Friday, November 17, 2006

The End Is Nigh

This is going to happen sooner than I expected.

Interior minister Jowad al-Boulani (slightly mischievous literal translation is Jowad The Pisser) came out on state-run television today and said that an arrest warrant has been placed on the head of Harith al-Dhari, head of the Muslim Scholars Association.

Wow. First off, al-Dhari represents the topmost 'Sunni' figure in Iraq's political scene, with credibility as powerful as SCIRI's Abdilaziz al-Hakim for Shi'ites. He represents the earlier Sunni stance of all-iraqi-rejects: no to occupation, no to elections, no to governmnets, fuck all - Falluja on your ass. He is incredibly hated by Shi'ites in general, and has been accused of being covertly allied with al-Qaeda, the Wikipedia entry for the Muslim Scholars Association describes it as the 'political face of al-Qaeda in Iraq.'

al-Dhari give his enemies the opportunity they've been dying to get a few days back on al-Arabiya television, he called the Anbar Rescue Council, the recently formed force fending off al-Qaeda in volatile Anbaar governorate a formation of 'weak tribes and bandits', he also said that al-Qaeda is 'a form of resistance, but we do not agree on them killing innocents'.

This is going to flame hell, as a Sunni, I used to love al-Dhari back in 2005 when Badr was running around killing people without anyone to step up to them, he looked strong, determined ; but after a while I got sick of all the sectarain bullshit and decided to hate them all, I must say however that my hatred for al-Dhari is rational, not emotional, this is how we are these days, I have to force myself to hate him, because no matter how hard I try there is a reminder deep down inside that we may lose to the other guys, and it scares me. Forget the "Sunnis and Shiites are united" This is Bullshit, the people who love Iraq as a country are a scared minority living outside the country and doing nothing.
Most Sunnis do love the Muslim Scholars, unlike Saddam, who's only credible with Baathists and opportunists who were livin' it back then, mainstream Sunnis may fall back on old Saddam sometimes because they feel so lonely stranded with Badr and Mahdi's big cahoonas.

What do I feel about al-Dhari's arrest warrant? I'm a minority, a guy who loves his country, not his sect. so my opinion does not entrail nothing, but here it is: Like so many people said about Saddam's execution. It could've felt much better, I would really be happy if they caught al-Dhari, but I would've felt happier if they managed to lay hands on al-Sadr, al-Hakim, Jalal al-Din al-Saghir, Solagh and all the other haters and murderers out there.

With Saddam, the Ba'athist figure, and al-Dhari, the Sunni Muslim figure being chased, the shitstorm prediction may be sooner than u think, hang on to your toilets.

I can really smell it, and to tell you something, I am relieved. Cut the teasing and just get it over with, we are getting sleepy.

105 comments:

Anonymous said...

From here in the USA, it looks like Maliki is a government stooge for Al Sadr similar to how the mayor of Cicero, Illinois, was a stooge for Al Capone in the 1920s. Is this an accurate comparison? It just seems that Maliki is cracking down on the Sunnis but is letting Sadr's goons free or removing checkpoints around Sadr's strongholds. Maliki also seems to be pushing back the deadline for disarming the militias, especially those under Al Sadr, more and more. Why don't I see more outcries of the unfairness of Maliki or is he actually impotent and his tough guy image a facade?

Anonymous said...

It's about time they issue an arrest warrant for this terrorist Shia hater. Iraq is in a state of chaos, there shouldn't be any effort made to appease such scum.

Before any hypocrites start crying about 'militias' just remember that the militias are a reaction to the Sunni Arab led terrorism.

To address the militia's, the government first has to address the Sunni Arab led terrorism, so then the militia's won't find any support.

And addressing the Sunni Arab led terrorism starts with this scum Dhari.

Anonymous said...

To address the militia's, the government first has to address the Sunni Arab led terrorism, so then the militia's won't find any support.

yes, exactly, the government address the sunni arabs by having another militia messing around, killing and detain innocent people... very smart!

Mike said...

Sounds like things are getting tense, hang in there Kid.

What do you see the U.S. military doing when it hits the fan? Do they have any ability to control it?

Anonymous said...

yes, exactly, the government address the sunni arabs by having another militia messing around, killing and detain innocent people... very smart!

Apparently you didn't get the point of my post, so I will reiterate.

The militia's are finding support among the Shia community because of the Sunni Arab led terrorism. To diminsh the support for the militia's, the coalition/Iraqi forces must address the root problem: the Sunni Arab led terrorism.

Once they address that (and by address I mean destroy) then there won't be any excuse for the militia's to operate.

Konfused Kid said...

Anon & Mixmode...

This is the point of view that I find the only fragile solution we could achieve: Since both Sunnis and Shiites have endorsed criminals because of their fear of others, it is necessary to diminsh one threat in order for the other to lose popular support. But this game is very dangerous and must done with incredible delicacy by the Americans, they have to put their feet down, they're my only hope today. The chance is very slim however, because Shiites and Sunnis now have reached a catalysmic understanding of each other based on collective sectarain entrenchment, i.e. whether u like it or not, the typical Sunni would now lok at how they are chasing Saddam and Dhari and say: look, they're chasing them because they're Sunnis.

So I think that unless Americans boldly step their feet down we have about 10% success rate in this course.
I'm still waiting for hell.

Anonymous said...

The Americans can stop nothing. The Americans can only buy time by addressing the crisis of the moment. It is up to the Iraqis themselves to stop this madness. A generator repairman gets shot in the street by an extremist, and all the Iraqis around him try not to get involved. This is what kept Saddam in power and gives power to these murderers. All the violence we hear today actually directly affect a very small percentage of the 26 to 27 million Iraqis. The vast majority of Iraqis hear it in the news just like Americans. Americans have the excuse of being 8,000 miles away to be passive. If the general Iraqi mindset can't be changed from passivity to proactiveness, the extremist minority will always have the upper hand.

Anonymous said...

Great blog! There is a lot of speculation about the US implementation of the "El Salvador Solution" in Iraq.

Do you think the death squads, or some of them, have been created by the US and other parties and is part of their strategy to control Iraq?

Anonymous said...

As expected, the quick attempt to build up Iraqi security forces has resulted in much less than ideal police and military units. With Saddam's support of Sunnis, the Shiite security forces are repeating history when the oppressed are freed by taking out past wrongs on the people who are identified with the overthrown leadership. Although less violent, South Africa's transition from a minority white rule to the majority black rule could be a foreshadow of the long term picture of Iraq. In South Africa, the white population is in a decline because of low reproduction and emigration. This may be the long term fate of the Sunnis as well as they are pressured to leave Iraq by the Shiites. Violently now, but through other forms of pressure as the security forces are cleaned up.

Anonymous said...

The militia's are finding support among the Shia community because of the Sunni Arab led terrorism. To diminsh the support for the militia's, the coalition/Iraqi forces must address the root problem: the Sunni Arab led terrorism.

But this will enflame more secterian conflict! There is already tension between the two (and the third, the kurds are doing three things: watching arabs killing each other; receive more arab muslims and christians into their territories, and busy strengthen their situation in the north of the country). Anyway, this is not the subject, but my point is I do agree with you that the Americans can do something, for two reasons:
one; no one trust the current Iraqi government anymore, and the Americans are neither arab nor kurds i.e. not iraqi in the first place, so people have more expectations than anything else, despite that no one trust the Americans either.
two; the Americans are responsbile 90% (if not more) for the mess we witness now, and they can control the situation, not easily but they can.

Finally, thanks for your elaboration :)

Magda said...

Kid
As one of the "Iraqis who love the country but are scared and living outside doing nothing" I find the recent posts / news from Baghdad increasingly depressing.
From day one I have expected the big plan was to divide Iraq into at least three parts, with all the foreign –civilised- forces around I had occasionally dreamt it could be an organised peaceful division with people finding themselves on the wrong side of the border ethnically or by sect “encouraged” to move from one to another area.
I am now coming round to the idea that all Sunni Arabs are going to be forcibly removed from the country, or at best marginalized into the deserts.
In response to a previous comment the difference between the Sunni Arabs and the white “South Africans” is that contrary to what some believe "Sunnis" are not some recent racially distinct foreign import into the country, Iraqis do not segregate so neatly along sectarian lines in the cities, and so in order to remove them the powers that be have had to allow indiscriminate Government and foreign forces to "avenge" the crimes committed by one previous Government against one sect by repeating these crimes against another (Falluja for Halabcha are we even now?), which not surprisingly gave birth to counter revenge, fear drives us all to primitive self protection, the killing just multiplies, until the only "solution" is separation by borders and armies, but only after all three major cities have been cleared not of an alien entity but of those who in the case of Baghdad and Mosul until a few years ago were by far the majority.
When I see what is happening now (which is by the way just a blown up version of the rampage I personally witnessed following the loss of Government control in parts of the south 1991) it makes me think that Saddam's method of forcibly moving people around the country was a kinder way, I guess time has shown that it doesn't work and so to be able to take over entire cities the current powers have decreed that death or emigration is the only solution, for any other group of people this would be called ethnic cleansing, for Sunni Arabs it is called “war on terror”.

Anonymous said...

Condeleeza Rice said at Hanoi today that "We are talking about people that are struggling, we believe, toward a better future" in reference to why the USA and its allies should continue to be in Iraq. Is she correct to cast Iraqis similar to the challenges the United States faced in history, including its independence from Britain, the Civil War, and the struggle against communism after World War Two? Despite all the difficulties, are Iraqis struggling for a better future or have they given up and try to avoid involvement in fear of their lives? If Iraqis have given up, then Rice's words are foolish, and the USA should leave Iraq as soon as possible.

Anonymous said...

To me the arrest warrant against Dhari sounded more like a ploy to turn him into a hero overnight, just like Muqtada, who was once a terrorist, now all you need to do is pop out to any street in Karrada and see how that terrorist is glorified.
And that gimmick looks like it was designed to make the media attention shift from the kidnapping scandal. 150 people were abducted in braod daylight, some of them are academics, the real riches of this god-forsaken country, does anybody care, I don't think so. They're citizens, neither turbans nor fine suits.

Anonymous said...

Just read that Ali al-Adhadh of SCIRI was assassinated in Sunni Baghdad territory. The question that comes to mind is, if it is true, is what is a SCIRI member doing driving through Sunni territory? Also, how important was this guy? There doesn't seem to be that much uproar reflected in the media by his death.

Anonymous said...

Just read that a battle occurred in Baqouba killing 18 and wounding 19. Was this another case where a conflict started between a Iraqi or US patrol and escalated as Sunni insurgents and US/Iraqi military forced poured reinforcements into the fight? Also read that Iraqi soldiers backed by US helicopters raided Sadr City and wounded 3 civilians. Anybody have further details on these?

Marshmallow26 said...

ZZzzzzz !!!!!!

We are really sleepy!

Good night kid

Anonymous said...

Another suicide bombing at Hillah. Although the Shiites blame Sunni insurgents, I see the hand of Al Quaida and its few Sunni allies in its Iraqi Shura Council behind suicide attacks against Shiites because I get the sense that the bulk of the Sunni insurgents are more concerned about protecting their neighborhood and living to fight another day. Is this a correct assessment?

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Cut the teasing and just get it over with, we are getting sleepy.

Is this new? :)

I hear they have already backed off on the arrest warrant. Kind of like the one for al-Sadr.

No guts, no glory.

Anonymous said...

Kid now I'm really sure that what u wrote in the title of ur blog is correct u r really KONFUSED and actually I didn't see an educated person like u to talk: Shiites this Shiites that Sunni this and Sunni that attata cha cha cha sha ta cha sa ta ta...
PLEASE forget the balming and pointing fingers it is due to the insist of the availablity of differences between the people of the same country that will bring the end not of only Iraq but of the world let's keep it simple and straight "there r Muslims and peaceful people and there r Ignorant Murderers and terrorists and the later guys have nothing to do with Islam", see plane and simple and all u have to do is to set on what side u belong to and I don't think that it is hard at all...

Konfused Kid said...

Kyubai...

first, i will be harsh so sorry for that, but what a theory! Maybe u should urgently write to James A. Baker for help in his study group, lak baba i think i am making myself clear: am talking about today's Iraqi streets, the educational center u speak of is unprotected and unarmed, they r forced to flee to sectarain extremes where they can have protection against the lovingly-called 'other'. Educated people like you and me are worth only 3aftas on the street.
Maybe u should go back to chanting Japanese methods of discipline and what-not. :P

Anonymous said...

Two talking heads have pretty much said the same thing recently. Charles Krauthammer, a Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist based in Washington, D.C., and Henry Kissinger, who needs no introduction, both have said that Iraqis lack the national identity required to form a democracy. Is this correct? I see indications like the Saaed's "Hurry Up, He's Dead" that there is commonality among the bulk of the Iraqis. Is the belief that Iraqis lack the capability to maintain a democracy only "inside-the-beltway" thinking or is it reality on the streets?

baka baka!!! said...

bawe3 habeebi, el americans can disarm the militias very easily; they just don't want to.
I know you're probably sick of these conspiracy theories but don't you think it's true? honestly, the militias move right under their eyes.
So don't expect them to do anything.

It's the Salvador cucumber, I mean Salvador option.
It's binary search .. I mean Divide and Conquer.

Don Cox said...

"americans can disarm the militias very easily; they just don't want to."_____You are vastly overestimating what the coalition forces can do. The Iraqi Army may eventually be able to disarm the militias, but they are not strong enough yet. The Al Qaeda group are still the most important cause of trouble.

Anonymous said...

If someone is over estimating the force on the ground of the "coalition forces" what the hell are they doing in Iraq if they can't restore order and get rid of a bunch of gangs? They better GET OUT of the country. They (and others, including Al Qaeda) burned the country and caused this chaos!!There are who assume that this can be solved by the Iraqi army!!! but the US dismentled the army, or is it people from another planet??

Bruno said...

kid --

I can understand that you and many other normal Iraqis see the US as a hope for salvation, but I’m just afraid that they will use you for their own agendas. If the US hits Iran, the Shiites will rise in rebellion and the US will be looking around for disposable Iraqis to use as cannon fodder instead of losing its soldiers in the battle. I’m just worried that you might fit the bill. Be careful, is all I’m saying.




[anon] “Do you think the death squads, or some of them, have been created by the US and other parties and is part of their strategy to control Iraq?”

Read this:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=FUL20051110&articleId=1230

and this:

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/archives/2006_02_01_healingiraq_archive.html#114020401267563155

not to mention this:

http://www.serendipity.li/cia/death_squads.htm

and then you can tell us what you think.

Matt said...

Kid, I hope they can just round them all up and take'em all out. That's much easier said than done, though.

annie said...

the occupation is not diffusing the death squads, that is clear. they are calling those sunni's who resist insurgents yet the shites are sanctioned as police or whatever. if the occupation forces left of course there would be bloodshed yet at least sunnis from other nations would protect those in iraq. he way it stands nopw we are looking more at a genocide appraoching until sunnis agree to divide the country giving them some lesser stautus. any gaines shites make now thru negotiations w/the oil contracts will sonn not look so wonderful because iraq stands better and stronger thru unification. sunnis and shia need eachother for a strong iraq. who gains by preventing this? who gains by sanctioning one form of slaughter over another. i don't understand what is the difference between AQ killing civilians and sanctioned death squads killing civilians. what? we name one terrorist and the other puppets from the government. this is madness.

Anonymous said...

But this will enflame more secterian conflict!

So do you suggest that the coalition/Iraqi forces don't address the Sunni Arab terrorism? Do you suggest they go to the militia's first?

