bobthedestroyer Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 "SAMARRA, Iraq - Insurgents posing as police destroyed the golden dome of one of Iraq's holiest Shiite shrines Wednesday, setting off an unprecendented spasm of sectarian violence. Angry crowds thronged the streets, militiamen attacked Sunni mosques, and at least 19 people were killed. With the gleaming dome of the 1,200-year-old Askariya shrine reduced to rubble, some Shiites lashed out at the United States as partly to blame. The violence — many of the 90 attacks on Sunni mosques were carried out by Shiite militias — seemed to push Iraq closer to all-out civil war than at any point in the three years since the U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Many leaders called for calm. "We are facing a major conspiracy that is targeting Iraq's unity," said President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd. "We should all stand hand in hand to prevent the danger of a civil war." President Bush pledged American help to restore the mosque after the bombing north of Baghdad, which dealt a severe blow to U.S. efforts to keep Iraq from falling deeper into sectarian violence. "The terrorists in Iraq have again proven that they are enemies of all faiths and of all humanity," Bush said. "The world must stand united against them, and steadfast behind the people of Iraq." British Prime Minister Tony Blair also condemned the bombing and pledged funds toward the shrine's reconstruction. U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and the top American commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, called the attack a deliberate attempt to foment sectarian strife and warned it was a "critical moment for Iraq." No one was reported injured in the bombing of the shrine in Samarra. But at least 19 people, including three Sunni clerics, were killed in the reprisal attacks that followed, mainly in Baghdad and predominantly Shiite provinces to the south, according to the Iraqi Islamic Party, the country's largest Sunni political group. Many of the attacks appeared to have been carried out by Shiite militias that the United States wants to see disbanded. In predominantly Shiite Basra, police said militiamen broke into a prison, hauled out 12 inmates, including two Egyptians, two Tunisians, a Libyan, a Saudi and a Turk, and shot them dead in reprisal for the shrine attack. Major Sunni groups joined in condemning the attack, and a leading Sunni politician, Tariq al-Hashimi, urged clerics and politicians to calm the situation "before it spins out of control." The country's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, sent instructions to his followers forbidding attacks on Sunni mosques, and called for seven days of mourning. But he hinted, as did Vice President Adil Abdul-Mahdi, that religious militias could be given a bigger security role if the government cannot protecting holy shrines — an ominous sign of the Shiite reaction ahead. Both Sunnis and the United States fear the rise of such militias, which the disaffected minority views as little more than death squads. American commanders believe they undercut efforts to create a professional Iraqi army and police force — a key step toward the eventual drawdown of U.S. forces. Some Shiite political leaders already were angry with the United States because it has urged them to form a government in which nonsectarian figures control the army and police. Khalilzad warned this week — in a statement clearly aimed at Shiite hard-liners — that America would not continue to support institutions run by sectarian groups with links to armed militias. One top Shiite political leader accused Khalilzad of sharing blame for the attack on the shrine in Samarra. "These statements ... gave green lights to terrorist groups. And, therefore, he shares in part of the responsibility," said Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and the former commander of its militia. The interior minister, who controls the security forces that Sunnis accuse of widepsread abuses, is a member of al-Hakim's party. The new tensions came as Iraq's various factions have been struggling to assemble a government after the Dec. 15 parliamentary elections. The Shiite fury sparked by Wednesday's bombings — the third major attack against Shiite targets in as many days — raised the likelihood that Shiite religious parties will reject U.S. demands to curb militias. The Askariya shrine, also known as the Golden Mosque, contains the tombs of two revered Shiite imams, who are considered by Shiites to be among the successors of the Prophet Muhammad. No group claimed responsibility for the 6:55 a.m. assault on the shrine in Samarra, a mostly Sunni Arab city 60 miles north of Baghdad, carried out by four insurgents disguised as police. But suspicion fell on Sunni extremist groups. The top of the dome, which was completed in 1905, collapsed into a crumbly mess, leaving just traces of gold showing through the rubble. Part of the shrine's tiled northern wall also was damaged. Thousands of demonstrators crowded near the wrecked shrine, and Iraqis picked through the debris, pulling out artifacts and copies of the Muslim holy book, the Quran, which they waved, along with Iraqi flags. "This criminal act aims at igniting civil strife," said Mahmoud al-Samarie, a 28-year-old builder. "We demand an investigation so that the criminals who did this be punished. If the government fails to do