Dubai Forums archive (old posts) - to navigate to the current version click Dubai Forums
Dubai Expat Help Dubai Chat Dubai Romance Dubai Auto Accountants wanted in Dubai Dubai High Tech Dubai Guide Sales manager jobs in Dubai Accommodation in Dubai Jobs in Dubai Available Professionals in Dubai Learn Arabic Philosophy Forum
Dubai Expat Forum - Philosophy and Religion Forums

Is this liberation or Humiliation...


Chocoholic The bomb picture is actually from the 1st Gulf War!!! Liban, Agreed that our troops shouldn't be there, but Iraq is now pretty much in civil war, so what do you do now. A suicide bomber killed 40 in Bagdhad yesterday.
Lionheart Humiliation



Even infants are terrorized



The only crime this old man properly is guilty of is being in his own house...

Bin laden couldn't Terrorize people the way the invaders terrorize innocent Iraqi woman, children,and elderly..

fear...


Another in the New Iraq

For more photos and News on Iraq check out Lionheart Simple Request - Put My Son's Name on a Bomb


"04/30/03 A retired New York City Police Department Sergeant lost his son on 9/11 at the WTC. He contacted the Marines requesting his son's name (Jason Sekzer) be written on one of the bombs we drop on Baghdad. To his surprise, Will received the following e-mail and 3 photos from Major Joe Boehm stationed in Kuwait. Gotta love our troops.....
From: ***@ [mailto:***@] Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 5:32 PM To: pao@centcom.mil Subject: Simple Request " Lionheart
A letter from a Iraqi sister who was in prisoned in Iraq...
Fatima’s Letter
"In the name of God, the Merciful, the Mercy-giving. “Say He is God the One; God the Source [of everything]; Not has He fathered, nor has He been fathered; nor is anything comparable to Him.” [Qur’an, Surat 112 “al-Ikhlas”]
I chose this noble Surah from the Book of God because it has the greatest impact on me and on all of you and it strikes a particular kind of awe in the hearts of Believers.
My brother Mujahideen in the path of God! What can I say to you? I say to you: our wombs have been filled with the children of fornication by those sons of apes and pigs who raped us. Or I could tell you that they have defaced our bodies, spit in our faces, and tore up the little copies of the Qur’an that hung around our necks? God is greatest! Can you not comprehend our situation? Is it true that you do not know what is happening to us? We are your sisters. God will be calling you to account [about this] tomorrow.
By God, we have not passed one night since we have been in prison without one of the apes and pigs jumping down upon us to rip our bodies apart with his overweening lust. And we are the ones who had guarded our virginity out of fear of God. Fear God! Kill us along with them! Destroy us along with them! Don’t leave us here to let them get pleasure from raping us! It will be an act to ennoble the Throne of Almighty God. Fear God regarding us! Leave their tanks and aircraft outside. Come at us here in the prison of Abu Ghurayb.
I am your sister in God (Fatimah). They raped me on one day more than nine times. Can you comprehend? Imagine one of your sisters being raped. Why can’t you all imagine it, as I am your sister. With me are 13 girls, all unmarried. All have been raped before the eyes and ears of everyone.
They won’t let us pray. They took our clothes and won’t let us get dressed. As I write this letter one of the girls has committed suicide. She was savagely raped. A soldier hit her on her chest and thigh after raping her. He subjected her to unbelievable torture. She beat her head against the wall of the cell until she died, for she couldn’t take any more, even though suicide is forbidden in Islam. But I excuse that girl. I have hope that God will forgive her, because He is the Most Merciful of all.
Brothers, I tell you again, fear God! Kill us with them so that we might be at peace. Help! Help! Help! [Wa Mu'atasima!]"
Subsequently, approximately 100 resistance fighters launched a fierce attack on the prison, forcing US troops to take cover inside their barracks within the compound. Fighters pounded the Americans with barrages of 82mm and 120mm mortar rounds. Large crowds of people gathered outside, fearful that the bombardment might harm the prisoners but they were assured by the fighters that they knew the layout of the prison camp very well.
Mafkarat al-Islam’s correspondent in Baghdad reported that the fighters succeeded in destroying part of the walls of the prison camp, blasting a hole four meters long in the inner and outer fences that encircled the camp.