The sectarian conflict is already inflamed and by not addressing the root problem (the Sunni Arab led terrorism) the conflict will be more inflamed.

If Shia continue to see their innocents being killed by cowardly bomb attacks, they're going to support the militia's even more!

There is already tension between the two (and the third, the kurds are doing three things: watching arabs killing each other; receive more arab muslims and christians into their territories, and busy strengthen their situation in the north of the country).

So do you want the Kurds to also suffer? Good for them, they're working on improving their situation.



my point is I do agree with you that the Americans can do something, for two reasons:
one; no one trust the current Iraqi government anymore,



Yea the Shia themselves can't trust the government because its failed in protecting them for the Sunni Arab led terrorism.

This 'National Unity' bullshit has produced nothing but a deadlocked, obstructionist situation where the government is powerless to act because its' expected to appease too many conflicting interests.

two; the Americans are responsbile 90% (if not more) for the mess we witness now, and they can control the situation, not easily but they can.

I disagree with you, I don't think the Americans are responsible for '90%' of this. The Americans didn't tell the Sunni Arab terrorists to go bomb Shia soft targets and kill innocent men, women, and children.

However, the inability of the American/Coalition/Iraqi forces to take tough measures and stop these acts of terrorism has not helped the situation.


Finally, thanks for your elaboration :)

Anytime.

Anonymous said...

Hey, why did you remove your picture with your friend??

Melantrys said...

I bet you 100..... um.... pebbles :D that he just wandered away in mid-template-change.

So if there isn't a new template up soon to bedazzle us and make us praise the ingenuity of the maker of this blog, there will be trouble. ;)

annie said...

The sectarian conflict is already inflamed and by not addressing the root problem (the Sunni Arab led terrorism)

kid, if and when you answer anon's questions could you also address this statement. do you believe the 'root problem' at this juncture is the 'sunni led terrorism'?

do you feel comfortable referring to sunni's violence as terrorism yet iraq gov/US sanctioned (MOI i presume)and shite death squads (badr brigades) as other than terrorism?

if you do feel the root cause as sunni related do you feel it is reasonable to look at the root cause of this, possible the debaathification or other operations imposed by the occupation (the bungled reconstruction of iraq placed in charge of foriegn contractors) what about the mercenaries and privatization of the military? do you feel these special forces have inflamed the situation in iraq?

thanks

Anonymous said...

do you feel comfortable referring to sunni's violence as terrorism yet iraq gov/US sanctioned (MOI i presume)and shite death squads (badr brigades) as other than terrorism?


Let's not forget the starting factor here, the death squads didn't start in full force until mid-2005, a good two years after the Sunni Arab led terrorism started!

Does it surprise you that two years of constant bombing on innocent civilian targets led angry young Shia men to take matters into their own hands?!

Maybe if the initial Sunni Arab terrorism was CRUSHED from the beginning, we wouldn't have death squads roaming around in Iraq looking for revenge.

Again, the death squads are a REACTION to the Sunni Arab terrorism, and to address them before addressing the root problem is ridiculous!

if you do feel the root cause as sunni related do you feel it is reasonable to look at the root cause of this, possible the debaathification or other operations imposed by the occupation (the bungled reconstruction of iraq placed in charge of foriegn contractors) what about the mercenaries and privatization of the military?

Do any of the above justify killing innocent Shia men, women, and children??

So your telling me that the 'bungled' reconstruction of Iraq infruriated some Sunni Arab so much that it led them to target Shia mosques, markets, homes, schools, etc..?


do you feel these special forces have inflamed the situation in iraq?

What's become clear is that the big picture in Iraq is the slowly brewing civil war. Most of the daily casualties are due to the ongoing sectarian fighting.

If you want an overview of the causes of the sectarian fighting, reread my above comments.

thanks

No problem.

bakayaro said...

anon, how do you know the militia's only started around mid-2005? and how do you know that car bombings and other stuff is done by sunni terrorists and not shia terrorists?

What? were you with them when they did it?

I agree that AQ has been provoking civil war for a long time, but the mehdi army isn't innocent either. even during 2004, I've read reports about their opression for shias themselves (their own people). Infact, the entire shia media was provoking civil war by blaming the sunnis for all the crimes of the previous regime, effectivly, provoking hatred and grudges against the entire sunni people.
Hence the militias enjoy torturing sunnis in a very sadistic way.

Anonymous said...

anon, how do you know the militia's only started around mid-2005?

It supposedly started after SCIRI took control of the Interior Ministry, which was mid-2005.

It accelerated after the bombing of the Sammarra shrine.

and how do you know that car bombings and other stuff is done by sunni terrorists and not shia terrorists?

Why would Shia kill their own people? I mean I know conspiracy theories are rampant in the Arab world, but to suggest that the past three years of bombings on innocent Shia targets are the results of 'Shia terrorists' is absurd!

What? were you with them when they did it?

Well apparently you were so maybe you could provide me evidence with your theory of 'Shia terrorists' bombing Shia targets.

I agree that AQ has been provoking civil war for a long time, but the mehdi army isn't innocent either. even during 2004, I've read reports about their opression for shias themselves (their own people).


Moqtada is a Shia internal issue as far as him 'oppressing Shia' goes. However, the main problem in Iraq isn't intra-Shia rivalries, its the Sunni Arab terrorist attacks against Shia innocents, which started in 2003.

Infact, the entire shia media was provoking civil war by blaming the sunnis for all the crimes of the previous regime, effectivly, provoking hatred and grudges against the entire sunni people.

The Shia media started this only after the Sunni Arab community elected terrorists like Tawafuq and Mutlak to parliament. These same terror sympathizing political blocs constantly insinuate Shias are Persians and justify the Sunni Arab led terrorism.

Also, what about the Sunni Arab stations which constantly praise the scum 'resistance' and smear the Shia parties all the time? Did you forget about them or is it that you only see the Shia with fault? Remember who started this conflict with their 'resistance' and bombing of Shia targets. You reap what you sow.

Hence the militias enjoy torturing sunnis in a very sadistic way.


Maybe if the scum Sunni Arab terrorists hadn't started bombing every Shia in sight three years ago it wouldn't have come to this. Again, you reap what you sow.

annie said...

thanks

No problem.


i wasn't thanking you anon. i was thanking kid in advance for considering my questions. i have no need to consult you about anything for you already stated your myopic views previously.

Let's not forget the starting factor here

no, lets not. i believe all of this was started by an invasion yet your glaring ommision of placing any responsibility on the source of the violence is a bellweather of the impotence on all the scewed logic blubbing from your sick brain.

Maybe if the initial Sunni Arab terrorism was CRUSHED from the beginning

crushed? maybe if the infrastructure hadn't been thoroughly demolished there would have been no 'sides' to this conflict. calling one sides violence terror yet the others somehow justified even tho both include innocents and civilians demonstrates how very uncivil you are.

So your telling me that the 'bungled' reconstruction of Iraq infruriated some Sunni Arab so much that it led them to target Shia mosques, markets, homes, schools, etc..?

i'm not telling you anything bigshot. i was asking a question from someone who's opinion i value and trust. you jumped in to pepper this converstaion w/you oh so onesidedness it leaves little room for doubt about your lack of anything resembling wisdom.

It supposedly started after SCIRI took control of the Interior Ministry, which was mid-2005.

no, it didn't. it started w/rumsfeld/negroponte as reported in newsweek 'the salvadoran option' article in 1/05. the report in 1/05 that is NOT the initial plans which started prior to that.


It accelerated after the bombing of the Sammarra shrine.


likely a black ops operation and in know way easily attributable to sunni's except in your once again myopic vision.


Why would Shia kill their own people?


once again you assume there are merely 2 factions in this operation completely disregarding the mercenaries, private contractors, or special ops/psyops who btw work in conjunction w/pentagon "the sunnis have yet to pay a price" (check newsweek) kick the anthillers.


What? were you with them when they did it?

Well apparently you were so maybe you could provide me evidence with your theory of 'Shia terrorists' bombing Shia targets.


ha! nice try at diversion impotent strawman


Maybe if the scum Sunni Arab terrorists hadn't started bombing every Shia in sight three years ago it wouldn't have come to this. Again, you reap what you sow.


you too. how's that sowin' workin' out for you. satisfied lately? i didn't think so. it's not over til the fat lady sings, and she's still hangin' out backstage, yet to make her entrance.

If we are indeed in the third act—as I will take up in a future article—then it may well be that this final act will prove to be very long and very painful. You may or may not know where you begin. You never know where you are going to end.

go educate yourself on the source of this madness

Anonymous said...

i wasn't thanking you anon. i was thanking kid in advance for considering my questions. i have no need to consult you about anything for you already stated your myopic views previously.


Listen you first rate piece of scum, it's easy to spew insults when we're seperated by God knows how many miles.

Your not worth the feces of a stray dog in Sadr City, so I was just being courteous by using polite language with you. If you want to debate, do it in a civilized manner, or expect me to respond in a similar manner as who have been responding.

no, lets not. i believe all of this was started by an invasion yet your glaring ommision of placing any responsibility on the source of the violence is a bellweather of the impotence on all the scewed logic blubbing from your sick brain.


So the invasion of the country led to Sunni Arab terrorists bombing innocent Shia targets? Good logic you bitch.

See I can use insults, too.

crushed? maybe if the infrastructure hadn't been thoroughly demolished there would have been no 'sides' to this conflict.

Your not answering the main question: Does this invasion justify the Sunni Arab terrorist effort to attack their supposed fellow countrymen??


calling one sides violence terror yet the others somehow justified even tho both include innocents and civilians demonstrates how very uncivil you are.

I see your parents have raised you in such an appropriate manner so that you go around spewing insults to people you don't know. Listen child, if you want to debate like this, we can debate like this.

My point is, since your head is so far up your ass you refuse to consider other opinions without hurling insults, that all the Shia reactions are just that: REACTIONS.

Get that through your filthy mind, the Shia kept quiet for the first 2-3 years before responding in full force. In those 2-3 years there was never any concentrated effort to subdue these terrorists within the Sunni Arab community. That's why you have the Shia turning to militias.

I don't know why I'm wasting my time talking to such ignorant whores who refuse to believe any other scenario. Please, go educate yourself as to who started this Shia-Sunni conflict. This is 1400 years old child, this conflict has nothing to do with the US.

i'm not telling you anything bigshot.

Well then don't respond to my comments you filthy bitch.

i was asking a question from someone who's opinion i value and trust. you jumped in to pepper this converstaion w/you oh so onesidedness it leaves little room for doubt about your lack of anything resembling wisdom.

Again, more sophistacation from the whore who takes it upon herself to respond to other peoples comments that weren't addressed to her.

I didn't jump into your conversation you piece of shit! Your responded to my comments, did you forget!!

Now, don't dodge my question who bitch, does a US invasion justify Sunni Arab terrorist scum targetting of their supposed countrymens innocents? Try and redeem any little credibility who have left by answering that in a semi-logical manner.

no, it didn't. it started w/rumsfeld/negroponte as reported in newsweek 'the salvadoran option' article in 1/05. the report in 1/05 that is NOT the initial plans which started prior to that.

For arguments sake, we'll say it started around 1/05, since this is apparently what it takes to debate with such uncivilized scum such as yourself.

The Sunni Arab terrorist attacks against their supposed fellow countrymen (Shia) started in 2003 right after the invasion!

So going by your swick, twisted logic the Shia didn't respond till 2 years later. Why don't you ponder that before responding.



likely a black ops operation and in know way easily attributable to sunni's except in your once again myopic vision.


Oh Boy, please do us all a favor and STFU. You do nothing but outrageous charges and bring no proof to substantiate them.

What about the countless other attacks against Shia targets? Are you going to say Sunni Arabs are innocent of that, too? Wow your logic is full of shit.

once again you assume there are merely 2 factions in this operation completely disregarding the mercenaries, private contractors, or special ops/psyops who btw work in conjunction w/pentagon "the sunnis have yet to pay a price" (check newsweek) kick the anthillers.


Don't flatter yourself by attempting to lecture me on an issue you have no credibility on to begin with.

Tell me, smart ass, are you Iraqi? Do have any family in Iraq?

This Shia-Sunni conflict is 1400 years old so don't bullshit me with your conspiracy theories.

What about the fact that the leadership of Saddam's security forces, which brutally and savagely oppressed Kurds and Shia, were primarily made up of Sunni Arabs. Do you think that would breed resentment among the population?

In your eyes, howeverm the Sunni Arab community is innocent of all this and the Shia are to blame, along with foreign intelligence agencies which you bring no proof to substantiate, except for some anonymous quotes in Newsweek.





ha! nice try at diversion impotent strawman

You made an outrageous statement insinuating 'Shia terrorists' were behind attacks on Shia civilians!

Now you don't want to bring proof to substantiate your allegation!

Just goes to show the lack of credibility on your end.



you too. how's that sowin' workin' out for you. satisfied lately? i didn't think so. it's not over til the fat lady sings, and she's still hangin' out backstage, yet to make her entrance.

yet again a pathetic attempt to dodge my perfectly valid points regarding the constant, mericless, brutall Sunni Arab terrorist attacks on Shia targets over the past three years.

Again, either address the points with logic or do us all a favor and STFU.

If we are indeed in the third act—as I will take up in a future article—then it may well be that this final act will prove to be very long and very painful. You may or may not know where you begin. You never know where you are going to end.

go educate yourself on the source of this madness


What a worthless, ignorant human being! Listen child, go educate YOURSELF on the 1400 year old Shia-Sunni conflict before making any attempt to seem knowledgeable on it.

If you plan on responding, please do it with some logic rather than nonsense. I'm not expecting much but maybe you might prove me wrong. I doubt it though.

annie said...

Your not answering the main question:


I see your parents have raised you in such an appropriate manner so that you go around spewing insults to people you don't know.

by caling you uncivil! thats rich

you refuse to consider other opinions

lol, from mr know it all only one sides fault coward anon!!!

filthy mind,

LOL he's on a roll, an all courage behind the keyboard, whoa, i'm almost runnin scared LOL

I don't know why I'm wasting my time talking to such ignorant whores who refuse to believe any other scenario.

because as we all now know you are a glutton for punishment and would rather suffer abuse than be all alone w/your limpdik accusations

This is 1400 years old child, this conflict has nothing to do with the US.

except it took a master (neocon)and w/shiite puppets playing chorus to get the one up . way to go. couldn't handle it w/out daddy neocon could ya?

Well then don't respond to my comments you filthy bitch.

LOL i'll respond whenever i like, just letting you know i would no more consult you than a flea infested stray dog that frequents the alleyways in the dirtiest part of the filthiest city.

takes it upon herself to respond to other peoples comments

i do believe it was you responding to my questions to kid. in fact i am quite positive. anyone who considers my question "jump into your conversation" is running scared your pathetically disguised 'lol statement as fact' poised as a question, oh yeah, we are all so falling for that pile of shiite (whoops i meant shit)

Now, don't dodge my question who bitch

lol. you mean your set up? oh, just a minute while i powder my nose mr strawman.

For arguments sake

no lets not. if you think i am stupid enough to be led around the nose by you i have a ocean to sell you in omaha. by the time it reaches the msm its already old news dipshit. back your figure up another year plus, these things are thrown together on the fly. i'd say take a look at when negroponte was brought into the mix, then back it up even further, in other words, it was part of the plan. part of the plan to get the sunni's to their knees to sign the very shortly coming up oil contracts. notice without the very big crutch of the occupation and installment of shiite puppets this 'retribution' would never have been ALLOWED to take place.