so, then we will take up arms and chase the people behind this attack." U.S. and Iraqi forces surrounded the Samarra shrine and searched nearby houses. About 500 soldiers were sent to Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad to prevent clashes. On Al-Jazeera television, Sunni politician Adnan al-Dulaimi pledged that the violence would not discourage Sunnis from working to form a new government and claimed the Samarra attack was not planned by Sunni insurgents but "a foreign hand aiming to create differences among Iraqis." National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie said 10 people were detained for questioning about the bombing. The Interior Ministry put the number at nine and said they included five guards. In the hours after the attack, more than 90 Sunni mosques were attacked with automatic rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, burned or taken over by Shiites, the Iraqi Islamic Party said. Large protests erupted in Shiite parts of Baghdad and in cities throughout the Shiite heartland to the south. In Basra, Shiite militants traded rifle and rocket-propelled grenade fire with guards at the office of the Iraqi Islamic Party. Smoke billowed from the building. Shiite protesters later set fire to a Sunni shrine containing the seventh century tomb of Talha bin Obeid-Allah, a companion of Muhammad, on the outskirts of Basra. Protesters in Najaf, Kut and Baghdad's Shiite slum of Sadr City also marched through the streets by the thousands, many shouting anti-American and anti-Israeli slogans and burning those nations' flags. Tradition says the Askariya shrine, which draws Shiite pilgrims from throughout the Islamic world, is near the place where the last of the 12 Shiite imams, Mohammed al-Mahdi, disappeared. Al-Mahdi was the son and grandson of the two imams buried in the Askariya shrine. Shiites believe he is still alive and will return to restore justice to humanity" If a civil war does erupt in Iraq... this will lead to an all out conflict in the middle east. You might be thinking "bob you crazy motherfucker, what in the flying fuck are you talking about?" Well, Shiiates and Sunnis are not only present in Iraq but they are locate din different countries. For example IRAN is 97 or so % shia so they will support the shias of Iraq militairly (the current gov is already influenced by Iran). Syria is 80% or so SUnni muslim so they will obviously support the sunnins... this can be said for all the surrounding nations, they will take sides. (The U.S. will probably be involved on the Shia side.. who knows) So ladies and gentlemen, prepare for the shitstorm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistaccio Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 YIKES !! :yuck: now calm down. No need for panickin' youse got to chill ain't jack shit happening son. :haha: Chill. Trust in God and everything will be all good. Hear me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Originally posted by bobthedestroyer@Feb 22 2006, 09:35 PM Many leaders called for calm. "We are facing a major conspiracy that is targeting Iraq's unity," said President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd. "We should all stand hand in hand to prevent the danger of a civil war." If a civil war does erupt in Iraq... this will lead to an all out conflict in the middle east. You might be thinking... Quoted post You know what I'm thinking? I'm thinking you missed the point. I thought you were all media savvy? I heard a general today also saying that they don't want an 'Iraqi civil war'... And the lie behind the lie here is that's exactly what they want, at least in name. This is all prep for a media spin and suddenly it's not gonna be the 'US invasion of Iraq' anymore it's gonna the 'Iraqi civil war'. I'm sure that spin doctors in DC have figured out that the 'invasion' angle only really works for short term conflict. If you invade you're supposed to conquer, a mark we obviously have fallen short of so far... so people aren't nearly as gruntled as they were before so... what to do? Sexy up the name! "Civil War" those 2 words stir such emotion in many Americans, 150 years AFTER the fact! You still have the Confederate battle flag all around on shirts and bumper stickers and state capitols... Obviously most black Americans are pretty happy with the outcome of that one and pretty much everyone in America kneejerk associates the words 'civil war' with the word 'slavery'. Immediately we think 'oh the poor oppressed... um, shia (in this case)'... this is a brutal attack obviously aimed at creating party division but I still think it was the Jews. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 No. 123 - Narrated Jarir: The Prophet said to me during Hajjat-al-Wida': Let the people keep quiet and listen. Then he said (addressing the people), "Do not revert to disbelief after me by striking the necks (cutting the throats) of one another (killing each other)." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonesome Cowboy Bill Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 so dawood what's your take on this? you never answered whether you are a shia or sunni btw... and from what you preach only american muslims with no affiliation to either sunni or shia can be good muslims Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest imported_Tesseract Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 smart said it, disgustingly well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishbel Bullen Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 yeah im sure in like a week itll be some civil war, but i mean the sunnis have been atttacking/suicide bombing shias for months now, one just blew himself up on a bus a couple days ago i think it was. nothing new, that whole are like ive said it before and ill say it again, is a fucking shitstorm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Smart, please correct me if I’m wrong because I often am, but is the premise of your theory that the recent attacks are going to work in our favor and we were somehow aware of or possibly committed the attack? Well assuming that is true, a civil war only means that there will be much more bloodshed, including our military forces who are seen as basically on the Shi’ite side (although that is changing), which will only reflect poorly on us. Also, I highly doubt a politician in our pocket like Talabani would announce it is a conspiracy if we were behind it, or be allowed to for that matter. Why would the US go out of its way to prevent a civil war if it worked to our advantage? But the major thing I’m wondering about here, how would our role changing from invader/occupier to referee for a civil war (which will be genocide and ethnic cleansing) change the minds of the public who are against this war? How is that a positive “spin�? And I doubt the American sheeple will see similarities between executing people at fake roadblocks and blowing up Mosques to our massive battlefields where the soldiers lined up in nice orderly rows and shot at each other, while wealthy townspeople watched from the surrounding hillsides while picnicking. �If you invade you're supposed to conquer, a mark we obviously have fallen short of so far...� Well, we have a presence in every corner of the country and move wherever and whenever we want, we have completely destroyed the insurgents every time they tried to control a city, have consistently been shutting down their operations, all with less than one percent of KIAs. But that statement probably is the general consensus, due to the stellar media coverage we get with the majority of reporters never leaving the green zone. I think a more feasible theory would be that Zarqawi was behind this. He decided Shi’ites are infidels and has been murdering civilian Shi’ites for quite some time. That right there puts him at the top of the list. This type of large scale attack is also his style, and most importantly he doesn’t like the fact that Sunnis and Shi’ites have been participating in the govt. together and bettering their relations. Once things get settled in Iraq and we pull out, it has been unanimously agreed by insurgents and the Iraqi people that they want all foreign fighters out, most want them gone already. He has gone from being a petty criminal to one of the most important people in the Middle East, and a civil war definitely benefits him. A little more of an outlandish theory would be that Iran was behind it to start up a civil war, in which their side would definitely win because they are the majority and would be better equipped/funded. The government the US is starting up is integrated with Kurds and Sunnis, but an all Shi’ite government would make it much easier for Iran to extend its influence. The revolutionary guard also has the know how for large attacks, and experience (see Beirut embassy bombing). Speaking of sexying things up, I gotta say your theory could fit in that category. Turn it into a movie, throw some scenes of American soldiers shooting a wedding, and we could make an easy 20 mil in Turkey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted February 23, 2006 Share Posted February 23, 2006 Originally posted by Smart@Feb 23 2006, 12:03 AM spin doctors Quoted post Ok, that is all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthedestroyer Posted February 23, 2006 Author Share Posted February 23, 2006 Al-queida actually is the key culrpit behind the attacks against shiites... the thing is, al-queida recruits from syria and other places with SUNNINS... SUNNINS and SHIITES have had a history of conflict... that probably won't change anytime soon. A civil war will be negative for the U.S. anyway you look it... Why do you think the government gives a flying fuck what you think on whether or not we should be there? We are there and we won't be leaving until the government of Iraq tells us to leave (I though I disussed this already) The Iraqi gov has full power, right now they request our presance so it is there and will continue marginally for 10 years or so to ensure that a civil war does NOT erupt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthedestroyer Posted February 24, 2006 Author Share Posted February 24, 2006 This shit IS VERY VERY serious. DAYTIME CURFEW BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq's most influential Shiite political leader called Friday for Sunni-Shiite unity as religious figures sought to calm passions and pull the nation from the brink of civil war after the bombing of a Shiite shrine two days ago and a wave of deadly reprisal attacks. An extraordinary daytime curfew in Baghdad and three nearby provinces appeared to have blunted the wave of attacks on Sunni mosques that followed Wednesday's bombing which destroyed the golden dome of the Shiite Askariya shrine in Samarra. Still, Iraqis feared that the two days of violence which followed the Samarra attack had pushed the country closer to sectarian civil war than at any time since the U.S.