The fate of Fatima and the other woman with her is unknown. Chocoholic Yawn, one sided view as per usual. Mate you're so boring. Lionheart
Comeon mate, my reporting is fair and balanced...just like your media..AKA CNN, Fox, ABC, NBC, etc etc etc.. GAB Agree with Choco. Your posts are immature propaganda. Make a balanced argument and then maybe it will be worthwhile reading. :roll: Chocoholic Lionheart, you never express your own opinion, you just cut and paste BS you've found on the net. Oh like half that shit isn't made up, give me a break. Liban The pictures are real and I will not debate them. American and British action in Iraq is disgusting and reprehensible. Liban Iraq is in a state of civil war. A war that probably would not be in course if it wasn't for the futile and gun-ho attitude of the Blair-Bush S&M team. I fear for Iraq and wish the Iraqis stop fighting each other and focus their efforts in ridding the land of the invading troops. Arab should not kill Arab and Muslim ought not to kill Muslim. I regret that some people do not understand this simple concept.... :cry:

1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
Chocoholic Please don't be so short sighted, Sunni and Shiite have been mrudering each other for years. It just gives them more of an excuse. Try telling them (not arabs) but Muslims should kill one another or anyone else for that matter. Liban
Murdering each other for years???
There have been clashes between the two communities, yes.
However, nothing like the Inquisitions in Spain or the excommunications in Catholiscism over the past 2000 years.
You missed the point of my post which is to say that what is happening is regrettable and I blame the foreign invadors for agrevating the situation with their shannanigans. kanelli Yeah, like the soldier put the baby in the face down position. He was likely sleeping on the blanket while the soldier was walking by. Only a complete moron would think that a baby would be carrying a weapon, and only a complete moron would think that a soldier would put a baby in that position. Lionheart, how about you tell all the bad guys to wear signs on their foreheads so that the army personnel know who they are. Then they can stop checking all the citizens for weapons and harbouring insurgents etc. Do you think they would all agree to wear signs? Those soldiers are constantly ambushed and never know when there will be a dangerous situation - so that is the other side you aren't considering. If they aren't in Iraq, the whole place will fall apart, and you all know it. GAB Nice K! I think having "I'm an insurgent" in permanent ink on one's forehead might be a giveaway, but gee, wouldn't it make life easier. :lol: BTW the baby looks to be in a normal position to me. Liban
The baby was sleeping like that, yes. However, it doesn't at all justify that cockroach soldier going into its home with his dirty boots with an automatic rifle.
American and British troops are not welcome and I hope the rebellion continues and intensifies against them. I hope that the Iraqis will not suffer, as they are now, for very long.... Lionheart
Choco...you are just mad cause I'm exposing the war crimes, hyprocricy committed by the so-called civiliazed world on poor innocent people whose only crime is being blessed with oil in their land..
"Oh like half that shit isn't made up, give me a break"
Propoganda is okey when its coming from western journalist who can't even venture outside the green zone in Bagdad to report...but its not exceptable when the reporting is coming from Iraqis who witness daily the wrath of American/British.... Why is it okey for the oppressor to have monopoly on propoganda?
Choco... people said the same thing about Vietnam, when the Americans were accussed of rape, torture, mass murders, etc... "Oh like half that shit isn't made up, give me a break" Lionheart
GAB...Is the western Media balanced? arniegang Lionheart you publish so much crap, people dont even want to debate with you. People will not discuss crap and biased propoganda Lionheart
The bad guys in Iraq..are the American/British invaders not the insurgent who aim is to liberate their country from Imperlist invaders.....Iraqis never asked the American/British invaders to liberate them nor was there WMD in Iraq...but this didn't stop the greedy imperlist from invading Iraq not to help Iraqi people, but to kill them for Isreal and greedy Oil companies..The Insurgents no matter how much the Western media demonies them they are Iraqis fighting for their land...for their rights against invaders who want to steal their resources and impose puppet government on them.
Kanelli...Just like AMerican soliders have killed, raped, committed genocides in Vietnam 40 years...they are committing the same acts against innocent Iraqi children( including infants), Iraqi woman and elderly....but unfortunatly Western Media will never report Iraqis killed by Americans...matter fact the media calls Iraqi deaths collateral damage....basically the life of Iraqi is worth nothing to Western media.