Are you going to say Sunni Arabs are innocent of that, too?

too? ah, please provide the link that establishes who exactly blew up the mosque that 'initiated' this civil war?
oh right, it is only you who gets to jump to wild conspiracy theories.. lol

Don't flatter yourself by attempting to lecture me on an issue you have no credibility on to begin with.

oh believe me, it is quite flattering laughing over your freaking out over my simple questions to kid. i'm so very shocked you are frothing at the mouth like the rabid dog you are, not. apparently you have lost all composure trying to insult your way into some superior position which it will be absolutely impossible to attain. not in my presence anyway. you're way to easy.

This Shia-Sunni conflict is 1400 years old

didn't you just say that? lol

were primarily made up of Sunni Arabs.

yawn. apparently the bloodshed now is worse. maybe you will be running scared shortly for the reaping part of your sowing.

In your eyes, howeverm the Sunni Arab community is innocent of all this and the Shia are to blame,

its easy enough to copy and paste, i noticed you didn't. oh yeah, thats because your arguments are made of straw. over there, look, i'm blowing your house down lol

You made an outrageous statement

whinner, ouch he's sooo sensitive.

Again, either address the points with logic or do us all a favor and STFU.

you're going to have to hold that piss and vinegar in your pants dude. i am not engaging you by answering any of your questions. i'm sure if kid see's fit he will. tho something tells me your credibility here may be to shot to shit for him to address you. we'll see. he's very civilized.

What a worthless, ignorant human being!

yawn. i'm so hurt the flea infested dog thinks i'm so worthless he just can't stop trying to dominate/repress me . ;) hicup, pass the popcorn mable.


If you plan on responding, please do it with some logic rather than nonsense.


lovely. how's this for logic. the shite blood/guts/and electric drills are going to loose their permission slip from the you know who shortly as the baker plan calls for resurrecting the sunni's. watch shite's to be the bottom (as in f..cked over ) in the new screwover ala cheneyco 3rd act coming up shortly. a little coup de grace in in the works as the big december deadline on oil contracts is comin round the bend. all your lame pretend superiority and might are going to sound pretty friggin lame. oh wait, you already sound lame.

annie said...

Your not answering the main question:

oh yeah, in case you didn't get it, go moan to kid, he's the one not answering. i am not your receptical nor do i have to aquiese to your strawman demands.

Anonymous said...

lol, from mr know it all only one sides fault coward anon!!!

Look, it's the sectarian whore dodging my questions again. Ok go ahead and fall back on abuse you filthy bitch.


LOL he's on a roll, an all courage behind the keyboard, whoa, i'm almost runnin scared LOL

You started this discussion with a filthy attitude, so don't be surprised when I respond in kind.


because as we all now know you are a glutton for punishment and would rather suffer abuse than be all alone w/your limpdik accusations

Listen child, you either answer the questions or you don't. No use in falling back on abuse.



except it took a master (neocon)and w/shiite puppets playing chorus to get the one up . way to go. couldn't handle it w/out daddy neocon could ya?

'Shiite' puppets? How are they 'puppets' if they are elected by an overwhelming majority of the country?

Also, I think Shiite were Iranian puppets? Now they're neocon puppets? Which one is it?


LOL i'll respond whenever i like,

Then don't bitch like a wild whore when someone responds to your nonsense.



just letting you know i would no more consult you than a flea infested stray dog that frequents the alleyways in the dirtiest part of the filthiest city.

Well the, smart ass, why are you responding to my comments which weren't directed at you? Looks like yet another credibility gap.


i do believe it was you responding to my questions to kid.

Yes, to kids questions, not yours. So either discuss in a professional way or STFU and stay out.


we are all so falling for that pile of shiite (whoops i meant shit)

Excuse me? Wallah you wouldn't have any courage to go to medinat al Thawra and say that. Typical cyber terrorist. Kuss ukhtik ya bint gahbaa.

lol. you mean your set up? oh, just a minute while i powder my nose mr strawman.

AGain, here you are dodging my valid points. Either address them or STFU :)


no lets not. if you think i am stupid enough to be led around the nose by you i have a ocean to sell you in omaha

Again here you are dodging my valid points. Either address them of STFU :)

notice without the very big crutch of the occupation and installment of shiite puppets

'Shiite puppets' again LOL Apparently you don't have any respect for the will of the Iraqi people. Do us all a favor and STFU.


too? ah, please provide the link that establishes who exactly blew up the mosque that 'initiated' this civil war?
oh right, it is only you who gets to jump to wild conspiracy theories.. lol


Again here your dodging my valid points. Either address them or STFU :)



oh believe me, it is quite flattering laughing over your freaking out over my simple questions to kid. i'm so very shocked you are frothing at the mouth like the rabid dog you are, not.

You responded to my comments. Either address my points of STFU :)

apparently you have lost all composure trying to insult your way into some superior position which it will be absolutely impossible to attain. not in my presence anyway. you're way to easy.


Again here you are dodging my perfectly valid points. Either address them or STFU :)

didn't you just say that? lol

"lol, yes annie I did just that! lol" When are you going to address it "lol"


apparently the bloodshed now is worse.

That's what happens when the Sunni Arab community harbors terrorists who strike mercilessly at innocent Shia civilians for three years in a row.

However, the innocent Shia lives don't mean anything to you.

After all, they're only 'Shit' neocon puppets..LOL Again I dare you to go to medinate al thawra and say that...


its easy enough to copy and paste, i noticed you didn't. oh yeah, thats because your arguments are made of straw. over there, look, i'm blowing your house down lol

Coming from someone who has been cherry picking my responses and not addressing my points.. Now that's a bit rich..

Again here you are dodging my perfectly valid points. Either address them or STFU :)

whinner, ouch he's sooo sensitive.

Again here you are dodging my perfectly valid points. Either address them or STFU :)

Again, either address the points
you're going to have to hold that piss and vinegar in your pants dude. i am not engaging you by answering any of your questions.


Again here you are dodging my perfectly valid points. Either address them or STFU :)

i'm sure if kid see's fit he will. tho something tells me your credibility here may be to shot to shit for him to address you. we'll see. he's very civilized.

HA! Funny you preach about 'civility' when you excuse the mass slaughter of Shia civilians over the past 4 years.

It's also hypocritical of you to talk about 'civility' when you deride the faith of 150 million people worldwide as 'Shit.' Very civilized, indeed.


yawn. i'm so hurt the flea infested dog thinks i'm so worthless he just can't stop trying to dominate/repress me . ;) hicup, pass the popcorn mable.

Again here you are dodging my perfectly valid points. Either address them or STFU :)


If you plan on responding, please
lovely. how's this for logic. the shite blood/guts/and electric drills


That's what happens when Sunni Arab terrorists are allowed to roam free among the Shia populace for three years reaking havoc.

are going to loose their permission slip from the you know who shortly as the baker plan calls for resurrecting the sunni's.

Ha! You wish LOL Actually the Baker Commission is most likely going to suggest the US engage Iran and Syria over Iraq, which would benefit the Shia.

The Sunni Arabs will never rule Iraq again, much to your dismay.

watch shite's to be the bottom (as in f..cked over ) in the new screwover ala cheneyco 3rd act coming up shortly.

Again here you are insulting the identity of 150 people worldwide. Typical from a hypocritical uncivilized whore who preaches about 'civility.' Fili min houn ya bint ghaba.


a little coup de grace in in the works as the big december deadline on oil contracts is comin round the bend. all your lame pretend superiority and might are going to sound pretty friggin lame. oh wait, you already sound lame.

Again here you are dodging my perfectly valid points. Either address them or STFU :)

Anonymous said...

Just to recap:

- I point out the fact that Shia militias are gaining support due to the inability of the coalition forces/government to tackle the Sunni Arab terrorism.


- 'Annie' refuses to address this valid point and falls back on bullshit arguments based on anonymous quotes from Newsweek.

- 'Annie' deliberately demeans the identity of 150 million Shia worldwide by referring to Shiasm as 'Shit.'

- I address the 1400 year old Shia-Sunni rivalry.

-'Annie' brushes off the 1400 year old Shia-Sunni rivalry and again resorts to foul language.

-I make comments with regards to kid's posts.

-'Annie' responds to my comments, uninvited, with foul language and an obvious anti-Shia mindset.

-'Annie' then insinuates I mind my own business after responding to MY comments.

-I point out the inconsistency in 'Annie's' argument.

-'Annie' again falls back on inconsistency and foul language.

- 'Annie' insinuates "Shia terrorists" are behind attacks on Shia civilians.

- I point out the inconsistency behind that argument and lack of logic in it.

- 'Annie' refuses to address my counter points and again falls back on foul language.

Looks like you have a lot of lost credibility to make up for. It would probably be best for you not to respond since you would only be digging a deeper hole for yourself.

bakayaro said...

lak wooow, shinu hai!! (what's this!! lol)

Apparently this anon guy is one of the mehdi army. There you have it folks, that's how they get people into this kind of shit: first remove all logical functions from their brains, then fill it with bullshit, and the subject is ready to go!

Anonymous said...

lak wooow, shinu hai!! (what's this!! lol)

Apparently this anon guy is one of the mehdi army. There you have it folks, that's how they get people into this kind of shit: first remove all logical functions from their brains, then fill it with bullshit, and the subject is ready to go!


Shino? Mahdi Army?! LOL Arjook yaba mat thahiknee!

I'm pointing out that the Shia militias are a response to the Sunni Arab terrorism, and if you can't accept that then maybe you would find a better crowd to talk to in, say, Anbar ma'ah jama'it 'baba Saddam.

Anonymous said...

Shoofa ya habayib Harith il nathil Dhari: 150 innocent Shia killed today in madinat al Thawra. Allah yerhamoon.

Yallah I'm waiting to see the justifications for this criminal act towards innocent men, women, and children.

Then people become surprised when there are retaliations for this horrendous atrocity. Laanatullahi alaa kul il irhabiyeen ou kul ili maa'un!

annie said...

I'm pointing out that the Shia militias are a response to the Sunni Arab terrorism,

so you are pointing out the chicken comes before the egg, or the egg comes before the chicken? which is it?

Either address my points of STFU :)

i addressed absolutely a point you addressed, although not a question you addresed, rather a premis you stipulated. this is not your blog and you hold no authority here to demand i either address your point, or stfu. really you ae drunk w/the need to authorize. go start your own friggin blog.

However, the innocent Shia lives don't mean anything to you.

totally untrue, totally. i have no preference for innocent lives, as long as they are human. well. maybe a little i lean towards a preference towards children and women, but also men. any innocent, especially those who look on all iraqis equally and condem all innocent life.

-'Annie' responds to my comments, uninvited, with foul language and an obvious anti-Shia mindset.

liar.both premises are wrong. i used neither foul language nor showed preference. here was my initail response

The sectarian conflict is already inflamed and by not addressing the root problem (the Sunni Arab led terrorism)

"kid, if and when you answer anon's questions could you also address this statement. do you believe the 'root problem' at this juncture is the 'sunni led terrorism'?

do you feel comfortable referring to sunni's violence as terrorism yet iraq gov/US sanctioned (MOI i presume)and shite death squads (badr brigades) as other than terrorism?

(hey clueless, notice the non partisan nature of that question??)

if you do feel the root cause as sunni related do you feel it is reasonable to look at the root cause of this, possible the debaathification or other operations imposed by the occupation (the bungled reconstruction of iraq placed in charge of foriegn contractors) what about the mercenaries and privatization of the military? do you feel these special forces have inflamed the situation in iraq?

thanks"

so where is the foul language? where is the attitude. right, it isn't there, not until you chime in w/you over amped reply.

you are obviously in so deep w/your perceptions clearly nothing i say is going to shed any light on the complexity of the problem, which you see as totally one sided. gee, if only life were so simple.

the hatred you hold in your heart is eating away at you, at your society, you will pass on to your children and it will never set you free. i surely pity you. now you have turned your hatred and accusations against me. so be it , i welcome you. perhaps this is a good thing. at least you fight an enemy that is illusive, one that you can never reach, never have any hope of conquering. maybe someday your world will not be so black and white, you will let go of divisions of 1400 years and move on to....today. it is called evolution. welcome o the 21st century, there is a whole world out there living and breathing. if you aren't part of the solution you are poart of the problem. you apparently feel revenge and retribution and settling 1400 year old scores are part pof the solution./ i don't.

make no mistake. i don't hold judgement against shite over and above , less than or more than sunni. it is only you i am speaking to. only your words of anger, hatred accusation, condemnation and justification i address. you, not you the shite, not you the sunni, not you the iraqi, not you the propaganda blogger, just you. you the anon. the nameless one. the hatred you hold in your heart will eat your soul. it tarnishes your children and your ancestors. embrace a future. you ae being played by a dangerous enemy, and it is not your sunni brother who is your greatest threat. in fact, you will only be strong once you realize the power you hold united. perhaps someday you will see. if not, i am certain your brohers and sisters will. otherwise you will not survive against those that seek your ultimate anniliation.

wake up. you are one sorry soul.

Anonymous said...

Annie, it's good to know that you can respond to my points without having to write a heartfelt poem.
Anyways, I'll go ahead and respond to you oh so proclaim righteous one.


so you are pointing out the chicken comes before the egg, or the egg comes before the chicken? which is it?

I'm saying the Sunni Arab terrorism on innocent Shia civilians is what led to this state of sectarian chaos in Iraq.

I would appreciate it if you would address that issue.



i addressed absolutely a point you addressed, although not a question you addresed, rather a premis you stipulated. this is not your blog and you hold no authority here to demand i either address your point, or stfu.

You're right, you have no obligation to respond. However, just know that your credibility is on the line when make don't justify statements insinuating that 'Shia terrorists' are responsible for the deaths of innocent Shia civilians, among many other absurd statements you have made.


really you ae drunk w/the need to authorize. go start your own friggin blog.

Authorize? I made some points to the posts, and you come along with all these ridiculous statements, none of which have been substantiated.

You should realize that in the real world, in the 21st century, you can't get away with making ridiculous allegations without having something to show for them.

totally untrue, totally. i have no preference for innocent lives, as long as they are human. well. maybe a little i lean towards a preference towards children and women, but also men. any innocent, especially those who look on all iraqis equally and condem all innocent life.

Yea and your respect for humans was on full display when you ridiculed Shia as 'shit' following my points of Shia being slaughtered daily.


liar.both premises are wrong. i used neither foul language nor showed preference.

It's funny you call me a liar when your the one who hasn't substantiated any of your allegations!

here was my initail response

And here was your first direct response towards ME:

no, lets not. i believe all of this was started by an invasion yet your glaring ommision of placing any responsibility on the source of the violence is a bellweather of the impotence on all the scewed logic blubbing from your sick brain.

Wow, what sophistication! You start your first discussion with me by spewing insults.

Listen, I didn't start insulting you, however, since you felt the need to respond in a childish manner I responded in kind. Don't act like the victim all of a sudden.


(hey clueless, notice the non partisan nature of that question??)

Read my above comments.

so where is the foul language? where is the attitude. right, it isn't there, not until you chime in w/you over amped reply.

Again, read my above comments :)

you are obviously in so deep w/your perceptions clearly nothing i say is going to shed any light on the complexity of the problem, which you see as totally one sided.
gee, if only life were so simple.


That's a bit rich coming from someone who throws all the blame on 'Shit puppets' and their 'neocon masters.'

Listen, go read some history and you will tha there is much more dynamics involved than just being a homogenous imperial conspiracy.



the hatred you hold in your heart is eating away at you, at your society, you will pass on to your children and it will never set you free. i surely pity you.

