us to put Saddam in power in the first place?

[Kerrigan]

Iraq has been governed by a sunni arab minority for centuries.

It's sad to see what this has turned into.

[Sky Captain]

Apparently muslims want more dead muslims.
Otherwise the violence would stop.
Truth = racism?

[Face Ache]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

This is what Robert Spencer at JihadWatch has been advocating for more than a year.

Genocide? Coool!

[voodoo]

Well, as long as it is in our interests then sure. Civil war it is.

Why is it that GWB wants to ruin that? Doesn't he get *anything*??

What is really in our best interest is to limit freedom, clamp down globalization and concentrate on fixing what is broken at home before trying to fix what is broken at the neighbour's house.

V

[Macrobat]

Bigot and racist? LMAO Alot like a pot calling a kettle black, I'd say, judging from all the "rhetoric" we hear coming from the mosques these days. I suppose you are brainwashed enough to believe the UK's Channel 4 special is all propaganda?

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

Bigot and racist? LMAO Alot like a pot calling a kettle black, I'd say, judging from all the "rhetoric" we hear coming from the mosques these days. I suppose you are brainwashed enough to believe the UK's Channel 4 special is all propaganda?

I don't get my information about Islam nor what happens in mosques from the TV. It's quite obvious you do though.

Do you think there's a chance you might keep the personal insults out of this? It's agains the forums rules as you well know.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain 

Apparently muslims want more dead muslims.
Otherwise the violence would stop.
Truth = racism?

Good point. Even IF the Sunni-Shia conflict was greatly minimized I think there would be still a lot of unified anti-US fighting going on. It seems the US found a way to take two groups that were unified against the US to become more interested in fighting old battles with each other than new battles with the US forces. Of course, there are so many factions involved in the battles over there it is not nearly as simply as that. Moqtada al Sadr's Shia forces are more interested in fighting the US than their Muslim brethren but they seem to be the anomaly right now. Internal conflict based on religious beliefs seems to be the norm right now in Iraq. It kinda reminds me of the Catholic-Protestant battles going on in Great Britian and Ireland in the 16th and 17th centuries. My guess is we've got another century of this type of Sunni-Shia violence occurring before they realize they can worship together in peace. It took a while for the Christians to get a peace established that would be amenable to both sides, I don't see why it would be any different in any other religion.

[Macrobat]

There was no personal insult in my post. The problem is, Muslims keep insisting it's a lunatic fringe, yet more and more and more instances of Imams inciting people to commit violence in the name of Islam keep surfacing.

Unfortunately for you - the information comes STRAIGHT from the horses' mouths:

YouTube - UK Mosques. Part 1 Of 3.

And dcmacdaddy, unfortunately, the facts do not back up this viewpoint. As a matter of fact police recruitment is up and Sunni militias in Iraq are getting instructions from their leaders NOT to target Americans unless they are in the company of Iraqi (Shi'a) Army members.

It wasn't "the US' who incited the two groups to fight Americans, it was primarily Al Qaueda through Iranian and Syrian Ba'athist backers.

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

There was no personal insult in my post. The problem is, Muslims keep insisting it's a lunatic fringe, yet more and more and more instances of Imams inciting people to commit violence in the name of Islam keep surfacing.

Calling someone brainwashed isn't a personal insult?

And of course there are more and more. We (Muslims, Europe, rest of the world) warned you that this war would result in that. But you wouldn't listen. Your actions (USA) have made everything so much harder for the rest of the world. You'd almost never hear any extremists preaching in Western mosques before the invasion of Iraq. Now, it's unfortunately becoming more and more common. But will you listen to us today? No, you'll continue to deny the fact that you have to know your "enemy" to win a war. You'll continue to think that dropping bombs and throwing money at the problem will solve everything. Because after all, US is always right aren't they?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

Calling someone brainwashed isn't a personal insult?

And of course there are more and more. We (Muslims, Europe, rest of the world) warned you that this war would result in that. But you wouldn't listen. Your actions (USA) have made everything so much harder for the rest of the world. You'd almost never hear any extremists preaching in Western mosques before the invasion of Iraq. Now, it's unfortunately becoming more and more common. But will you listen to us today? No, you'll continue to deny the fact that you have to know your "enemy" to win a war. You'll continue to think that dropping bombs and throwing money at the problem will solve everything. Because after all, US is always right aren't they?