Chocoholic And how many Iraqi's have you guys actually spoken to about the situation? I have several Iraqi friends and I can tell you they do not share your views. sniper420 LionHeart..bro...I understand ur concern of a stranger invading the privacy.......I guess Americans should have done bit more homework b4 invading Iraq.....cos some things like a man searching a woman is considered offensive in that part of the world which Americans could have easily countered by asking a female colleague to frisk search her.....but THEY hAVE to search house to house........boy u havent been in a war .........have u? U never know a woman or some "harmless" person brandishing weapn all of a sudden ........and u loose 2 of ur pals.........I know those Americans & British governments have messed Iraq so bad to meet their own greedy needs..but know law and order have to b restored.......and only way to do that is to first disarm local pop.......and train local troops and policemen to slowly takeover... most of the american troops are from or below middle class...some have no choice cos they have to feed their families..some think they are serving the nation......but only few know who is to really gain -those filthy ppl in government considering a troop mere video game character... As for the letter........it was really disturbing.........the person who has done this heinous crime should be tried and punished......she should have come forward with her pals and complained the authorities to seek justice PEACE Chocoholic Good answer Sniper. Lionheart I suggest you go watch Farenheight 9/11 and see where the majority of american troops really come from. Many are barely out of their teens, from the ghettos and run down towns and they are easy recruits for the army because they have no choice, they are young men who're ignorant of what's going on outisde of their own back yard. Remember about 80% of americans don't even have a passport and aren't interested in what's happening in other parts of the world. These young recruits become yes sir, no sir guys, and in their ignorance believe everything they're told. You also go on about collateral damage, well in a war this is normal - once again you don't really understand the concept of war. Plus what about all the innocent people killed by suicide bombers, do they deserve to die? Muslim and others alike? These people certainly don't discriminate. What about all the children who died in Beslan? These were casualties of a horrific crime and for what? Children as young as 6, murdered, tortured and raped by their captures, called filthy pigs and animals, did they deserve to die? Wake up Lionheart, once again you fail to look beyong the end of your nose. hashman
That's true Choco, one of the things that really suprised me in Farenheit 911 is when Moore approaches a Congress man and asked him to send his offspring to the army.......the congressman stares at Moore and says"I have only 1 son!" that was completely outrageous cos there are many families they find out it was noting more than wild goose chase for them....they would want every answer for the blood spilled by their offspring.........I said the same thing to my Iraqi friends..then he replied...... most of the troops in every country come from well-to do families....bcome slaves or killing robots for their govnts.....I had to zip my mouth Lionheart
Brother.... don't be naive, you as well as I know that most of these American soliders joined the Army after the sep 11 to simply avenge the deaths of 3000 AMericans, by killing any muslim they encontered in Afghanistan or Iraq... don't get me wrong brother..I don't believe that all AMerican soliders are bad the same I believe all the insurgent groups in Iraq are good.... I'm not as optimistic as your are about the future of Iraq as long as American/British are there.....I don't its the interest of occuppiers for Iraq to be stable and just society...because if that was to happen than they wouldn't have anymore excuse to stay in Iraq, so that they could steal more of Iraqis resources..civil war and law lessness is the only way they could maintain their occuppation. Lionheart
Choco will you except Sep 11 as collateral damage..if not...than why is it okey for Iraqis of Afghans to except the deaths of over 50000 people at the hand of Americans/British as collateral damage...why is it okey for Americans to go around the world killing people and calling it collateral damage...but when so-called terrorist target their people its murder..its terrorism...its never collateral damage....why?...Is terrorism only when Americans or West are terrorized... Isn't what America is doing in Iraq terrorism or is it liberation by terrorizing..
Insurgents in Iraq target the Police, the army whom they percieve as traitors... most if not all the insurgents don't deliberately target their own people...but western media, AMerican occuppiers, and their puppets are intent on spreading propoganda about the insurgents...they will use anything to demonize insurgent..even to an extent of planting car bombs in a market full of people and than later blaming it on the freedom fitghters to discredit them in the eyes of Iraqis.... Lionheart
British Special Forces Soldiers Planting Bombs in Basra
Recent events in Basra have raised suspicions that the British army may have reactivated these same tactics in Iraq.
Articles published by Michel Chossudovsky, Larry Chin and Mike Whitney at the Centre for Research on Globalization’s website on September 20, 2005 have offered preliminary assessments of the claims of Iraqi authorities that two British soldiers in civilian clothes who were arrested by Iraqi police in Basra on September 19—and in short order released by a British tank and helicopter assault on the prison where they were being held—had been engaged in planting bombs in the city. A further article by Kurt Nimmo points to false-flag operations carried out by British special forces troops in Northern Ireland and elsewhere, and to Donald Rumsfeld’s formation of the P2OG, or Proactive Preemptive Operations Group, as directly relevant to Iraqi charges of possible false-flag terror operations by the occupying powers in Iraq.