Did you expect me to thank you when you called Shia 'shit'?

now you have turned your hatred and accusations against me.

No, I should have thanked you after you insulted Shia indentity, insinuated Shia were behind most of the sectarian violence in Iraq, and stated that the Shia were neocon puppets.

Thank you very much for your insightful, intelligent rationale.

maybe someday your world will not be so black and white,

Again, coming from someone who refuses to see the dynamics of a 1400 year old conflict and instead chooses to blame a percieved homogenous entity ("Shiite puppets" and their "Neocon masters").

you will let go of divisions of 1400 years and move on to....today. it is called evolution. welcome o the 21st century,

Yes, tell that to the Sunni Arab terrorists who have been blowing up innocent Shia men, women, and children for the past 4 years. Rather, you excuse that under the guise of some bullshit conspiracy theory.

there is a whole world out there living and breathing. if you aren't part of the solution you are poart of the problem. you apparently feel revenge and retribution and settling 1400 year old scores are part pof the solution.

Read my above comments.

i don't.

Oh really? Then why do you refer to Shia as 'shit.' Stop hiding behing your bullshit victimization.

make no mistake. i don't hold judgement against shite over and above , less than or more than sunni. it is only you i am speaking to. only your words of anger, hatred accusation, condemnation and justification i address. you, not you the shite, not you the sunni, not you the iraqi, not you the propaganda blogger, just you.

Read my above comments. I get tired of repeating myself after a while. Do us both a favor and cut your bullshit, respond to my points.

you the anon. the nameless one. the hatred you hold in your heart will eat your soul. it tarnishes your children and your ancestors. embrace a future.

you ae being played by a dangerous enemy, and it is not your sunni brother who is your greatest threat.

Again more bullshit conspiracy theories. I think Sheikh Illyan, the number three guy on the Tawafuq slate (the Sunni Arab political bloc) will disagree with you.

This is the same guy who has repeatedly stated that Shia are not the majority in Iraq, and he was elected by a majority of the Sunni Arab community.

So stop looking a the world through your black and white lenses of good and evil and read the dynamics going on behind the scenes.

in fact, you will only be strong once you realize the power you hold united.

Well the Shia tried that and they got car bombs in return for their efforts.

perhaps someday you will see. if not, i am certain your brohers and sisters will. otherwise you will not survive against those that seek your ultimate anniliation.

Again, more poetic bullshit. It would do you good to educate yourself on the instrisics of this conflict rather than make bullshit generalizations and accusations.

wake up. you are one sorry soul.

I hate to interrupt your poetic prose, but let's get back to reality.

Here are a few clarification I would like you to clear up:

1.) What was your reasoning behind disrespecting the identity of 150 million Shia muslims by ridiculing them as 'shit.?

2.) You earlier stated that 'Shia terrorists' may be behind attacks on innocent Shia civilians, how do you come to that conclusioning?

3.)You also stated earlier that the government in Iraq were 'Shiite puppets' to their 'neocon masters.' How do you justify your claim, given of course that this government is democratically elected by the majority of the Iraqi people?

4.)You have been insinuating that the current sectarian conflict in Iraq is a result of hidden hands. However, history has shown that the Shia-Sunni conflict is much more dynamic than that. Given the treatment of Shia as second class citizens under the Ummayyad dynasty, the Abbasid dynasty, the Ottoman empire, and the previous Iraqi regime(s), how do you reconcile that history with your allegations?

I would greatly appreciate your clarification of my above inquiries. I don't desire to go in circles anymore arguing, I just want to know where you stand. Cheers.

annie said...

1.) What was your reasoning behind disrespecting the identity of 150 million Shia muslims by ridiculing them as 'shit.?

ouch, that's a bit of a strectch there mr oh so righteous. my reasoning? my reasoning for insulting you. number one. i ask kid some perfectly reasonable questions. i didn't ask you because it is abundantly clear you justify one form of mayhem, torture, terror and murder, while at the same time condem another w/justificatios of "they did it first". you are stuck n some sicko world where everyone is bound by your neat little descriptions of sunni and shiite completely disregarding people who couldn't give a f'ing f..k about religion or dividing their country along these lines tho that is exactly what the masters of occupation and neocon agenda would like of you all for the purpose of division. so while your questions addressed to kid rested on this premise (not w/any question in your mind) i thought it quite realistic, and still do, to establish the reasonableness of looking at root causes(yes, i used that term, "is it reasonable") which you so handily twisted into an acusation of insinuating that 'Shia terrorists' are responsible for the deaths of innocent Shia civiliansthe root causes i pointed towards were conditions set, not by shiites but by the occupation. by the handling of the transformation.

you obviously think that the PTB have no influence whatso ever in this mess, that is totally clear. you are so emersed in your hatred and retibution you see everything as one sided. i on the other hand do not. i think it is irresponsible to assume all violence by one side is justified, all terror comes from one side of the conflict.

the glaring omission i spoke of earlier is the root causes for why this conflict is happening now, used to inflame a society to bring it to its knees. you are being played. iy is amazing to me you cannot see this. no one NO ONE, working w/the government can be in power w/out the authorization of the occupating power. who runs the MOI? where is the cia in all this? when i say puppets i refer to those who tow the official line that will lead the country to be weaker. anyone who doesn't see this is blind. BLIND. are you such a fool that you will throw away your future for old 1400 year old scores? and not see the evil hands that direct this madness?

You have been insinuating that the current sectarian conflict in Iraq is a result of hidden hands.

are you deaf? i am not insinuating!!! i could scream it from the highest mountain. you are being played. this secretarian conflict is being nurtured, pampered,condoned and authorized.

so, to address why i insulted you, and btw, it was not millions of people i was directing my insult to, only you, especially you, and you alone, the reason....

What a worthless, ignorant human being! smart ass, filthy bitch, bitch, you bitch, you piece of shit! whore , ignorant whores, filthy mind. head is so far up your ass, child, not worth the feces of a stray dog , first rate piece of scum

apparently you are quite apt at dishing it out, but inable to taste your own medicine. all of this from your posting prior to my insult you take such outrageous offense to. get a grip. one of the most common phrases of my society is jesus f'ing christ. if christians got as bent out of shape as you did by my jousting (and yes, it was a joust, if you cannot tell from the 'whoops' statement, you are too dense) nobody would ever get along.

your big numero uno question is all about framing this conflict in the hands of one side as the victim of the other. this is madness and stupidity. no different than the cheneyco stupidity of saying the muslims are all at fault for terror which is absurd. what kind of world are you going to live in once you all settle all your scores? are you under the illusion you can settle each and everyone. because i'll guarentee you, after you do, i know some people who will have no problem reaping the benefit of iraqis genociding. there are some interested parties in your real estate. your oil too. so keep up all your rightness, see how successful your life is then.

blowhard.

Anonymous said...

What mosque

Anonymous said...

ouch, that's a bit of a strectch there mr oh so righteous.

Glad to see you could get to the point and answer the question :)

my reasoning?

Yes that would help.


my reasoning for insulting you. number one.

So you insult the entire Shia identity?

i ask kid some perfectly reasonable questions. i didn't ask you because it is abundantly clear you justify one form of mayhem, torture, terror and murder, while at the same time condem another w/justificatios of "they did it first".

All I'm pointing out is the miltia's are a result of the inability of the govt/coalition forces to protect innocent Shia.

You seem to be too indulged in your fantasy of Sunni Arab victimization at the hands of Shia that you forget the root cause of this.

you are stuck n some sicko world where everyone is bound by your neat little descriptions of sunni and shiite completely disregarding people who couldn't give a f'ing f..k about religion or dividing their country along these lines

Well thats the result of 1400 years of oppression. Amazing what that'll do to make one more aware of his/her identity.

However, you choose to brush that aside as if it is an unimportant issue.

tho that is exactly what the masters of occupation and neocon agenda would like of you all for the purpose of division.

Actually I don't think it would be in the Bush administrations interests to see Iraq divided, as they would probably fear a regional war that would endager their allies as well as their economic interets.

However, thats all irrelevant to conspiracy theorists lie you. Everything is black and white.

so while your questions addressed to kid rested on this premise (not w/any question in your mind) i thought it quite realistic, and still do, to establish the reasonableness of looking at root causes(yes, i used that term, "is it reasonable") which you so handily twisted into an acusation of insinuating that 'Shia terrorists' are responsible for the deaths of innocent Shia civiliansthe root causes i pointed towards were conditions set, not by shiites but by the occupation. by the handling of the transformation.

Well, that's not what you initially said. You said the Iraqi government is composed of 'Shiite puppets' and their 'neocon masters.'

This same 'Shiite puppet' government was elected by the overwhelming majority of the Shia community, so your allegation is an insult to the Iraqi Shia community.

I probably shouldn't reason with people like you.

you obviously think that the PTB have no influence whatso ever in this mess, that is totally clear. you are so emersed in your hatred and retibution you see everything as one sided.

Well there is plenty of proof over the past 1400 years of Sunni Arab aggression towards Shia. Proof that predates the existence of the US.


i on the other hand do not. i think it is irresponsible to assume all violence by one side is justified, all terror comes from one side of the conflict.

Apparently you do, smart ass, when you say make allegations that the US 'occupation' is behind everything and that Shias and Sunnis are brethren, when everyone knows this isn't the case.

Maybe you should do a little more reading and enlighten yourself on the dynamics of the Shia-Sunni conflict. I've told you this a thousand times, yet you still disregard it and fall back on conspiracy theory bullshit.

the glaring omission i spoke of earlier is the root causes for why this conflict is happening now, used to inflame a society to bring it to its knees. you are being played. iy is amazing to me you cannot see this. no one NO ONE, working w/the government can be in power w/out the authorization of the occupating power.

Again with the bullshit conspiracies. Tell me, why would it be in the Bush administrations interests to have an unstable, chaotic Iraq? Didn't you see the fallout in the midterm election because of Iraq. Wouldn;t an unstable Iraq bogg down US troops and give Iran and Syria a upper hand? Please, think before you make such accusations.


who runs the MOI? where is the cia in all this? when i say puppets i refer to those who tow the official line that will lead the country to be weaker.

Yes, PM Maliki is a puppet. Except for the fact he has publicly been at odds with the US over several issues. Maybe you should do some research.

Also, Sciri, Dawa, and the Sadr bloc are also all puppets. Please, don't waste my time with your baseless accusations.


are you such a fool that you will throw away your future for old 1400 year old scores?

Buwahahahaha!!! Yes, only '1400 year old scores.' What planet are you living on? This Shia-Sunni rivalry isn't an incident that just happened 1400 years ago. This has been ongoing over the past 1400 years! The situation in Iraq is a continuation of it. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if you attrributed the whole 1400 year old conflict to some Zionist/Imperial conspiracy. Please, do educate yourself.



are you deaf? i am not insinuating!!! i could scream it from the highest mountain. you are being played. this secretarian conflict is being nurtured, pampered,condoned and authorized.

Read my above comments.

so, to address why i insulted you, and btw, it was not millions of people i was directing my insult to, only you, especially you, and you alone, the reason....

Yes, the best way to direct your insult at me, solely me, is to ridicule Shia indentity by referring to is as 'shit.'
Get a life.

What a worthless, ignorant human being! smart ass, filthy bitch, bitch, you bitch, you piece of shit! whore , ignorant whores, filthy mind. head is so far up your ass, child, not worth the feces of a stray dog , first rate piece of scum

Two can play this game:

i have no need to consult you about anything for you already stated your myopic views previously, the scewed logic blubbing from your sick brain, how very uncivil you are, i'm not telling you anything bigshot, your lack of anything resembling wisdom, your once again myopic vision, impotent strawman, go educate yourself, coward anon!!!, w/your limpdik, w/shiite puppets, flea infested stray dog that frequents the alleyways in the dirtiest part of the filthiest city, that pile of shiite (whoops i meant shit), mr strawman, dipshit, shiite puppets, like the rabid dog you are, lost all composure, flea infested dog, watch shite's to be the bottom (as in f..cked over ), strawman demands, really you ae drunk, liar, you are stuck n some sicko world, blowhard.

And after all that, this is my favorite line:

i used neither foul language

HAHAHAHAHA! Yes apparently your the one caught up in your dillusion of victimization that you can't even recognize your own faults. Talk about being hypocritical, that's probably why I wipe my ass with everything you have to say.

if christians got as bent out of shape as you did by my jousting (and yes, it was a joust, if you cannot tell from the 'whoops' statement, you are too dense) nobody would ever get along.

Well, Christians in your society don't have 1400 year oppression and massacres to think about. There also aren't car bombs going off daily in your society.

Also, why don't you just worry about your society and leave Iraq alone. You have nothing to do with Iraq and your opinion with regards to the situation in Iraq is worthless. Instead of lecturing to others what they should do with their country, do us all a favor and STFU :)

so keep up all your rightness, see how successful your life is then.

Care to elaborate?

blowhard.

bitch. See I can use foul language too.

To sum it up:

Your scenarios have been full of shit.

You refuse to acknowledge 1400 year old conflict and brush them aside as just '1400 year old scores.'

You refuse to see the situation in more than 2 dimensions.

You have ridiculed the will of the majority of the Iraqi people by demeaning their representatives, without basis might I add, as 'Shiite puppets.'

You have demeaned the identity of 150 million Shia Muslims in your fruitless attempt to supposedly insult me.

You refuse to acknowledge that the Sunni Arab terrorism has any fault in encouraging the growth of Shia militias.

Your a waste of my time, your a hypocrite, you have no credibility, and I think its best for you to not state your opinion again so as not to make a fool of your self.

Also, this statement from yours got me steaming earlier:

except it took a master (neocon)and w/shiite puppets playing chorus to get the one up . way to go. couldn't handle it w/out daddy neocon could ya?

Who the fuck are you sitting in the US with no connection to Iraq to insinuate that the Shia are cowardly puppets?

Let me give you a history lession, since your lack on knowledge has provided grounds for such:

- Go research the 1991 uprising, it was in that uprising when the Shia and the Kurds rose against tyranny, only NOT to be helped by their supposed Sunni Arab 'brethren,' yet rather mercilessly crushed by them!

- Go research Dujail

- Go research the purges of the Dawa party

I have lost all respect for you. How dare you degrade those who have sacrificed for the freedom of Iraq! If it weren't for the whole SUNNI MUSLIM WORLD lobbying against helping Shia and Kurds, they would have toppled this illegitimate dictatorship in no time.

"couldn't do it w/o daddy neocon, could ya?'

Go to hell you ignorant scum! Your lack of respect for the majority of the Iraqi people is evident in your posts. Even if you don't want to respect me, which I could give less of a fuck since it wouldn't mean much coming from someone like you, respect those who hae sacrificed for Iraq.

annie said...

Go to hell you ignorant scum! Your lack of respect for the majority of the Iraqi people is evident in your posts. Even if you don't want to respect me, which I could give less of a fuck since it wouldn't mean much coming from someone like you, respect those who hae sacrificed for Iraq.

yawn. you're starting to sound eerily familiar. and not very convincing. and boring too. bla bla victim victim 1400 years etc etc.
yawn.

kid, i was reading missing links about al-Dhari's visit to King Abdullah in SA.

Bashir Nafie writes in Al-Quds al-Arabi: The recent attack on the reputation of Harith al-Dhari, head of the Muslim Scholars Association of Iraq, was triggered by his political activities in the region, and not by anything he said. He had been saying the same things about the illegitimacy of the occupation since 2003...What was new, and what so alarmed the Green Zone people, was his visit to Saudi Arabia and the fact he had a discussion with the Saudi King. This was shocking, because since 2003 the Arab regimes in the region have left Iraqi affairs up to their friends the Americans, prefering not to get involved themselves.


interesting, cheney is headed there.