-led invasion nearly three years ago. Several joint Sunni-Shiite prayer services were announced for Friday, including one at the Askariya shrine. But security forces turned away about 700 people, virtually all of them Sunnis, who showed up for the service. In a statement read over national television, top Shiite leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, said those who carried out the Wednesday bombing at the Askariya shrine in Samarra "do not represent the Sunnis in Iraq." Al-Hakim instead blamed Saddam Hussein loyalists and followers of al-Qaida in Iraq boss Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. "We all have to unite in order to eliminate them," al-Hakim said in a statement. "This is what al-Zarqawi is working for, that is, to ignite a sectarian strife in the country," he added. "We call for self-restraint and not to be dragged by the plots of the enemy of Iraq." U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad acknowledged the danger facing Iraq — and the U.S. strategy for disengaging from this country. But he also said this was also a "moment of opportunity" for Iraq. "This tragedy can be used to bring people together," Khalilzad told reporters. Late Thursday, Iraqi state television announced an extension of the nighttime curfew until 4 p.m. Friday in Baghdad and the nearby provinces of Diyala, Babil and Salaheddin, where the shrine bombing took place. But security forces permitted worshippers to walk to mosque for midday prayers. A large crowd attended Friday prayers at Baghdad's Abu Hanifa mosque, Baghdad's most important Sunni site, where Imam Ahmed Hasan al-Taha denounced the attack on the Shiite shrine as a conspiracy intended to draw Iraqis into sectarian strife. There was also little sign of the curfew in Baghdad's teaming Shiite slum, Sadr City, where armed militiamen loyal to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr have been out in force since Wednesday's attack. Iraqi police found six bodies handcuffed and shot near a parking lot in the area, the Interior Ministry said. In the southern Shiite heartland, more than 10,000 people converged on Basra's al-Adillah mosque, where a representative of Iraq's top Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, called another joint service with Sunnis. The extraordinary security measures helped curb — but not eliminate — the violence. In Basra, where the curfew was not in effect, gunmen Friday kidnapped three children of a Shiite legislator from near the family home, police said. They were freed hours later in a raid that also netted a suspect, police Cap. Mushtaq Khazim said. Al-Jbouri is a member of the Islamic Dawa Party-Iraq Organization and is the former head of Basra's provincial council. Elsewhere, police found the bodies of two bodyguards for the Basra head of the Sunni Endowment, a government body that cares for Sunni mosques and shrines. They had been shot. South of the capital, in the religiously mixed area known as the "Triangle of Death," gunmen burst into a Shiite home in Latifiyah, separated men from women, and killed five of the males, police Capt. Ibrahim Abdullah said. In the northern town of Birtilla, which is not covered by the curfew, 500 Shiites marched to demand Saddam's execution and death to Sunni fanatics. The biggest Sunni Arab bloc in parliament announced Thursday it was pulling out of talks with the main Shiite coalition, but Khalilzad was optimistic they would reverse the decision. Without the establishment of an inclusive government, the U.S. strategy for disengagement from Iraq will collapse. But Khalilzad predicted the Sunnis would return to the negotiating table and chances for a unity government remained good. He said Iraqi leaders on all sides appreciated the need for compromise to avert a civil war. He said several steps were being considered by the Shiite-dominated government, including an investigation to establish responsibility for the shrine attack and better protection for religious sites. He also said a fund to rebuild the Askariya shrine and repair Sunni mosques damaged in the backlash was under study, as well as a ban on carrying weapons without authorization and the appointment of an advisory political committee to help calm tensions. Anger, however, was running deep and it could take time to determine whether the country has passed through this latest crisis. On Thursday, the Sunni clerical Association of Muslim Scholars said at least 168 Sunni mosques had been attacked. The Interior Ministry said it could only confirm figures for Baghdad, where it had reports of 19 mosques attacked, one cleric killed and one abducted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Originally posted by bobthedestroyer@Feb 24 2006, 09:10 AM In a statement read over national television, top Shiite leader Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, said those who carried out the Wednesday bombing at the Askariya shrine in Samarra "do not represent the Sunnis in Iraq." Quoted post It's a good thing a shiite came out to denounce the framing of the Sunnis (probably by the CIA) You know, especially since he is "head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq"... I can't begin to say how cool it is to have THOSE guys on our side... *HEY MUHUCKABUCK YER MOMMA FUCKS GOATS!!!