The accusations made by Iraqi officials echo insistent but unsubstantiated claims, going back at least to the spring of 2004, to the effect that many of the terror bombings carried out against civilian targets in Iraq have actually been perpetrated by U.S. and British forces rather than by Iraqi insurgents.
Some such claims can be briskly dismissed. In mid-May 2005, for example, a group calling itself “Al Qaeda in Iraq” accused U.S. troops “of detonating car bombs and falsely accusing militants.” For even the most credulous, this could at best be a case of the pot calling the kettle soot-stained. But it’s not clear why anyone would want to believe this claim, coming as it does from a group or groupuscule purportedly led by the wholly mythical Abu Musab al-Zarqawi —and one whose very name affiliates it with terror bombers. These people, if they exist, might themselves have good reason to blame their own crimes on others.
Other claims, however, are cumulatively more troubling.
The American journalist Dahr Jamail wrote on April 20, 2004 that the recent spate of car bombings in Baghdad was widely rumoured to have been the work of the CIA: “The word on the street in Baghdad is that the cessation of suicide car bombings is proof that the CIA was behind them. Why? Because as one man states, ‘(CIA agents are) too busy fighting now, and the unrest they wanted to cause by the bombings is now upon them.’ True or not, it doesn’t bode well for the occupiers’ image in Iraq.”
Two days later, on April 22, 2004, Agence France-Presse reported that five car-bombings in Basra—three near-simultaneous attacks outside police stations in Basra that killed sixty-eight people, including twenty children, and two follow-up bombings—were being blamed by supporters of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr on the British. While eight hundred supporters demonstrated outside Sadr’s offices, a Sadr spokesman claimed to have “evidence that the British were involved in the attacks.”
An anonymous senior military officer speaking on behalf of the occupying coalition said on April 22, 2004 of these Basra attacks that “It looks like Al-Qaeda. It’s got all the hallmarks: it was suicidal, it was spectacular and it was symbolic.” Brigadier General Nick Carter, commander of the British garrison in Basra, stated more ambiguously that Al Qaeda was not necessarily to blame for the five bombings, but that those responsible came from outside Basra and “quite possibly” from outside Iraq: “‘All that we can be certain of is that this is something that came from outside,’ Carter said.” Moqtada al-Sadr’s supporters of course believed exactly the same thing—differing only in their identification of the criminal outsiders as British agents rather than as Islamist mujaheddin from other Arab countries.
In May 2005 ‘Riverbend’, the Baghdad author of the widely-read blog Baghdad Burning, reported that what the international press was reporting as suicide bombings were often in fact “car bombs that are either being remotely detonated or maybe time bombs.” After one of the larger recent blasts, which occurred in the middle-class Ma’moun area of west Baghdad, a man living in a house in front of the blast site was reportedly arrested for having sniped an Iraqi National Guardsman. But according to ‘Riverbend’, his neighbours had a different story:
People from the area claim that the man was taken away not because he shot anyone, but because he knew too much about the bomb. Rumor has it that he saw an American patrol passing through the area and pausing at the bomb site minutes before the explosion. Soon after they drove away, the bomb went off and chaos ensued. He ran out of his house screaming to the neighbors and bystanders that the Americans had either planted the bomb or seen the bomb and done nothing about it. He was promptly taken away.
Also in May 2005, Imad Khadduri, the Iraqi-exile physicist whose writings helped to discredit American and British fabrications about weapons of mass destruction, reported a story that in Baghdad a driver whose license had been confiscated at an American check-point was told “to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license.” After being questioned for half an hour, he was informed that there was nothing against him, but that his license had been forwarded to the Iraqi police at the al-Khadimiya station “for processing”—and that he should get there quickly before the lieutenant whose name he was given went off his shift.
The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors. The only feasible explanation for this incident is that the car was indeed booby trapped by the Americans and intended for the al-Khadimiya Shiite district of Baghdad. The helicopter was monitoring his movement and witnessing the anticipated “hideous attack by foreign elements”.
According to Khadduri, “The same scenario was repeated in Mosul, in the north of Iraq.” On this occasion, the driver’s life was saved when his car broke down on the way to the police station where he was supposed to reclaim his license, and when the mechanic to whom he had recourse “discovered that the spare tire was fully laden with explosives.”