Hmm.. well one remidy would be to wipe out all mosques and deport the moslems. It could be done

V

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Hmm.. well one remidy would be to wipe out all mosques and deport the moslems. It could be done

V

You think that would solve anything? But go ahead and try. At least then our leaders can finally be charged for the crimes they have committed.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

You think that would solve anything? But go ahead and try. At least then our leaders can finally be charged for the crimes they have committed.

Do or do not. There is no try. /yoda

V

[Macrobat]

Okay, I realize that English isn't your first language but this - ? - is a question mark. I asked you if you had been brainwashed.

And the war had NOTHING to do with the beginnings of this. All the war did was open the eyes of the West to what has been taught in the Mosques for years.

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

Calling someone brainwashed isn't a personal insult?

And of course there are more and more. We (Muslims, Europe, rest of the world) warned you that this war would result in that. But you wouldn't listen. Your actions (USA) have made everything so much harder for the rest of the world. You'd almost never hear any extremists preaching in Western mosques before the invasion of Iraq. Now, it's unfortunately becoming more and more common. But will you listen to us today? No, you'll continue to deny the fact that you have to know your "enemy" to win a war. You'll continue to think that dropping bombs and throwing money at the problem will solve everything. Because after all, US is always right aren't they?

So what you're saying is, it's not about Arabs anymore?
Like this is against a religion.

Unless you mean Islam wiping out the Jews.(like that started after 9/11)

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

Isn't this the exact strategy that lead us to put Saddam in power in the first place?

How did the omnipotent United States "put Sadam in power in the first place"? I can't wait to hear the conspiracy theory for that one. Big, bad U.S. is so omnipotent that we have installed all the dictators in all of the shitholes on earth because it can't possibly be that the people in those countries are to blame. Our same government that can't get chumps like Hugo Chavez and Amawannajihad to do what we want, is the same government whose power is so far reaching that they've been able to contrive the whole situation Iraq is currently in. Have you not noticed.........our govt is almost completely impotent to run our own affairs, much less the affairs of all the third world messes around the world.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by DLQ2006 

How did the omnipotent United States "put Sadam in power in the first place"? I can't wait to hear the conspiracy theory for that one. Big, bad U.S. is so omnipotent that we have installed all the dictators in all of the shitholes on earth because it can't possibly be that the people in those countries are to blame. Our same government that can't get chumps like Hugo Chavez and Amawannajihad to do what we want, is the same government whose power is so far reaching that they've been able to contrive the whole situation Iraq is currently in. Have you not noticed.........our govt is almost completely impotent to run our own affairs, much less the affairs of all the third world messes around the world.

What the CIA does and what the U.S. is capable of following through with, are two completely different situations.

[DLQ2006]

[QUOTE=Sayf-Allah;3270817]

We (Muslims, Europe, rest of the world) warned you that this war would result in that. But you wouldn't listen. Your actions (USA) have made everything so much harder for the rest of the world.

This is the mentality that says we shouldn't fight our enemies because it might upset them. Our actions did not make everything so much harder for the rest of the world, their actions have. This is the same kind of mentality that always finds more blame in crime victims than the criminals.

How were we supposed to keep leaving these poor people alone that you believe are now inspired to be terrorists? like how we were leaving them alone before 911? Apparantly, all the giving of money to their countries and buying oil from their countries so that they can have money to build things for themselves like schools and hospitals didn't make them stop hating us. How more could we have left them alone than that? By not buying their oil? Buy not not sending them money all the time in foreign aid? So your plan I guess is that we should leave them alone, give them money, and buy oil from their countries? Yea........because that has worked out so well for us in the past.

Either terrorists are a threat to us or they are not. I think it's been made pretty clear that they are. Not fighting them doesn't make them less of a threat. It makes them more of one. Today, if you are a terrorist leader, chances are pretty good that you'll be hunted down by one of our Army Rangers or Delta Forces type of guys and be killed or put in a prison for a very long time if not for life. What was the penalty for such terrorist leaders before we started fighting back in this war?

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by olePigeon 

What the CIA does and what the U.S. is capable of following through with, are two completely different situations.

Care to explain how it was that the CIA supposedly installed Sadam Hussein? I'm sure you have a very amusing conspiracy theory copied and pasted somewhere that you can share. Seems to me like if our CIA had this kind of power, that they would have done something about Iran, N. Korea, and Venezuala by now. What are they waiting for? Is us being under a nuclear jihad all part of their master plan?