David Almacy, a White House spokesman in Washington, said Cheney was not in Iraq and that his only currently planned travel to the region is the previously announced trip he will make to Saudi Arabia on Friday to meeting the next day with King Abdullah to discuss developments in the Middle East, including Iraq.

annie said...

you ignorant scum!

actually, the term is you ignorant slut

you need to brush up on your comedy

Anonymous said...

yawn. you're starting to sound eerily familiar. and not very convincing. and boring too. bla bla victim victim 1400 years etc etc.
yawn.


I would expect that response from someone who demeans the identity of 150 million Shia worldwide.


actually, the term is you ignorant slut

you need to brush up on your comedy


Nice try at diversion.

Also, the truth isn't meant to be funny.

Anonymous said...

Also, I'm going to repost my response since you have resorted to your bullshiy tactics again of overlooking critical points...

ouch, that's a bit of a strectch there mr oh so righteous.

Glad to see you could get to the point and answer the question :)

my reasoning?

Yes that would help.


my reasoning for insulting you. number one.

So you insult the entire Shia identity?

i ask kid some perfectly reasonable questions. i didn't ask you because it is abundantly clear you justify one form of mayhem, torture, terror and murder, while at the same time condem another w/justificatios of "they did it first".

All I'm pointing out is the miltia's are a result of the inability of the govt/coalition forces to protect innocent Shia.

You seem to be too indulged in your fantasy of Sunni Arab victimization at the hands of Shia that you forget the root cause of this.

you are stuck n some sicko world where everyone is bound by your neat little descriptions of sunni and shiite completely disregarding people who couldn't give a f'ing f..k about religion or dividing their country along these lines

Well thats the result of 1400 years of oppression. Amazing what that'll do to make one more aware of his/her identity.

However, you choose to brush that aside as if it is an unimportant issue.

tho that is exactly what the masters of occupation and neocon agenda would like of you all for the purpose of division.

Actually I don't think it would be in the Bush administrations interests to see Iraq divided, as they would probably fear a regional war that would endager their allies as well as their economic interets.

However, thats all irrelevant to conspiracy theorists lie you. Everything is black and white.

so while your questions addressed to kid rested on this premise (not w/any question in your mind) i thought it quite realistic, and still do, to establish the reasonableness of looking at root causes(yes, i used that term, "is it reasonable") which you so handily twisted into an acusation of insinuating that 'Shia terrorists' are responsible for the deaths of innocent Shia civiliansthe root causes i pointed towards were conditions set, not by shiites but by the occupation. by the handling of the transformation.

Well, that's not what you initially said. You said the Iraqi government is composed of 'Shiite puppets' and their 'neocon masters.'

This same 'Shiite puppet' government was elected by the overwhelming majority of the Shia community, so your allegation is an insult to the Iraqi Shia community.

I probably shouldn't reason with people like you.

you obviously think that the PTB have no influence whatso ever in this mess, that is totally clear. you are so emersed in your hatred and retibution you see everything as one sided.

Well there is plenty of proof over the past 1400 years of Sunni Arab aggression towards Shia. Proof that predates the existence of the US.


i on the other hand do not. i think it is irresponsible to assume all violence by one side is justified, all terror comes from one side of the conflict.

Apparently you do, smart ass, when you say make allegations that the US 'occupation' is behind everything and that Shias and Sunnis are brethren, when everyone knows this isn't the case.

Maybe you should do a little more reading and enlighten yourself on the dynamics of the Shia-Sunni conflict. I've told you this a thousand times, yet you still disregard it and fall back on conspiracy theory bullshit.

the glaring omission i spoke of earlier is the root causes for why this conflict is happening now, used to inflame a society to bring it to its knees. you are being played. iy is amazing to me you cannot see this. no one NO ONE, working w/the government can be in power w/out the authorization of the occupating power.

Again with the bullshit conspiracies. Tell me, why would it be in the Bush administrations interests to have an unstable, chaotic Iraq? Didn't you see the fallout in the midterm election because of Iraq. Wouldn;t an unstable Iraq bogg down US troops and give Iran and Syria a upper hand? Please, think before you make such accusations.


who runs the MOI? where is the cia in all this? when i say puppets i refer to those who tow the official line that will lead the country to be weaker.

Yes, PM Maliki is a puppet. Except for the fact he has publicly been at odds with the US over several issues. Maybe you should do some research.

Also, Sciri, Dawa, and the Sadr bloc are also all puppets. Please, don't waste my time with your baseless accusations.


are you such a fool that you will throw away your future for old 1400 year old scores?

Buwahahahaha!!! Yes, only '1400 year old scores.' What planet are you living on? This Shia-Sunni rivalry isn't an incident that just happened 1400 years ago. This has been ongoing over the past 1400 years! The situation in Iraq is a continuation of it. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if you attrributed the whole 1400 year old conflict to some Zionist/Imperial conspiracy. Please, do educate yourself.



are you deaf? i am not insinuating!!! i could scream it from the highest mountain. you are being played. this secretarian conflict is being nurtured, pampered,condoned and authorized.

Read my above comments.

so, to address why i insulted you, and btw, it was not millions of people i was directing my insult to, only you, especially you, and you alone, the reason....

Yes, the best way to direct your insult at me, solely me, is to ridicule Shia indentity by referring to is as 'shit.'
Get a life.

What a worthless, ignorant human being! smart ass, filthy bitch, bitch, you bitch, you piece of shit! whore , ignorant whores, filthy mind. head is so far up your ass, child, not worth the feces of a stray dog , first rate piece of scum

Two can play this game:

i have no need to consult you about anything for you already stated your myopic views previously, the scewed logic blubbing from your sick brain, how very uncivil you are, i'm not telling you anything bigshot, your lack of anything resembling wisdom, your once again myopic vision, impotent strawman, go educate yourself, coward anon!!!, w/your limpdik, w/shiite puppets, flea infested stray dog that frequents the alleyways in the dirtiest part of the filthiest city, that pile of shiite (whoops i meant shit), mr strawman, dipshit, shiite puppets, like the rabid dog you are, lost all composure, flea infested dog, watch shite's to be the bottom (as in f..cked over ), strawman demands, really you ae drunk, liar, you are stuck n some sicko world, blowhard.

And after all that, this is my favorite line:

i used neither foul language

HAHAHAHAHA! Yes apparently your the one caught up in your dillusion of victimization that you can't even recognize your own faults. Talk about being hypocritical, that's probably why I wipe my ass with everything you have to say.

if christians got as bent out of shape as you did by my jousting (and yes, it was a joust, if you cannot tell from the 'whoops' statement, you are too dense) nobody would ever get along.

Well, Christians in your society don't have 1400 year oppression and massacres to think about. There also aren't car bombs going off daily in your society.

Also, why don't you just worry about your society and leave Iraq alone. You have nothing to do with Iraq and your opinion with regards to the situation in Iraq is worthless. Instead of lecturing to others what they should do with their country, do us all a favor and STFU :)

so keep up all your rightness, see how successful your life is then.

Care to elaborate?

blowhard.

bitch. See I can use foul language too.

To sum it up:

Your scenarios have been full of shit.

You refuse to acknowledge 1400 year old conflict and brush them aside as just '1400 year old scores.'

You refuse to see the situation in more than 2 dimensions.

You have ridiculed the will of the majority of the Iraqi people by demeaning their representatives, without basis might I add, as 'Shiite puppets.'

You have demeaned the identity of 150 million Shia Muslims in your fruitless attempt to supposedly insult me.

You refuse to acknowledge that the Sunni Arab terrorism has any fault in encouraging the growth of Shia militias.

Your a waste of my time, your a hypocrite, you have no credibility, and I think its best for you to not state your opinion again so as not to make a fool of your self.

Also, this statement from yours got me steaming earlier:

except it took a master (neocon)and w/shiite puppets playing chorus to get the one up . way to go. couldn't handle it w/out daddy neocon could ya?

Who the fuck are you sitting in the US with no connection to Iraq to insinuate that the Shia are cowardly puppets?

Let me give you a history lession, since your lack on knowledge has provided grounds for such:

- Go research the 1991 uprising, it was in that uprising when the Shia and the Kurds rose against tyranny, only NOT to be helped by their supposed Sunni Arab 'brethren,' yet rather mercilessly crushed by them!

- Go research Dujail

- Go research the purges of the Dawa party

I have lost all respect for you. How dare you degrade those who have sacrificed for the freedom of Iraq! If it weren't for the whole SUNNI MUSLIM WORLD lobbying against helping Shia and Kurds, they would have toppled this illegitimate dictatorship in no time.

"couldn't do it w/o daddy neocon, could ya?'

Go to hell you ignorant scum! Your lack of respect for the majority of the Iraqi people is evident in your posts. Even if you don't want to respect me, which I could give less of a fuck since it wouldn't mean much coming from someone like you, respect those who hae sacrificed for Iraq.

Anonymous said...

Again, I'm going to repost my response since you seem to have fallen back on bullshit tactics of overlooking critical points.

Listen, either you respond accordingly or you STFU and don't waste my time.

ouch, that's a bit of a
strectch there mr oh so righteous.


Glad to see you could get to the point and answer the question :)

my reasoning?

Yes that would help.


my reasoning for insulting you. number one.

So you insult the entire Shia identity?

i ask kid some perfectly reasonable questions. i didn't ask you because it is abundantly clear you justify one form of mayhem, torture, terror and murder, while at the same time condem another w/justificatios of "they did it first".

All I'm pointing out is the miltia's are a result of the inability of the govt/coalition forces to protect innocent Shia.

You seem to be too indulged in your fantasy of Sunni Arab victimization at the hands of Shia that you forget the root cause of this.

you are stuck n some sicko world where everyone is bound by your neat little descriptions of sunni and shiite completely disregarding people who couldn't give a f'ing f..k about religion or dividing their country along these lines

Well thats the result of 1400 years of oppression. Amazing what that'll do to make one more aware of his/her identity.

However, you choose to brush that aside as if it is an unimportant issue.

tho that is exactly what the masters of occupation and neocon agenda would like of you all for the purpose of division.

Actually I don't think it would be in the Bush administrations interests to see Iraq divided, as they would probably fear a regional war that would endager their allies as well as their economic interets.

However, thats all irrelevant to conspiracy theorists lie you. Everything is black and white.

so while your questions addressed to kid rested on this premise (not w/any question in your mind) i thought it quite realistic, and still do, to establish the reasonableness of looking at root causes(yes, i used that term, "is it reasonable") which you so handily twisted into an acusation of insinuating that 'Shia terrorists' are responsible for the deaths of innocent Shia civiliansthe root causes i pointed towards were conditions set, not by shiites but by the occupation. by the handling of the transformation.

Well, that's not what you initially said. You said the Iraqi government is composed of 'Shiite puppets' and their 'neocon masters.'

This same 'Shiite puppet' government was elected by the overwhelming majority of the Shia community, so your allegation is an insult to the Iraqi Shia community.

I probably shouldn't reason with people like you.

you obviously think that the PTB have no influence whatso ever in this mess, that is totally clear. you are so emersed in your hatred and retibution you see everything as one sided.

Well there is plenty of proof over the past 1400 years of Sunni Arab aggression towards Shia. Proof that predates the existence of the US.


i on the other hand do not. i think it is irresponsible to assume all violence by one side is justified, all terror comes from one side of the conflict.

Apparently you do, smart ass, when you say make allegations that the US 'occupation' is behind everything and that Shias and Sunnis are brethren, when everyone knows this isn't the case.

Maybe you should do a little more reading and enlighten yourself on the dynamics of the Shia-Sunni conflict. I've told you this a thousand times, yet you still disregard it and fall back on conspiracy theory bullshit.

the glaring omission i spoke of earlier is the root causes for why this conflict is happening now, used to inflame a society to bring it to its knees. you are being played. iy is amazing to me you cannot see this. no one NO ONE, working w/the government can be in power w/out the authorization of the occupating power.

Again with the bullshit conspiracies. Tell me, why would it be in the Bush administrations interests to have an unstable, chaotic Iraq? Didn't you see the fallout in the midterm election because of Iraq. Wouldn;t an unstable Iraq bogg down US troops and give Iran and Syria a upper hand? Please, think before you make such accusations.


who runs the MOI? where is the cia in all this? when i say puppets i refer to those who tow the official line that will lead the country to be weaker.

Yes, PM Maliki is a puppet. Except for the fact he has publicly been at odds with the US over several issues. Maybe you should do some research.

Also, Sciri, Dawa, and the Sadr bloc are also all puppets. Please, don't waste my time with your baseless accusations.


are you such a fool that you will throw away your future for old 1400 year old scores?

Buwahahahaha!!! Yes, only '1400 year old scores.' What planet are you living on? This Shia-Sunni rivalry isn't an incident that just happened 1400 years ago. This has been ongoing over the past 1400 years! The situation in Iraq is a continuation of it. Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if you attrributed the whole 1400 year old conflict to some Zionist/Imperial conspiracy. Please, do educate yourself.



are you deaf? i am not insinuating!!! i could scream it from the highest mountain. you are being played. this secretarian conflict is being nurtured, pampered,condoned and authorized.

Read my above comments.

so, to address why i insulted you, and btw, it was not millions of people i was directing my insult to, only you, especially you, and you alone, the reason....

Yes, the best way to direct your insult at me, solely me, is to ridicule Shia indentity by referring to is as 'shit.'
Get a life.

What a worthless, ignorant human being! smart ass, filthy bitch, bitch, you bitch, you piece of shit! whore , ignorant whores, filthy mind. head is so far up your ass, child, not worth the feces of a stray dog , first rate piece of scum

Two can play this game:

i have no need to consult you about anything for you already stated your myopic views previously, the scewed logic blubbing from your sick brain, how very uncivil you are, i'm not telling you anything bigshot, your lack of anything resembling wisdom, your once again myopic vision, impotent strawman, go educate yourself, coward anon!!!, w/your limpdik, w/shiite puppets, flea infested stray dog that frequents the alleyways in the dirtiest part of the filthiest city, that pile of shiite (whoops i meant shit), mr strawman, dipshit, shiite puppets, like the rabid dog you are, lost all composure, flea infested dog, watch shite's to be the bottom (as in f..cked over ), strawman demands, really you ae drunk, liar, you are stuck n some sicko world, blowhard.

And after all that, this is my favorite line:

i used neither foul language

HAHAHAHAHA! Yes apparently your the one caught up in your dillusion of victimization that you can't even recognize your own faults. Talk about being hypocritical, that's probably why I wipe my ass with everything you have to say.

if christians got as bent out of shape as you did by my jousting (and yes, it was a joust, if you cannot tell from the 'whoops' statement, you are too dense) nobody would ever get along.

Well, Christians in your society don't have 1400 year oppression and massacres to think about. There also aren't car bombs going off daily in your society.

Also, why don't you just worry about your society and leave Iraq alone. You have nothing to do with Iraq and your opinion with regards to the situation in Iraq is worthless. Instead of lecturing to others what they should do with their country, do us all a favor and STFU :)

so keep up all your rightness, see how successful your life is then.

Care to elaborate?

blowhard.

bitch. See I can use foul language too.

To sum it up:

Your scenarios have been full of shit.

You refuse to acknowledge 1400 year old conflict and brush them aside as just '1400 year old scores.'

You refuse to see the situation in more than 2 dimensions.

You have ridiculed the will of the majority of the Iraqi people by demeaning their representatives, without basis might I add, as 'Shiite puppets.'