Khadduri mentions, as deserving of investigation, a “perhaps unrelated incident” in Baghdad on April 28, 2005 in which a Canadian truck-driver with dual Canadian-Iraqi citizenship was killed. He quotes a CBC report according to which “Some media cited unidentified sources who said he may have died after U.S. forces ‘tracked’ a target, using a helicopter gunship, but Foreign Affairs said it’s still investigating conflicting reports of the death. U.S. officials have denied any involvement.”
Another incident, also from April 2005, calls more urgently for investigation, since one of its victims remains alive. Abdul Amir Younes Hussein, a CBS cameraman, was lightly wounded by U.S. forces on April 5 “while filming the aftermath of a car bombing in Mosul.” American military authorities were initially apologetic about his injuries, but three days later arrested him on the grounds that he had been “engaged in anti-coalition activity.” Arianna Huffington, in her detailed account of this case, quite rightly emphasizes its Kafkaesque qualities: Hussein has now been detained, in Abu Graib and elsewhere, for more than five months—without charges, without any hint of what evidence the Pentagon may hold against him, and without any indication that he will ever be permitted to stand trial, challenge that evidence, and disprove the charges that might at some future moment be laid. But in addition to confirming, yet again, the Pentagon’s willingness to violate the most fundamental principles of humane and democratic jurisprudence, this case also raises a further question. Was Hussein perhaps arrested, like the Iraqi whose rumoured fate was mentioned by ‘Riverbend’, because he had seen—and in Hussein’s case photographed—more than was good for him?
Spokesmen for the American and British occupation of Iraq, together with newspapers like the Daily Telegraph, have of course rejected with indignation any suggestion that their forces could have been involved in false-flag terrorist operations in Iraq.
It may be remembered that during the 1980s spokesmen for the government of Ronald Reagan likewise heaped ridicule on Nicaraguan accusations that the U.S. was illegally supplying weapons to the ‘Contras’—until October 5, 1986, that is, when a CIA-operated C-123 cargo aircraft full of weaponry was shot down over Nicaragua, and Eugene Hasenfus, a cargo handler who survived the crash, testified that his supervisors (one of whom was Luis Posada Carriles, the CIA agent responsible for the 1976 bombing of a Cuban civilian airliner) were working for then-Vice-President George H. W. Bush.
The arrest—and the urgent liberation—of the two undercover British soldiers in Iraq might in a similar manner be interpreted as casting a retrospective light on previously unsubstantiated claims about the involvement of members of the occupying armies in terrorist bombing attacks on civilians.
The parallel is far from exact: in this case there has been no dramatic confession like that of Hasenfus, and there are no directly incriminating documents like the pilot’s log of the downed C-123. There is, moreover, a marked lack of consensus as to what actually happened in Basra. Should we therefore, with Juan Cole, dismiss the possibility that British soldiers were acting as agents provocateurs as a “theory (that) has almost no facts behind it”?
* * * * *
It appears that when on September 19 suspicious Iraqi police stopped the Toyota Cressida the undercover British soldiers were driving, the two men opened fire, killing one policeman and wounding another. But the soldiers, identified by the BBC as “members of the SAS elite special forces,” were subdued by the police and arrested. A report published by The Guardian on September 24 adds the further detail that the SAS men “are thought to have been on a surveillance mission outside a police station in Basra when they were challenged by an Iraqi police patrol.”
As Justin Raimondo has observed in an article published on September 23 at , nearly every other aspect of this episode is disputed.
The Washington Post dismissively remarked, in the eighteenth paragraph of its report on these events, that “Iraqi security officials variously accused the two Britons they detained of shooting at Iraqi forces or trying to plant explosives.” Iraqi officials in fact accused them not of one or the other act, but of both.
Fattah al-Shaykh, a member of the Iraqi National Assembly, told Al-Jazeera TV on September 19 that the soldiers opened fire when the police sought to arrest them, and that their car was booby-trapped “and was meant to explode in the centre of the city of Basra in the popular market.” A deliberately inflammatory press release sent out on the same day by the office of Moqtada al-Sadr (and posted in English translation at Juan Cole’s Informed Comment blog on September 20) states that the soldiers’ arrest was prompted by their having “opened fire on passers-by” near a Basra mosque, and that they were found to have “in their possession explosives and remote-control devices, as well as light and medium weapons and other accessories.”
What credence can be given to the claim about explosives? Justin Raimondo writes that while initial BBC Radio reports acknowledged that the two men indeed had explosives in their car, subsequent reports from the same source indicated that the Iraqi police found nothing beyond “assault rifles, a light machine gun, an anti-tank weapon, radio gear, and medical kit. This is thought to be standard kit for the SAS operating in such a theater of operations.”