To what end have they contrived their clever plot to install Sadam, cause 911 to happen, start a war in Iraq, cause all these poor Iraqis to kill each other while our troops are dying in the effort to make Iraq a better place, cause a civil war to break out, and cause world condemnation upon us for it? To what end? How has the U.S. benefited from this and what on earth would ever be enough of an incentive for those working in the CIA to be part of such an evil scheme? Let's just cut the bull here. This all boils down to the fact that it's easier to believe the U.S and our agencies like the CIA are to blame rather than it is to accept the fact that there are failed cultures in this world and that their failings are their own. Sadam was a byproduct of his culture, not an ingenious invention of the CIA.

[Snow-i]

I'm not quite sure how some would blame the US for the Sunni's and Shi'as wanting to wipe each other off the face of the earth? Could you explain how their hatred of each other is our fault? Could you also while you're at it explain how their hatred of my way of life is our fault?

It seems that you're trying to blame the US for all of Islam's problems (with no blame on them of course). The way I understand your arguments its like you're trying to fit a square peg into a circular hole.

[DLQ2006]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

What a surprise that that bigot and racist wants more dead Muslims.........

You know what the Muslims could do to show him? Put down their weapons and stop all the killing. That would really show that racist bigot.

Wait............what is that sound?

Oh darn...........the sound of crickets chirping.

[Macrobat]

Sunni and Shi'a have been killing each other for more than a thousand years over their differences in the passing of the mantle in the wake of Mohammed's death. Hundreds of years before the Americas were even discovered. I, too, would love to hear an explanation how a 236-year-old country supposedly "started" this conflict.

And olePigeon, your glasses need cleaning - you are one letter off, it was in Iran that the Shah was put back into power by the CIA in order to curtail the first "Islamic Revolution." You know, the one the Ayatollah Khomeini finally pulled off 30 years later?

Saddam's hero was Adolf Hitler, his favorite book was "Mein Kampf," the Ba'ath Party was actually modeled after the Nazi Party. Saddam came to power after deposing his own cousin (who later died under "mysterious circumstances") who happened to be the duly-elected president of Iraq. He then purged his country's legislatural bodies of all who opposed him, with a gun and publicly.

The CIA had nothing to do with it.


BTW, racist and bigot is redundant. Spencer is neither - he simply dares to tell the truth about Islam. The point has been made - all the two factions have to do is stop acting like savage, sub-human mental midgets and stop killing each other over philisophical differences.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by Macrobat 

There was no personal insult in my post. The problem is, Muslims keep insisting it's a lunatic fringe, yet more and more and more instances of Imams inciting people to commit violence in the name of Islam keep surfacing.

Unfortunately for you - the information comes STRAIGHT from the horses' mouths:

YouTube - UK Mosques. Part 1 Of 3.

Here is a text-article reporting about the problem:
Mirror.co.uk - News - BRITAIN'S NEW PREACHERS OF HATE

There are about 900-1000 mosques in the UK, a little over 500 officially declared to be places of worship. How many of these mosques are regularly visited and preached in by Saudi-wahabi-learned preachers?

I think that it's possible for Saudi-wahabi-learned preachers to get speak-time in most of these mosques, simply because it's usually accompanied with a generous sum of money for the mosque, and most mosques need money.

What do these saudi-wahabi-preachers preach? Easy: Prophet Muhammad had to fight against polytheists, jews and christians in Arabia back then betrayed the prophet often and eventually even allied with the polytheists, the Quran warned prophet Muhammad and his followers not to make alliances with christians and jews... and against all odds, thanks to divine intervention and the strong faith of prophet Muhammad and his followers they achieved a decisive victory over the polytheists in Mecca and the Kaabah could be restored back to its original purity, freed from the idols...
So it's clear, what muslims have to do, namely to emulate prophet Muhammad and fight and conquer the whole world until all people are worshipping the one and only God, and since Islam is the fullest and perfected faith and religion, the Quran the last and most complete version of God's message to humanity, anyone not wantin to become a muslim is a kuffar, a polytheist, a hypocrite or worst of all an atheist.

You don't want that the mosques of UK are financed by wahabits and preached in by wahabi-preachers with their extremistic ideology, then stop it legally, institute a british mosque-tax on british muslims that finances british mosques and finances the education of british imams, and don't give visas to wahabi-saudi-preachers to visit the UK.

Stop crying foul, and pointing fingers, and do something with the economic and legal instruments of a modern state.

It's really not in the league of rocket-science to understand, how saudi-wahabi-preachers and ideologues and their financial backers in Saudi-Arabia are abusing their economic possibilities to bring their message to british mosques, that are lacking in homegrown financial support as well as lacking in homegrown preachers.

Taliesin