You have demeaned the identity of 150 million Shia Muslims in your fruitless attempt to supposedly insult me.

You refuse to acknowledge that the Sunni Arab terrorism has any fault in encouraging the growth of Shia militias.

Your a waste of my time, your a hypocrite, you have no credibility, and I think its best for you to not state your opinion again so as not to make a fool of your self.

Also, this statement from yours got me steaming earlier:

except it took a master (neocon)and w/shiite puppets playing chorus to get the one up . way to go. couldn't handle it w/out daddy neocon could ya?

Who the fuck are you sitting in the US with no connection to Iraq to insinuate that the Shia are cowardly puppets?

Let me give you a history lession, since your lack on knowledge has provided grounds for such:

- Go research the 1991 uprising, it was in that uprising when the Shia and the Kurds rose against tyranny, only NOT to be helped by their supposed Sunni Arab 'brethren,' yet rather mercilessly crushed by them!

- Go research Dujail

- Go research the purges of the Dawa party

I have lost all respect for you. How dare you degrade those who have sacrificed for the freedom of Iraq! If it weren't for the whole SUNNI MUSLIM WORLD lobbying against helping Shia and Kurds, they would have toppled this illegitimate dictatorship in no time.

"couldn't do it w/o daddy neocon, could ya?'

Go to hell you ignorant scum! Your lack of respect for the majority of the Iraqi people is evident in your posts. Even if you don't want to respect me, which I could give less of a fuck since it wouldn't mean much coming from someone like you, respect those who hae sacrificed for Iraq.

annie said...

LOL freak alert

annie said...

oh yeah.. cheney was in iraq too. well, the military guy said he was, then retracked. but then again they told the french, and you know how the french are (joke) he was so not in iraq the white house issued a statement saying he wasn't in iraq.

lots of fancy meeting going on right now. coup in the works. oil deal comin up.

i better not say anything about our resident blowhard, he may have a heart attack w/all that anxiety about the last 1400 years.

can't stop lol. i'm so bad

jane! you ignorant slut!

Anonymous said...

'Annie,'

As if your unwillingness to respond to my previous responses hasn't already shattered whatever little is left of your credibility to shit, I advise you to stop digging deeper holes for yourself.

It's clear you refuse to acknowledge opinions which conflict with yours. In any case, as we say in Arabic, ra'eetik ou teezie sawa (rough translation: 'I wipe my ass with your opinions').

So do us a favor Ms. anti-Shia conspiracy theorist, stick to analyzing Seattle politics. You have no place in Iraq and your opinion regarding the situation there is worthless.

Konfused Kid said...

It all began when Baathists, backed up by al-Qaeda, but still mainly Baathists, who started attacking Shiite areas, they masqueraded under the loose term 'Sunni insurgents', which is a byproduct of American simplification of Iraqi culture - and has greatly helped in amplifiying differences and heightening tensions.
While the majority of mischief in Iraq today is orchestrated by Shiite militas, they did not start it, the Mahdi's army was formed as early as 2003 and it was only active in killing Sunnis after the Samarra Shrine incidents, the Badr Brigade however, began massive extermination ever since interior minister Solagh came into office.
I think Anon is right on many points, but the blame does not fit squarely on 'Sunni insurgents', Badr Brigade had a lot to do with it, and it's basically the lack of a true patriotic Iraqi leadership on both sides that have led to this unfortunate consequence.

I will address this more expansively on an upcoming post.

Konfused Kid said...

oh, and Anon...you accuse Annie of being anti-Shia while it is clear that you are anti-Sunni. Please try and differentiate between Sunnis and Baathists. While I know this is hard, because now everything is either Sunni or Shiite, and Sunnis themselves, like Shiites too, did not bother to differentiate themselves from criminals. But if you want someone to take your opinions on an objective basis then you must start acting as one. If you can't do that, shut the fuck up.

Melantrys said...

So, let's see, we have here Annie, of the leftish political persuasion, unfortunately prone to flights of conspiracy theorism that even left wing, paranoid me can't relate to anymore and an anonymous Shi'ite whose thinking is quite obviously mainly driven by sectarianism and generalisations.

Annie, even though I don't agree with some of the theories you spin we're basically on the same side, so I have been rather tolerant and withholding judgment in the past. But Anonymous is right. He civilly argued his point of view and you started to insult him without any reason. You've been doing that a lot lately, with whoever opposed your views, and I am not tolerant anymore. You're giving the left a bad name. Ppl disagree, you insult them. Be civil!

Anonymous, I think you should try to think outside of being Shi'a.

The both of you: The spamming you've been doing is trolling. Your argument takes up most of the comment section of this blog entry, and, seriously, no sane person is willing to read through all that squabble.

Show some respect to the Kid's blog.

Kid: Dunno. *is off to work*

Anonymous said...

oh, and Anon...you accuse Annie of being anti-Shia while it is clear that you are anti-Sunni. Please try and differentiate between Sunnis and Baathists. While I know this is hard, because now everything is either Sunni or Shiite, and Sunnis themselves, like Shiites too, did not bother to differentiate themselves from criminals. But if you want someone to take your opinions on an objective basis then you must start acting as one. If you can't do that, shut the fuck up.

Listen kid, I never claimed to be objective, so don't come at me like you are already presuming my mindset. I'm sure its easy for you to make such accusations when your hold up in Athamiya, but it would be wise not to.

In any case, I will openly claim that I am for the partition of Iraq because its clear that these are irreconciable differences which can't be solved by forced different sects to live with one another. I also don't want to see the oil of southern Iraq go to people who support Dhari.

That said, it's hard for me to accept the fact that the current Sunni Arab political bloc in parliament (habibak il Tawafuq) has leaders in it who openly use scare tactics to rile their base up against the Persian (Shia) threat.

I remember Sheikh Illayan on al-Arabiya stating that openly and defiantly that "Shia are not the majority in Iraq." I'm sure your well acquainted with Sheikh Illayan, kid. If the number three man on the Tawafuq slate thinks like this publicy of Shia, then I can only imagine what the rank and file of Tawafuq think privately. Maybe you can clarify this for me since you have taken it upon yourself to analyze the mindset of others.

I look forward to your response, and unlike 'Annie,' I assume that you will actually address my points. Also, try not to be too presumptious regarding how I want my views to come across. Oh, and lest I forget, say hi to all those who know who demonstrated against baba Saddams verdict in Athamiya.

Konfused Kid said...

I am not making presumptions. Your ideals and viewpoint is quite clearly demonstrated by your previous statements.
Akhee il karim, You try to drag me into a sectarain argument, but because this will not help me or you and will create hatred, I will try to answer your questions as politely and nicely as I can, hoping that you try in your heart to have a favorable opinion of me as person and remember that a lot of people are still good and love each other.
While I live in Adhamiya, my climate is not a homoegneous Sunni, I have many Shiite friends from college and my two bestfriends who were killed earlier were Shiites. one was from Karbala and the other is buried in Najaf. While I identify myself as a Sunni Muslim, I do not identify myself as a POLITICAL Sunni Muslim, because all political parties today are bullshit, starting from Allyan to al-Hakim. My favorite politicians are Mithal al-Aloosi and Ayad Jamal al-Din. You should understand that there are a lot of good people in Adhamiya but they under the control of Baathists and al-Qaeda, just as the Mahdi's army holds virtual dictatorship of Sadr City. and by now, everyone is so afraid of each other - there is no trust on either side, and both sides are guilty my friend.
You remind me of a friend in Najaf, he puts his sect before his country and this is what has led us to where we are now, do not hope for division because I can see it already.

Good day to you and I hope that this letter finds you in well being, and if you intend to contine arguing in the same tone then do not bother waiting for my reply.

You are right, Sunnis and Shiites cannot be united based on their religion, but the majority of Iraqis are not religious and this is why there WAS a possible coexistence. Now it's being ripped apart and it has created mentalities like yourself. I have talked with such people for a long time, people who blame it all on America, people who blame it all on the Jews, people who blame it all on Iran and people who blame it all on Dhari. When are we going to stop acting so stupid and see that the fault mainly lies in ourselves.

Anonymous said...

FACT:

23 Nov 2006 - 202 dead
Wave of car bomb and mortar blasts strike Sadr City in Baghdad

7 April 2006 - 85 dead
Triple suicide bombing at Shia Buratha mosque in Baghdad

5 Jan 2006 - 110 dead
Suicide bombers hit Karbala shrine and police recruiting station in Ramadi

14 Sept 2005 - 182 dead
Suicide car bomber targets Baghdad labourers in worst of a series of bombs

28 Feb 2005 - 114 dead
Suicide car bomb hits government jobseekers in Hilla

2 March 2004 - 140 dead
Suicide bombers attack Shia festival-goers in Karbala and Baghdad

1 Feb 2004 - 105 dead
Twin attacks on Kurdish parties' offices in Irbil

Anonymous said...

I'm glad you are able to reply in an amicable way. Your politeness is appreciated.


I am not making presumptions. Your ideals and viewpoint is quite clearly demonstrated by your previous statements.

The presumption you made was that I was attempting to exhibit an objective viewpoint. I didn't make any attempt to hide where I was coming from, however you took it upon yourself to curse at me because I didn't fit your ideal objectiveness.

However, I will let that slide so this forum doesn't disintegrate into back and forth accusations.

Akhee il karim, You try to drag me into a sectarain argument, but because this will not help me or you and will create hatred, I will try to answer your questions as politely and nicely as I can, hoping that you try in your heart to have a favorable opinion of me as person and remember that a lot of people are still good and love each other.

Your intentions are admirable, however, people who fit the criteria that you've described above don't seem to have much influence in Iraq.


While I live in Adhamiya, my climate is not a homoegneous Sunni, I have many Shiite friends from college and my two bestfriends who were killed earlier were Shiites. one was from Karbala and the other is buried in Najaf.

I understand that, and from what I've read of your posts you are a very moderate Sunni Arab, relative to those in parliament of course.

However, what I remember from your posts is the sectarian mindset of those whom you described as living in Athamiya.

When I hear about the Imam at your mosque who acted as if he was about to cry after Zarqawi's death, it makes me want to hasten this decentralization even more.

While I identify myself as a Sunni Muslim, I do not identify myself as a POLITICAL Sunni Muslim, because all political parties today are bullshit, starting from Allyan to al-Hakim.
My favorite politicians are Mithal al-Aloosi and Ayad Jamal al-Din.


I admire Iyad Jamal al-Din very much too. I hold may of the same views he does. If you go read some of the transcripts of his TV appearance you will see that he also talks about the Arab hatred towards the Shia identity.

So even within well known moderate Shia like Jamal al-Din, there is a strong awareness of Shia identity.


You should understand that there are a lot of good people in Adhamiya but they under the control of Baathists and al-Qaeda,

Unfortunately, those good people you speak of haven't had their intentions materialize.

I mean I consider you to be fairly open minded, yet you even admitt as early as last year you were supporting people like Dhari. The same Dhari who calls al Qaeda a component of the 'resistance.'

and by now, everyone is so afraid of each other - there is no trust on either side, and both sides are guilty my friend.

Yes, but we have to realize what led to this situation.

Akhi the Shia are tired of seeing relentless bombings of their innocents. When Sistani was giving fatwas urging for 'unity,' there was silence from Dhari about the slaughter of innocent Shia men, women, and children.


You remind me of a friend in Najaf, he puts his sect before his country and this is what has led us to where we are now, do not hope for division because I can see it already.

What do you expect us to do? Shoo minstafeed min a 'united' Iraq? Shoo hata ashkaal Illayan ou Dhari yejoo alal parliament?

From a Shia perspective, we have seen nothing but bloodshed from the Sunni Arab community. I do realize that there are people with good intentions, however the only intentions that have materialized are the ones that have been oppressive.

Good day to you and I hope that this letter finds you in well being, and if you intend to contine arguing in the same tone then do not bother waiting for my reply.

Good day to you kamaan ya azizna.

Atleast this time you said 'if' rather than presuming I would respond in such a way.

You are right, Sunnis and Shiites cannot be united based on their religion, but the majority of Iraqis are not religious and this is why there WAS a possible coexistence. Now it's being ripped apart and it has created mentalities like yourself.

Mentalities like mine were harvested over a 1400 year time period. When the tyrant fell, many Shia thought that they could co-exist with the Sunni Arab community, and went out of their way to try and make that possible.

However, unfortunately, only the ill intentions within that community have materialized. As of now there is now benefit to such a 'unity.'

I have talked with such people for a long time, people who blame it all on America, people who blame it all on the Jews, people who blame it all on Iran and people who blame it all on Dhari. When are we going to stop acting so stupid and see that the fault mainly lies in ourselves.

That's the problem, because the people themselves think this way. I truly believe that most Sunni Arab Iraqis view Shia as inferior, and this could be due to their upbringings. This is also reflected in the politicians they elect/support. I don't see any reason to reconcile with such a superiority mentality.

In any case ya akhna il aziz, InshAllah this violence will end and all will live in peace. Allah kareem.

annie said...

ok, i heard you melantrys. i will try to be more civil. and i apologize for contributing to the uncivilness and to anon in general for not being more sympathetic to his POV.

and about those conspiracy theories. i will be the first to admit i know way less about sunni/shia than any iraq. and perhaps you might allow that i know my own government and their capabilities more than an outsider.
just sayin. they are not benign.

Anonymous said...

I'm another American who knows my government and its capabilities. Annies' "conspiracy theories" don't sound out of line to me. I don't find it unreasonable that when the going got rough against the "insurgents" Negraponte and Steele were sent in to what they did in El Salvador. Why else did they go if not to help DAWA train their death squads?

I read an interview with a demolitition expert who said it would take a good crew about 12 hours to set the explosives to blow up the golden dome the way it blew. There were US check points in the area at the time.

Does anyone believe that the guys behind Bush and their wanna be 007s wouldn't do things like that. Don't you think they would try to use 1400 of conflict to their advantage? And yes, they are short sighted and ignorant enough not to see the long term consequences.

Anonymous said...

WOW. It is interesting to hear that the " top sunni figure" as you called hinm, in iraq is supporting alqaeda, and refusing to issue a fatwa ( an edict ) against those who did 9/11. they should have arrested him long time ago.

Anonymous said...

against those who did 9/11

weren't mosy of those guys saudi's?

The recent attack on the reputation of Harith al-Dhari, head of the Muslim Scholars Association of Iraq, was triggered by his political activities in the region, and not by anything he said. He had been saying the same things about the illegitimacy of the occupation since 2003. What was new, and what so alarmed the Green Zone people, was his visit to Saudi Arabia and the fact he had a discussion with the Saudi King.

maybe cheney's visit to that same king a couple days later means something.

WOW

wow is right, i'm shocked. 3,000 american dead! what is that worth?? a million iraqi's? 2 million? if we arrest Harith al-Dhari can we also arrest george bush?? how about some war crimes trials.. i'm ready.

maybe we can get some confessions american style, we are so lucky (aren't we now) that we have dispensed w/those pesky genevas. much more thrilling to be uncivilized. don't you agree?

annie said...

Al-Dhari , who is an outspoken critic of al-Maliki�s government and the presence of U.S.-led foreign troops, charged that the Shiite-dominated administration is using a curfew declared in Baghdad after the bombings as a way to carry out attacks on Sunnis.

But he also urged Iraqis not to join in violence, which he said threatens to tear the country apart.

bakayaro said...

Actually I think that Dhari has condemned terrorist bombings many many times ..
I agree though that he hasn't spoken against AQ by name very much, probably because he's afraid of them or something. His opinions don't agree very much with AQ except in refusing the political process, but his reasons are very different from AQ.