One might well wonder, with Raimondo, whether an anti-tank weapon is “standard operating equipment”—or what use SAS men on “a surveillance mission outside a police station” intended to make of it. But more importantly, a photograph published by the Iraqi police and distributed by Reuters shows that—unless the equipment is a plant—the SAS men were carrying a good deal more than just the items acknowledged by the BBC. I would want the opinion of an arms expert before risking a definitive judgment about the objects shown, which could easily have filled the trunk and much of the back seat of a Cressida. But this photograph makes plausible the statement of Sheik Hassan al-Zarqani, a spokesman for Al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia: “What our police found in their car was very disturbing—weapons, explosives, and a remote control detonator. These are the weapons of terrorists. We believe these soldiers were planning an attack on a market or other civilian targets….”
The fierce determination of the British army to remove these men from any danger of interrogation by their own supposed allies in the government the British are propping up—even when their rescue entailed the destruction of an Iraqi prison and the release of a large number of prisoners, gun-battles with Iraqi police and with Al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia, a large popular mobilization against the British occupying force, and a subsequent withdrawal of any cooperation on the part of the regional government—tends, if anything, to support the view that this episode involved something much darker and more serious than a mere flare-up of bad tempers at a check-point.
* * * * *
There is reason to believe, moreover, that the open civil war which car-bomb attacks on civilians seem intended to produce would not be an unwelcome development in the eyes of the occupation forces.
Writers in the English-language corporate media have repeatedly noted that recent terror-bomb attacks which have caused massive casualties among civilians appear to be pushing Iraq towards a civil war of Sunnis against Shiites, and of Kurds against both. For example, on September 18, 2005 Peter Beaumont proposed in The Observer that the slaughter of civilians, which he ascribes to Al Qaeda alone, “has one aim: civil war.” But H. D. S. Greenway had already suggested on June 17, 2005 in the Boston Globe that “Given the large number of Sunni-led attacks against Shia targets, the emerging Shia-led attacks against Sunnis, and the extralegal abductions of Arabs by Kurdish authorities in Kirkut, one has to wonder whether the long-feared Iraqi civil war hasn’t already begun.” And on September 21, 2005 Nancy Youssef and Mohammed al Dulaimy of the Knight Ridder Washington Bureau wrote that the ethnic cleansing of Shiites in predominantly Sunni Baghdad neighbourhoods “is proceeding at an alarming and potentially destabilizing pace,” and quoted the despairing view of an Iraqi expert: “‘Civil war today is closer than any time before,’ said Hazim Abdel Hamid al Nuaimi, a professor of politics at al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad. ‘All of these explosions, the efforts by police and purging of neighborhoods is a battle to control Baghdad.’”
Whether or not it has already begun or will occur, the eruption of a full-blown civil war, leading to the fragmentation of the country, would clearly be welcomed in some circles. Israeli strategists and journalists proposed as long ago as 1982 that one of their country’s strategic goals should be the partitioning of Iraq into a Shiite state, a Sunni state, and a separate Kurdish part. While foreign ministry official Oded Yinon’s February 1982 essay “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s” is the best-known instance of this argument, a similar proposal was published by Ze’ev Schiff in the newspaper Ha’aretz in the same month.
A partitioning of Iraq into sections defined by ethnicity and by Sunni-Shia differences would entail, obviously enough, both civil war and ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. But these considerations did not deter Leslie H. Gelb from advocating in the New York Times, on November 25, 2003, what he called “The Three-State Solution.” Gelb, a former senior State Department and Pentagon official, a former editor and columnist for the New York Times, and president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, is an insider’s insider. And if the essays of Yinon and Schiff are nasty stuff, especially in the context of Israel’s 1981 bombing attack on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor, there is still some difference between speculatively proposing the dismemberment of a powerful neighbouring country, and actively advocating, from a position of institutional power, the dismemberment of a country that one’s own nation has conquered in a war of unprovoked aggression. The former might be described as a diseased imagining of war and criminality; the latter very clearly approaches the category of war crimes.
Gelb’s essay proposes punishing the Sunni-led insurgency by separating the largely Sunni centre of present-day Iraq from the oil-rich Kurdish north and the oil-rich Shia south. It holds out the dismembering of the Yugoslav federation in the 1990s (with the appalling slaughters that ensued) as a “hopeful precedent.”