* (inside joke, sorry)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 ... no 'junior council for the islamic revolution in Iraq' for him... all that AND a catchy title... <sigh> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stereotype V.001 Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 Originally posted by Smart@Feb 24 2006, 10:34 AM It's a good thing a shiite came out to denounce the framing of the Sunnis (probably by the CIA) Quoted post Ok, since you said it a bit clearer this time, I have to reiterate how that would make no sense in any conceivable way. I must be missing something here, but how would a civil war even remotely benefit what we are doing in Iraq, or in any way for that matter? Your previous explanation didn’t make a whole lot of sense and seemed to skip over alot of things. Like I said earlier, the US public is not going to see a correlation between our civil wars. They don’t see the correlation to the civil wars in Africa to the one we had, which would be basically what’s going to happen there only with more media coverage. Our role changing from occupier to referee for their civil war isn’t going to suddenly change the minds of the Sheehan-esque peacenik protestors or anyone who doesn't like the war as it is. A civil war only means there will be more of our service members coming home in body bags. Not to mention, again, a politician like Jalal Talabani who is in our pocket would not come out saying it is a conspiracy if we were behind it or were trying to use it to our advantage. Did all of that slip your mind? And if the CIA was trying to frame the Sunni nationalists, why would all of the military big wigs come out saying it is Zarqawi and his love child “The supreme Jihad committee of awesomeness regarding the region known as Iraq, featuring Al Qaeda “? It doesn’t add up, please fill me in how it would be remotely beneficial to us. But it is a damn good plot for hollywood, like that movie with Harrison Ford, and he runs around with the drug lord, and the drug lord is all like "yo mayne i used 2 work for fidel but now i slingin coke mayne." Quality film right there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonesome Cowboy Bill Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 how do muthafuckers be spending all they time protesting? maybe if they actualy worked shit would get done... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leftover crack Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 the one thing that saddam was good at was keeping the two sides at peace. it's only a matter of time before this mess gets out of hand and all of this just because we had to go and play the worlds police man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smart Posted February 25, 2006 Share Posted February 25, 2006 Originally posted by Stereotype V.001+Feb 24 2006, 12:25 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Stereotype V.001 - Feb 24 2006, 12:25 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Smart@Feb 24 2006, 10:34 AM It's a good thing a shiite came out to denounce the framing of the Sunnis (probably by the CIA) Quoted post I have to reiterate how that would make no sense in any conceivable way. I must be missing something here... Quoted post [/b] I always said you were pretty 'astute'... don't force me to change that to 'ass toot'... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobthedestroyer Posted February 25, 2006 Author Share Posted February 25, 2006 Originally posted by Smart+Feb 25 2006, 03:36 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Smart - Feb 25 2006, 03:36 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'> Originally posted by Stereotype V.001@Feb 24 2006, 12:25 PM <!--QuoteBegin-Smart@Feb 24 2006, 10:34 AM It's a good thing a shiite came out to denounce the framing of the Sunnis (probably by the CIA) Quoted post I have to reiterate how that would make no sense in any conceivable way. I must be missing something here... Quoted post I always said you were pretty 'astute'... don't force me to change that to 'ass toot'... Quoted post [/b] You're not addressing his valid point. There is no benefit to the U.S. in any way shape or form in the case of a sunni v shia civil war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawood Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 Originally posted by Lonesome Cowboy Bill@Feb 23 2006, 06:25 AM so dawood what's your take on this? you never answered whether you are a shia or sunni btw... and from what you preach only american muslims with no affiliation to either sunni or shia can be good muslims Quoted post here's the thing. Allah named us muslims. which means one who submits to Allah's will. So, if I use the word Sunni to mean "someone who follows the ways of the prophet" then the word sunni is a good thing, but if it's used the way the news media uses it (as an opposite sect of the shiites) then I don't affiliate myself with that. As a matter of fact, the news always calls Saddam a sunni, but the scholars of Islam say he's a bathi'st socialist disbeleiver. (not even a muslim) So, go figure. And no, for the record you don't have to be American to be a good Muslim. And also for the record, the shia are way off as far as Islamic beleifs go. And the sunnis in Iraq (if youre referring to saddams followers are way off too.) It's a weird world we live in. The political situation is terrible. I don't have much to say about this yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.