Dhari refuses the political process because he's trying to be idealistic in his national view. AQ refuses it because they don't believe in anything but the gun when it comes to dealing with others (even if these others are Iraqis).

Dhari calls for national unity (الوحدة الوطنية) where as AQ considers the whole "national unity" concept a deep pile of shit that must be burned and destroyed.

Dhari is trying hard to make the resistance look good, AQ is trying hard to make it look bad; or rather, they don't give shit about how other people look at them.

Hardcore (ideological) AQ followers in general don't like Dhari; Zarqawi himself has considered Dhari to be a hypocrite.
Hobbysit AQ followers love everyone whom America doesn't like, from Shaviz to Saddam, to Dhari to Zarqawi.

Lynnette in Minnesota said...

Mel,

It may look like you and Annie are on the same side, but I rather doubt it.

There's liberal and then there is looney leftist. One is open minded, the other is as narrowminded as any rabid right winger.

You fall in the first category and Annie falls in the second.

ella said...

Anonymous

You may be right in saying that most ( I would say some) iraqi Sunni arabs view shia as inferior, but it is also true that majority of Shiat view themselves as victimized and victims (which is partially right) and their own religion as superior. Not to mention that sunni and shia in their majority view Kurds as inferior and beneath notice (look at how many jokes about Kurds stupidity both of you have). It seems that even Iraqi bloggers do not often talk to the kurdish bloggers.

Bakayaro

I have to disagree with you about al Dhari.
Al Dhari and his Association of Muslim Scholars did not put fatwa against Al Qaeda and the killing of shia. As Sadr asked them to do that many times. al Dhari also refused political process not because he is a patriot but because he wants power for himself and his people. He is afraid, as are most sunni, of losing their influence and power. That's the main reason he and his organization does not condemn al Qaeda and that's the main reason he does not condemn violence done by Sunni.
As for his relation with Al Qaeda...........Al Qaeda wants chaos in Iraq and it seems it is getting it, thanks also to Al Dhari.

BTW why is your nickname a japanese curse?

ella said...

ps. It's quite disturbing addressing you as Bakayaro-san.

annie said...

(look at how many jokes about Kurds stupidity both of you have)

how did i miss this ella? care to provide links? quotes? i've been around these websites for a while now, i never heard any stupid kurd jokes. this is the first i heard. are they like polish jokes or something. do people really follow this crap? illuminate me please.

There's liberal and then there is looney leftist.

oh lynn, you continue to be such a boring blowhard. here, go chew on this for awhile. apparently the majority of the planet is looney leftist in your book.

to succeed in permanently changing the country's image, the country has to be prepared to change its behavior. He reiterates his strong belief that a reputation cannot be constructed: it has to be earned.

get it, it's a two way street.

from the nyt article linked to above

Some American commanders believe that Mr. Sadr retains influence over some groups he has declared to be renegades. If that were the case, the splinter groups would be functioning like the Salvadoran death squads of the 1980s; those operated quasi-independently and gave their government a measure of deniability even when it almost certainly had ordered killings...

Less well known is that before the invasion, the United States also cozied up to some of the Shiite militias, who were then expatriates, with promises that they would not be immediately disbanded if they returned to Iraq, said Amatzia Baram, director of the Ezri Center of Iran and Gulf Studies at the University of Haifa in Israel.


little innocent lyn thinks anyone who implicates anything the US does as being anything but lily WHITE
is ulra wacko leftist. get a grip looneylyn When a wave of torture and murder staggered a small U.S. ally, truth was a casualty.

maybe cheney/negroponte just bit off more than they can chew. and now the very people we have been calling insurgents are the ones we may be aligning with, no? this is what the evidence points towards, or is the nyt part of the looney left?

your ideas rarely contradict any from members of the narrowminded ...... rabid right winger. set so don't go claiming to be 'open minded moderate' etc etc just because you feign politeness when i prefer more blunt speak. you dish out insults as good as the rest of us. and yer loony ta boot!

Anonymous said...

High profile bombings like the one on Thursday, especially on Sadr City, are simplified as from "Sunni insurgents", but they are almost always from Al Quaida and its small group of Sunni allies of convenience. Their purpose is to incite the volatile militias of Sadr in taking out their frustration on Sunnis in general which, unfortuately they are happy to do. The bulk of the Sunni insurgents are defending their neighborhoods and wish to live to fight another day. Maliki is continuing to show to be a dancing monkey of Sadr, but the Iraqi people, even Shiites, are tired of his hypocrisy of talking tough against militias but doing the opposite when Sadr is involved. http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/ shows the general chatter of the militias on both sides, conveniently translated into english. Although there is foreboding, except for Sadr's militias, everybody else is pretty much taking defensive positions which means full scale civil war is still on hold. Another positive is that this is a sign that normal people are not turning their heads which was the prevalent sentiment not too long ago. It is up to the Iraqi people, but it is obvious that a prime minister that has no ties with Sadr is needed to reign in the Shiite militias doing the bulk of the killing. As for Al Quaida and its "Shura council" that continues to provoke the Shiites, that is going to be a long term fight that eventually the Iraqis will have to take over completely from the USA. They need a cleaner security force instead of one that currently has the appearance of being infiltrated by Sadr's gangs. All is not lost. Pessimism will seem to be the standard mood, but the atmosphere is ripe for changes for the positive. The bulk of the Iraqi people still don't believe in sectarianism. If those people can take charge and link together, the minority who are looking for a fight can be beaten back.

Anonymous said...

the atmosphere is ripe for changes for the positive.

as in 'its so bad the only way we can go is up?'

everybody else is pretty much taking defensive positions which means full scale civil war is still on hold.

excuse me? do you have anyone on the ground you can link to? because this is not what we are hearing elsewhere

However, for the people living on the streets, for Iraqis in their homes, if this is not civil war, or a form of it, then they do not want to see what one really looks like.

seriously,where is your pep talk coming from?

The place is a mess — it's an absolute mess.

ella said...

http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/ shows the general chatter of the militias on both sides, conveniently translated into english.
sang j moon
You probably did not notice that zeyad did not give only militia chatter, and I think most of it was sunni (look at description of mahdi army and what district the chatter originates).
There is a civil war in Baghdad but chatter and the "absolute mess" professed by journalists make it, in my opinion, seem even worse than it really is.
Iraq does not end in Baghdad and elsewhere there is relative quiet.
That said, Al Qaeda said that it will concentrate on Baghdad, will try do make everything there chaotic and it seems it did, or at least started shia and sunni going in the direction they want them to go. Not that they needed much of a push, unfortunately.

annie said...

There is a civil war in Baghdad but chatter and the "absolute mess" professed by journalists make it, in my opinion, seem even worse than it really is.
Iraq does not end in Baghdad and elsewhere there is relative quiet.


interesting perspective

annie said...

Between 2 percent and 5 percent of Iraq's 27 million people have been killed, wounded or uprooted since the Americans invaded in 2003, calculates Anthony Cordesman of the Center for International and Strategic Studies.

``This is civil war,'' he said.

Since midsummer, Shiite militias, Sunni insurgent groups, ad-hoc Sunni self-defense groups and tribes have accelerated campaigns of sectarian cleansing that are forcing countless thousands of Shiites and Sunnis in Baghdad to seek safety among their own kind.

Whole towns north and south of Baghdad are locked in the same sectarian struggle, among them the central Shiite city of Balad, still under siege by gunmen from surrounding Sunni towns after a bloody spate of sectarian massacres last month.

Even outside the center of sectarian strife in the central region of the country, Shiite factions battle each other in the south, Sunni tribes and factions clash in the west. Across Iraq, the criminal gangs that emerged with the collapse of law and order rule patches of turf as mini-warlords.

......

``The thing is, because Iran and Syria both have spoiling power in Iraq, if you could neutralize them,'' it would ease some of the many pressures within Iraq, Hiltermann said. But he said the two countries may demand a mighty trade-off: for Syria, U.S. help with its biggest stated aim, winning back the Golan Heights from Israel; for Iran, U.S. compromise over its nuclear program.


Doesn't this last paragraph tell us that it is Israel that stands in the way of enlisting help of relevant nations to hammer out a settlement, or am I missing something?

Anonymous said...

For a real civil war, you would only have to look at the first Lebanese Civil War to see the contrast in what is happening in Iraq. Lebanon is just around the corner of reminding the world what a real civil war looks like. In a real civil war, you have spates of violence which results in full scale army clashes and multiples of the casualties occurring now along with the constant low level deaths. You had the 600 people killed on Bloody Saturday, 1,000 people killed each in the Karantina and Damour Massacres. 2,000 Palestinians were massacred as Syria entered the war on the Maronite side. You have neighbors invading with their armies as Syria and Israel did. You have refugeee movements at least ten times that of what is happening in Iraq. People who find what is happening in Iraq as unbearable will go screaming under a rug when a real civil war breaks out, and there will be absolutely no doubt that a civil war is occurring. When you actually have Sunni and Shiite armies moving to capture land from each other with the USA unable to deter them even in face-to-face combat, you will know what true civil war looks like. Right now, what you have is Al Quaida and its small number of Sunni allies of convenience provoking Sadr's militias with high profile attacks especially the suicide ones, but the bulk of Sunnis are only concerned about protecting their neghborhood and living to fight another day. Sadr's militias cause the bulk of the deaths and it is mainly due to Maliki not clamping down on them because of his conflict of interest ties with Sadr. When leadership fails like this, noone can afford to be a bystander in Iraq. The majority of Iraqis still believe Iraq will be one country 5 years from now, and that majority needs to stand up and show the minority that is dominating the news who is boss in Iraq. Those who continue to cower in victim mentality will only let the extremist minorities determine their fate.

ella said...

Sang J. Moon
It really depends on definition of a civil war. The one from Wikipedia says that "A civil war is a war in which parties within the same culture, society or nationality fight for political power or control of an area. Political scientists use two criteria: the warring groups must be from the same country and fighting for control of the political center, control over a separatist state or to force a major change in policy. The second criteria is that at least 1,000 people must have been killed in total, with at least 100 from each side"
On the other hand in algerian Civil War about 200,000 people lost their lives, in Lebanon 150,000 with around 1 million fleeing the country, in Nigeria 3 million people died, in Bangladesh up to 300,000 died. So it seems that in civil war do not need armies but only militia rampaging through the country. However Iraqi Kurdistan and Basra area are quiet, so the civil war, if one can call it that, is concentrated mainly in Baghdad, as are the journalists of all stripes looking for the news.
BTW Anybody heard some awfull news from Kurdistan?
No, that's what I thought.

Anonymous said...

Can someone explain to me why there is all this chatter about whether it is a civil war ot not? Is this about framing? Either way the same amount of people die. A rose by any other name and all that. Why the debate?

Something to chew on

Anonymous said...

Hi ella

You may be right in saying that most ( I would say some) iraqi Sunni arabs view shia as inferior,

Well it doesn't help when the overwhelming majority of Sunni Arabs vote for people (like Shiekh Illayan) who publicly proclaim that 'Shia aren't the majority in Iraq.'

I think that justifies my statements.

but it is also true that majority of Shiat view themselves as victimized and victims (which is partially right)

Well it's hard not to feel victimized when a sect (Shias, in this case) has been going through 1400 years of oppression and the minute they gain power the whole Sunni Arab world congratulates them by sending them suicide bombers.


and their own religion as superior.

So do people of many other faiths. In fact, I've heard many Sunnis openly call Shia 'primitive' because of their religious commemorations.


Not to mention that sunni and shia in their majority view Kurds as inferior and beneath notice (look at how many jokes about Kurds stupidity both of you have).

The difference is that this alleged mentality doesn't materialize into savage car bombings that kill 200 innocent men, women, and children, as we saw in Sadr City last week.

ella said...

anonymous

Yes, all of us know that iraqis are dying, we would not be here, I think, if we did not care about what is happening in Iraq and with Iraqis. Yes, it is somewhat academic. But the labels are often important as they tell you how to look at what is going on and insist on different solutions to the events.
Look at the names: "mujahidin" ,"terrorists" , "resistance","fighters", "militiamen", "insurgents"
And then "Wahhabis", "saddamists", "nawasib", "al rafidha", "al turs","iraqis".
See the difference?

ella said...

Anonymous

Yes, I know that in many countries you are treated as inferiors (ex. Pakistan, KSA) and I know that the martyrdom of Hussein is one of the most important events in your faith.
But I wish that instead of blaming each other you try to work with each other in Iraq. It may seem right now very difficult, in fact, next to impossible, but I hope you try.

So do people of many other faiths. In fact, I've heard many Sunnis openly call Shia 'primitive' because of their religious commemorations.
Well, yes, they call Ashura primitive, and not only them. So what, why not disregard them and laugh at these people. It may be difficult at first but then it gets easier.
The difference is that this alleged mentality doesn't materialize into savage car bombings that kill 200 innocent men, women, and children, as we saw in Sadr City last week.
True, but then some shia torched couple of sunni. That is savage and in my view should be condemned.

Anonymous said...

It is important to define geopolitically if a civil war is occurring in Iraq or not because if it is technically considered a civil war, the Democrats in the USA will have leverage to push for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq because it would mean the fight is lost. They would cut funding if the president continued to try to stay in Iraq. To Sadr's militias and Al Quaida and its cronies, this is desired so that they can remove the major obstacle to their greatest chance at taking over Iraq. To the majority of Iraqis, this will be disaster no matter what their sentiment about foreign occupation is. Iraq would surpass even the first Lebanese Civil War in the carnage that would follow. If this is the endgame you seek, then you would indeed press to call what is happening in Iraq a civil war. If you want to avoid this endgame, you also want to avoid the civil war label politically to the outside.

Anonymous said...

Hi ella,

I'm presuming your previous response was addressed to the 'anonymous' before me. In any case, I'd like to thank you for responding to my comments.



Anonymous

Yes, I know that in many countries you are treated as inferiors (ex. Pakistan, KSA) and I know that the martyrdom of Hussein is one of the most important events in your faith.
But I wish that instead of blaming each other you try to work with each other in Iraq. It may seem right now very difficult, in fact, next to impossible, but I hope you try.



I was just responding to your comment regarding the victimization of Shia as being partially true.

Don't get me wrong, I would like for Shia to work with Sunni Arabs, however, it's hard to do when they're represented by people like Dulaimi, Illayan, and Dhari.

Well, yes, they call Ashura primitive, and not only them. So what, why not disregard them and laugh at these people. It may be difficult at first but then it gets easier.

I'm sure a lot of Shia do disregard them. However, I was just responding to your comments about Shia viewing their religion as superior by making the point that many Sunnis do to as well as people of others faiths.

So the view that one's religion is superior to another's isn't an exclusively Shia view.


True, but then some shia torched couple of sunni. That is savage and in my view should be condemned.

Yes, but that was a reaction to the savage slaughter of 200+ innocent civilians in Sadr City.

I'm not saying it's right, but I am saying we have to look at why Shia militia's are responding they way they are and why they have support.

annie said...

BTW Anybody heard some awfull news from Kurdistan?

maybe not awful, but interesting.turns out the US special envoy for countering the PKK is also on the lobbiest of lockeed martin, the uber 22 billion plus of iraqi defense contracts that also just signed a sweet deal to provide arms to turkey to counter... pkk!

Our new man in Ankara will be seen as an arms merchant in diplomat's clothing. He should be replaced.

business

as usual

Anonymous said...