Gelb’s essay has been widely interpreted as signaling the intentions of a dominant faction in the U.S. government. It has also, very appropriately, been denounced by Bill Vann as openly promoting “a war crime of world-historic proportions.”
Given the increasing desperation of the American and British governments in the face of an insurgency that their tactics of mass arbitrary arrest and torture, Phoenix-Program or “Salvadoran-option” death squads, unrestrained use of overwhelming military force, and murderous collective punishments have failed to suppress, it comes as no surprise that in recent military actions such as the assault on Tal Afar the U.S. army has been deploying Kurdish peshmerga troops and Shiite militias in a manner that seems designed to inflame ethnic hatreds. GAB Nice answer Sniper!! :) Chocoholic You still don't look at anything else apart from the situation there do you. You're like a broken flippin' record. Well if you don't bloody like it, why don't you go to Iraq and stand against the yanks and pomms - loser. Dubai Knight
Hear! Hear!
All too easy to be sitting comfortably elsewhere writing total bollocks about life than actually dealing with the real thing.
Go to Baghdad on behalf of the forum, make sure you carry a large placard saying some of the things you say here, and then you can report from a personal point of view.
Personally I think you would last about a nanosecond and it would be the Iraqi people who would top you!
Knight Liban Its quit annoying how everybody here speaks about Iraq in a way that they know what the Iraqi people want. This is the order of those who can speak for Iraq: 1) Iraqis inside Iraq 2) Other Arabs inside Iraq 3) Iraqis outside Iraq 4) Other Arabs outside Iraq 5) Nobody else So please, those who keep saying they know what Iraqis think or know should not continue. arniegang They do have their say Liban. They are knocking shit out of each other, in between blowing each other up. Liban Sarcasm is the tool of fools arniegang. Rethink your approach. sniper420
look who is talking.a guy dreaming about Arab union.but Lo! didnt even spend even iota of his energy in protecting Iraqi bros from insurgent bombs and other mishap. How much do u know abt iraqis :roll: Chocoholic Liban, I think what you posted is a little offensive, so you're basically saying that I'm not allowed to convey the thoughts of MY IRAQI FRIENDS?! That they are not allowed to voice their opinion TO ME!!!!! And this privilage is only for ARABS?! Please give me a break now who's being one sided. Who cares what nationality you are or where you come from, if my friends who come from Iraq choose to voice their opinion on the matter to me, it's not up to you to tell me I can't share it - just because it's not what YOU want to hear! So basically in your opinion I cannot voice an opinion because I'm a white English girl. Well going along your rules Liban from now on you're not allowed to talk about the Americans or British or Europeans because you cannot understand what is going on first hand. Therefore: 1 Only Brits/Yanks in Iraq can talk about what they are or are not doing in Iraq 2 Only Brits/Yanks outside of Iraq can talk about their situation in Iraq 3 Nobody else OK Fair enough or are you going to carry on with your double standards? Liban Illiteracy must run rampant for you Choco. I never said that Iraqis cannot voice their opinions. I only said that YOU have no say in Iraq. By "you" I refer to non-Iraqis and non-Arabs. Iraq is an Arab country and itd problems are internal to Iraqi and Arab affairs. Now foreigners. Now get off you high horse. shafique Liban, Pedant in me forces me to ask whether Iraq is in fact an Arab country... It's borders were created by the British and the majority of the population are Shia. Now, I may be wrong here, but aren't Shia predominantly Persian in origin rather than Arab? Also, Kurds aren't Arabs and they are a significant population here as well. As an aside, I read an interesting opinion that successive rulers in the region deliberately broke up the Kurdish lands to keep the Kurdish people from exerting too much power in the region. The Kurds are a proud people and were historically very strong - for example they were the only, or one of the very few, peoples that managed to resist Alexander the Great. The Ottoman empire began the 'divide and rule' policy with the Kurds and the British re-enforced this when they divided up the region. The fear of Kurdish nationality is still strong - as witnessed by Turkey's reaction to the invasion of Iraq.. So, is Iraq an Arab state? (To be honest, I'm not sure what the definition of Arab state is..?) Cheers, Shafique Liban The Shias are not all Persian in origin. In Iraq the Shia Muslims are of both Persian and Arab descent. For example: Grand Ayatolla Ali Sistani is, of long past, of Iranian background. His origins are indeed Persians. Ayatolla Moqtadar Al-Sadr is of Arab background. PM Jaafari is of Arab background. Shiite ideology in Iraq is similar to the one in Iran. But thats