Thank you for answering my question Sang J. Moon

It is important to define geopolitically if a civil war is occurring in Iraq or not because if it is technically considered a civil war, the Democrats in the USA will have leverage to push for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq because it would mean the fight is lost.

Does this mean if it is in fact a civil war in Iraq America cannot win? Does this mean calling it a civil war is a partisan issue? If that is the case, would it be reasonable to assume that someone aiming to remain in Iraq may deny a civil war is occurring, even if it was, because they were trying to influence one political party in America?
Does it mean Iraq is really not as bad as the news and blogs say, they are lying to us, so that we will leave?

They would cut funding if the president continued to try to stay in Iraq.

Why would the president want to stay in Iraq if a civil war means Americas goals are lost?

To Sadr's militias and Al Quaida and its cronies, this is desired so that they can remove the major obstacle to their greatest chance at taking over Iraq.

It is not only the militias that want America to leave Iraq. Don't most Iraqis want the occupation to leave? Do you think maybe Iraqis are exaggerating the war to get the occupation out?

To the majority of Iraqis, this will be disaster no matter what their sentiment about foreign occupation is.

What will be a disaster? A civil war, or calling it a civil war?

Iraq would surpass even the first Lebanese Civil War in the carnage that would follow. If this is the endgame you seek, then you would indeed press to call what is happening in Iraq a civil war. If you want to avoid this endgame, you also want to avoid the civil war label politically to the outside.

I'm not sure I'm following you. Do you mean if one calls it what it may be, it makes it worse? What if it is a civil war? Do you mean if it is denied, it makes it go away? What do you cal it then? A big scuffle in may places in Iraq? I heard somewhere once they where uniforms it is official. I also heard some militias were going to get uniforms of Sadams old army. Will this make a difference?

Sorry to ask so many questions. I just keep hearing all this fuss about civil war recently, is it because the Democratic party makes it up for their agenda? Is this all because of the Democrats? Or is it the Republicans? What about the Iraqis? Do they think it is a civil war?

annie said...

BTW Anybody heard some awfull news from Kurdistan?

maybe not awful, but interesting.turns out the US special envoy for countering the PKK is also on the lobbiest of lockeed martin, the uber 22 billion plus of iraqi defense contracts that also just signed a sweet deal to provide arms to turkey to counter... pkk!

Our new man in Ankara will be seen as an arms merchant in diplomat's clothing. He should be replaced.

business

as usual

ella said...

Annie

How many times you will recycle one and the same news story? I think you (or Bruno, or Italian) already posted it couple of times somewhere else.
PKK is active in Turkey, not in Iraqi Kurdistan. However, I would like to thank you, in the name of Kurds, that you acknowledge that part of Turkey is also a proper part of Kurdistan. Only don't tell it to the Turks when you visit Turkey, you may go to prison and even your american citizenship may not help you.

annie said...

However, I would like to thank you, in the name of Kurds, that you acknowledge that part of Turkey is also a proper part of Kurdistan.

?? could you elaborate? is kurdistan proper? kurdistan is a (proper)region is it not, but not its own (proper)country? so of course the region of kurdistan includes the part in turkey, no?

so your reference to thanking me, i'm not sure i follow? does turkey not acknowledge kurdistan exists as a region, or a proper region? does a region need to be 'properly' acknowledged to be a region?

does the US support of the kurds stop at the border of turkey? i saw the map of the new middle east at the airforce website and the projected new country of kurdistan moves into turkey does it not? so i assume that means the US plan is to include this region into turkey and be supportive of it? but i read at a state department website the US is not supportive of the PKK or their advances into turkey. please excuse my naivete regarding this region. but it does confuse me a little because the US and israel have strong alliances w/turkey. so where would we stand in a possible conflict? w/turkey side of kurdistan, or w/iraqi side? if we supported the conflict by expanding the proposed country of kurdistan into the already existing region of turkey, would we not be in conflict w/turkey. but we are supportive of lockeed martin selling arms to turkey, presumably to counter this expansion. so i'm not clear how this we are not in favor of the position of the pkk and turkey. but if you are thanking me, you being all things pro US policy i presume this means we support the expansion, no? in that case, why are we selling the ammo to turkey?

ella said...

Anonymous @ 9:07

It may seem that I owe you apology.
Just now, on other blog I have read that the first mention of sunni being burned alive by shia in western press was by AP. Cited as a source was Iraqi police Capt. Jamil Hussein. It seems he does not exist, at least americans are saying that he is not employed by Iraqi police nor he is employed by Iraqi Interior Ministry. That "alledged" capt. is a press source of many shia atrocities, and it seems that he reports only shia ones.
Now I would like to ask Iraqis in Iraq reading this blog (if there are such) to tell me if you know anybody who saw this attrocity, or heard from somebody who saw it and who, in his/her opinion, is reliable source. Thanks.

annie said...

ella, you didn't clarify any of my questions. i am very sincere in my curiousity. perhaps if you cannot address them someone else can take a shot. certainly there is some rigamarole in terms of aliegences? no?

ralston/cnn

hersh

The former Israeli intelligence officer acknowledged that since late last year Israel has been training Kurdish commando units to operate in the same manner and with the same effectiveness as Israel’s most secretive commando units, the Mistaravim. The initial goal of the Israeli assistance to the Kurds, the former officer said, was to allow them to do what American commando units had been unable to do—penetrate, gather intelligence on, and then kill off the leadership of the Shiite and Sunni insurgencies in Iraq. (I was unable to learn whether any such mission had yet taken place.) “The feeling was that this was a more effective way to get at the insurgency,” the former officer said. “But the growing Kurdish-Israeli relationship began upsetting the Turks no end. Their issue is that the very same Kurdish commandos trained for Iraq could infiltrate and attack in Turkey.”
...
The Israeli decision to seek a bigger foothold in Kurdistan—characterized by the former Israeli intelligence officer as “Plan B”—has also raised tensions between Israel and Turkey. It has provoked bitter statements from Turkish politicians and, in a major regional shift, a new alliance among Iran, Syria, and Turkey, all of which have significant Kurdish minorities......

In early June, Intel Brief, a privately circulated intelligence newsletter produced by Vincent Cannistraro, a retired C.I.A. counterterrorism chief, and Philip Giraldi, who served as the C.I.A.’s deputy chief of base in Istanbul in the late nineteen-eighties, said:

Turkish sources confidentially report that the Turks are increasingly concerned by the expanding Israeli presence in Kurdistan and alleged encouragement of Kurdish ambitions to create an independent state. . . . The Turks note that the large Israeli intelligence operations in Northern Iraq incorporate anti-Syrian and anti-Iranian activity, including support to Iranian and Syrian Kurds who are in opposition to their respective governments.


so, where are we in all this? is the subject taboo? do we support an expanded kurdistan or don't we, and is this why you thanked me? or were you snarking and are supportive of the border of turkey remaining? which i presume is ralstons postion as it reads in the link, sort of.

ella said...

Annie dear

?? could you elaborate? is kurdistan proper? kurdistan is a (proper)region is it not, but not its own (proper)country? so of course the region of kurdistan includes the part in turkey, no?
Why don't you go some googling and look at maps published in Turkey and in Syria, they would answer your questions.

please excuse my naivete regarding this region. but it does confuse me a little because the US and israel have strong alliances w/turkey. so where would we stand in a possible conflict?
You are living in USA not me, so I don't understand why you do not know your own country's policy?.

but if you are thanking me, you being all things pro US policy i presume this means we support the expansion, no?
But I thanked you in the name of Kurds, kurds are neither anti nor pro american, they are pro-Kurds.

BTW
You are quoting Hersh so frequently. Is it because investigative journalists like Seymour Hersh reveal the extent of… the cowardice of the American regime, you live under?

annie said...

You are living in USA not me, so I don't understand why you do not know your own country's policy?.


oh, you are so very helpful ella. like i am supposed to know my countries foriegn policy on every region on the friggin map? why even bother to respond at all? you essentially say nothing except go look it up yourself!
i don't need to look at a map to know where the region of kurdistan is. my question to you was what the hell you meant by that you acknowledge that part of Turkey is also a proper part of Kurdistan.

proper?

Why don't you go some googling and look at maps published in Turkey and in Syria, they would answer your questions.

your friggin attitude needs serious adjustment. never mind already, i could care less anymore about what your snark is up to. i'm just going to follow my instincts and assume that because kurdistan is a cultural region and area where the culture is predominant is part of kurdistan. i could give a hoot about proper. really, get over yourself and show a little more civility you oaf.

annie said...


does the US support of the kurds stop at the border of turkey? i saw the map of the new middle east at the airforce website and the projected new country of kurdistan moves into turkey does it not? so i assume that means the US plan is to include this region into turkey and be supportive of it?


i noticed how you completley evaded this issue. ella, miss knowitallgolookitupongooglesmartypants

annie said...

Is it because investigative journalists like Seymour Hersh reveal the extent of… the cowardice of the American regime, you live under?

that is an interesting perspective of why i might read one of the most respected journalists on the planet! tell me, why do you read hersh, or do you prefer to get your hersh news watered down. or perhaps you just avoid any topic he covers. hell no you don't want to know about abu ghaib! no my lai for ella!

i subscribe to the newyorker ella, do you have a problem w/that? i read almost every single article in the newyorker, especilly i love the talk of the town. what exactly about that article of hershes i linked to offends you? what part of it demonstrates the cowardice of the American regime.

seriously? when has hersh ever painted the united states as cowardly? bitterness just oozes out of your writing ella, and spills onto the page, you really don't like being on the wrong side of history do you? any challenge to your pro americana pov really threatens you doesn't? maybe its because you live in a world of illusion and any message you can't control is a message you want to anialate. does truth threaten you ella? do i?

i am totally accostomed to living in a world where a spade is not called a spade. but you know what, a rose by any other name smells just as sweet. you can call a civil war any dam thing you want and just as many people die, and great journalists are here to serve the people by informing them of the truth, something you must find offensive.

i understand cowardice ella, not from hersh, but from you.

you think you can snark the shit out of me? little ms "long autumn nights". little ms "how are your sleeping habits". i promise you one thing, i will follow up any and all bs from you with your own medicine to the point you will wish you had never opened your big snarky mouth in my direction. consider yourself warned. unless you want to be made a permanent fool of, get off my back.

all you had to do was answer my simple misunderstanding of your comment about kurds, but no, and it leads to this, proud? you must be a glutton for punishment.

ella said...

Annie

So I was right.
And your this words in you post"any challenge to your pro americana pov really threatens you doesn't? maybe its because you live in a world of illusion and any message you can't control is a message you want to anialate. does truth threaten you ella?" shows you feelings.

I do pity you. Not that you think that, but that you project you feelings of bitterness on someone else. And "glutton for punishment" I am not. You are.

"i will follow up any and all bs from you with your own medicine to the point you will wish you had never opened your big snarky mouth in my direction. consider yourself warned."

LOL

ella said...

Sorry
Should be "And the following words in your post" I/o "your this words in you post"

annie said...

So I was right.

right about what? that i should go to google? that kurds would be happy that i acknowledged kurdistan was partly in turkey? right about what? pat yourself on the back for being right about something i ask you a question about?

LOL.

I do pity you. Not that you think that, but that you project you feelings of bitterness on someone else. And "glutton for punishment" I am not. You are.

if you are going to insult me you need to be a little more original. why don't you at least be a little more specific about what this evidence of my bitterness is? because this is fun calling you on your pathetic attempts to avoid answering my questions about US position on turkey in its new ME map? huh? you didn't like the friggin question so you decided to amp up the attitude?

I do pity you.

thats a neat trick. you get stuck in a corner so you pity the one who challenges you. you don't feel challenged ella? prove it. how do you resolve the issue of the US postion? i ask you an honest question that i was quite sincere about, you answer me w/snark and accuse me of being bitter. hmm. little like the cat calling the kettle don't you think?

lol

what, you didn't like they way i slapped you down and shut you up over at 24's when you made rpeated attemots to drag my personal life , or your imaginings of it, into the thread. i noticed when i threatened to ask omar to intervine that shut you up for good. so, harboring old anymousities are ya. get used to it. your too easy. you wrap yourself in spin continuously and your an easy mark. you are out of your league trying to corner me because i travel in truth.

And "glutton for punishment" I am not.

ha! prove it, stfu

or answer the question about turkey in a polite way. or i suppose you can just make comments that make no sense whatsoever and not answer politiely when someone asks you the intent? and this is me projecting on you??

ha! you wish.

maybe its because you live in a world of illusion and any message you can't control is a message you want to anialate. does truth threaten you ella?"

what's it like traveling in your little world of neocon/zionists do no harm? workin out for ya?

i didn't think so. you represent about the most disliked segment on the planet right now.

and you pity me. that's almost cute, is you weren't so pathetic

ella said...

Oh dear.
Annie, get a life. :-)

annie said...

Oh dear.
Annie, get a life. :-)


thanks for the smile ella, finally you are making sense. what came over you?

i have a wonderful life btw, wouldn't trade it for the moon, sun or stars.
i was born w/luck,love and fortune.

just wish i get this damn criminal out of the WH, flush all the rapid responders down the toilet and wake up in the mornin to find out iraq found itself a leader who could unify the country to throw the invaders out!

Coach Factory said...

ray ban sunglasses, nike free, michael kors, vans shoes, ray ban pas cher, hollister, sac louis vuitton, sac louis vuitton, nike roshe run, nike roshe run, abercrombie and fitch, nike blazer, new balance pas cher, nike air max, nike roshe, nike free pas cher, barbour, oakley pas cher, louboutin, louis vuitton uk, hollister, vanessa bruno, nike huarache, hogan outlet, sac guess, polo lacoste, lululemon, north face, air force, timberland, nike trainers, ralph lauren, mac cosmetics, converse pas cher, polo ralph lauren, mulberry, longchamp, hollister, vans pas cher, longchamp, michael kors pas cher, north face, louis vuitton, sac hermes, michael kors, sac longchamp, air max, abercrombie and fitch, nike tn, sac burberry

Coach Factory said...

chi flat iron, reebok outlet, marc jacobs, canada goose jackets, lululemon outlet, valentino shoes, bottega veneta, ugg boots, canada goose, asics running shoes, canada goose, moncler, rolex watches, ugg, instyler, ferragamo shoes, birkin bag, air max, moncler outlet, north face outlet, soccer jerseys, north face jackets, beats by dre, canada goose, p90x, new balance shoes, hollister, jimmy choo outlet, ugg australia, timberland boots, ghd, uggs outlet, celine handbags, canada goose outlet, iphone 6 cases, baseball bats, babyliss pro, ugg boots, nfl jerseys, herve leger, mont blanc, giuseppe zanotti, wedding dresses, mcm handbags, moncler, insanity workout, ugg pas cher, canada goose uk, soccer shoes, moncler

Coach Factory said...

nike free, air max, oakley sunglasses, tory burch outlet, michael kors outlet, chanel handbags, michael kors outlet, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton handbags, coach factory outlet, longchamp outlet, ray ban sunglasses, louboutin, kate spade handbags, louboutin shoes, true religion outlet, prada outlet, louis vuitton outlet, longchamp handbags, burberry outlet, louboutin outlet, tiffany and co, nike shoes, louis vuitton, jordan shoes, true religion jeans, michael kors outlet, coach outlet store online, coach outlet, burberry outlet, kate spade outlet, gucci outlet, michael kors outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton outlet stores, michael kors outlet, louis vuitton outlet, air max, ray ban sunglasses, polo ralph lauren outlet, coach purses, true religion jeans, longchamp handbags, oakley sunglasses cheap, christian louboutin shoes, michael kors outlet, prada handbags