not to say that the Shiites are Iranian. To say that, one would also have to be convinced that since Sunni ideology is similar in say Syrian and Pakistanis Sunnis, those two groups are of the same ethnicity. That would, of course, be incorrect. Because of inter-racial marriages and the propensity for Arabs to leave their lands and explore, the Arab Race of the times of The Prophet is somewhat in a fluidic state. It is not necessarly homogeneous as one was. Arabs are linked by a common language and similar culture (note the words used, similar and not identical), moreso that skin tone, hair type, or religion (since many of my Arab bretheren are of Jewish and Christian faiths). Iraq is Arab, with the exception of the northern tip (which is predeominantly Kurdish) and the eastern front (which is predominantly Iranian). Lionheart
Choco...I'm doing more service for the freedom fighters in Iraq by being here, by making people aware of what is really happening in Iraq. The only thing I will achieve by going to Iraq to fight along side the freedom fighters is helping Americans/British discredit the freedom fighters as foriegn terrorist. sniper420
Well to begin with initially all the arabs originated from Yemen......Mesopotamia, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria (Allepo) etc....were non-Arab regions about 2000-3000 yrs ago, mainly after the rise of Islam, Arabs did spread and prosper in Middle East. Even today u see minority non-Arabs like Assyrians in Iraq kanelli
No you aren't, you are only spreading half-truths and present very little critical analysis of anything you read. You are a cut-and-paste propagandist. sniper420 Liban.......where was the Arab brotherhood when Iraqis invaded their bro's house and commited crimes that when I read I was dizzy for a week - I aint exaggerating. I can't comprehend the fact that somebody could do such heinous act-read "Matyr's day" by Micheal Kelly who provided balanced view of Iraq, Kuwait , Saudi & Isreal during Gulf War. Unfortunately he didnt get a chance to cover 2003 war and was the first journalist to die or casualty of war in Iraq in 2003. Ok leave past, see present, do u really know which region in the world is so imbalanced in weath- Middle east. Here there are countries of 4 or 10 million having GDP more than countries having pop of 120 million. Yes there is huge waste of wealth on useless buildings projects, luxuries while not far from the world ppl can't even afford single meal..... ok now let's go to past......did u know the reason why Baghdad fell in 11th century? If u read the conversations between Hulagu and Caliph u shall know the reasons........did u know why Jerusalem fell in first crusade.......did u know what Saladin had o go through just to unite troops to attack Jerusalem........if it wasn't for him, Jerusalem would have been an European country. Read em and I shall hear about ur Arab reunion fantasies...... Liban One thing you are so blatantly missing in your entire post is the notion of human ego. Who controls Arab countries? EGO-MANIACS!!! These egomaniacs were placed there or propped up directly or indirectly via Western interference. It is because of those ego-centrical rulers that Arab countries are in the disarray they are in today. As for your historical references. Thankyou for repeating what most people already know :) Lionheart
ok now let's go to past......did u know the reason why Baghdad fell in 11th century? If u read the conversations between Hulagu and Caliph u shall know the reasons........did u know why Jerusalem fell in first crusade.......did u know what Saladin had o go through just to unite troops to attack Jerusalem........if it wasn't for him, Jerusalem would have been an European country.
Saluhuddin(may allah be pleased with him) wasn't an Arab..he was a kurd and most of his solidiers were not..but rather consisted of mixture mainly Turkman , Kurds, Central Asian, and African muslims...Arabs at the time like today were busy in fighting and backstapping each other.. Chocoholic Liban ,I think you must be riding a Shire Horse as yours seems to be the highest around here! Don't tell us what we can and cannot comment on. Our people are dying in Iraq as well! Do you think we want them there being blown to bits, tortured and murdered everyday - no! So don't tell me what I can comment on. shafique Liban - thanks for the clarification about the ethnic make-up of Iraq. Just last night someone was explaining to me the ethnic make-up of the UAE and he commented that the 'nationals' weren't homogenous - and his comments that the Shia nationals here were Iranian in origin and his general comment was that in the Mid-East the Sunni/Shia split was on general ethnic lines - with Shia being of Persian descent. Thanks again for your insights - always good to learn. Wasalaam, Shafique Dubai Knight



Dubai Forum | Paris Forum | Vegan Forum | Brisbane Forum | 3D Forum | Classified Jobs in Dubai | Listings of Jobs in London | London classified ads Portal
| © 2021 Dubai Forums | Privacy policy