DawudTalut
Peace be upon you.
Peace be on you. What do think, is about to happen in Iraq. How things will be expanded? or curtailed as soon as possible? or will be waited to be get out of control?....Opinion?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What do think, is about to happen in Iraq.
- Thread starter DawudTalut
- Start date
"As soon as possible" is a very dangerous phrase to use in Iraq - or even in the Middle East in general.
The way I see it, Iraq lacks true unity - and worse yet, it lacks people willing to discuss things and seek mutual understandings as well. So I don't think it can get out of control, because it can hardly be said to be in control now.
What seems to be happening is a very typical anarchy period, perhaps an inevitable, even long-delayed one. According to the Wikipedia article about Iraq:
And right there you see much of the problem. Witness the first few paragraphs of the article about the Kingdom of Iraq:
It seems clear to me that there has never been a true Iraq as such; it is just a geographical territory inhabited by people that hardly ever (at least since 1920) had anything resembling a mutual understanding about their shared duties and rights.
Establishing "Treaties" and declaring countries and Kingdoms to exist is essentially meaningless in and of itself. It just creates the most superficial of semblances of legitimacy and ensures the continuity of hostilities, even if they are repressed most of the time.
Reconsidering the frontiers of Iraq might help a bit. But as Israel, Palestine, Paquistan and India can surely evidence, frontiers alone do not peace make.
"Iraq" has been suffering through attempts at seeking stability by way of armed conflict since 1920 at the very least. What effect can that have on the perspective of the people living there?
I very much doubt that more than a tiny percentage of them has more than a fleeting familiarity with true political stability, let alone political legitimacy (which I personaly find to be increasingly rare and arguably impossible to attain even in supposedly consolidated countries). The conflicts are too deeply rooted, the alternatives much too alien to their actual life experience.
I fear that most of the people in the region simply know of no better way than to take arms and go on until either dying or hoping to have killed enough people to create a momentary semblance of stability.
Solving such a quagmire is difficult under the best of circunstances. And heavy armed interference from foreign powers is about as far removed from those best of circunstances as a zombie apocalypse would be... and for depressingly similar reasons too, although the zombie scenario may actually be more peaceful.
The best case scenario that I can conceive, which is not even remotely a likely one, is one where the Arab League and other transnational organizations (of the kind that does not make a point of establishing its goals in military terms, mind you) spearhead good will campaigns of the kind that Khān Abdul Ghaffār Khān might inspire and engage in.
Basically, it is a matter of raising enough voices and unarmed soldiers willing to put themselves on the line in order to establish peace. Soldiers in the sense of accepting sacrifice for a cause, mind you. Of journeying and learning and appealing for peace.
By no means should the use of actual killing weapons by them be seen as acceptable. To be blunt, one does not create peace by being the most skilled killer.
Before such critical numbers of actual peace adepts are established in Iraq (at great cost and sacrifice, no doubt - but sacrifice can be peaceful and even joyous, as Christians are expected to be able to say), I can hardly expect anything else than a succession of confused conflicts with ever so questionable goals and dubious legitimacy.
Oh, and of course, if the US or even UNO approves of airstrikes, terrorism in the Middle East will spring anew and feverished for decades to come.
After all, what other choice will the people feel to have? Dying and suffering quietly on the behalf of the hubris of foreigners?
After all, what other choice will the people feel to have? Dying and suffering quietly on the behalf of the hubris of foreigners?
Civil war seems to have already started. The question, then, is whether it will be a long one or a short one.
BSM1
What? Me worry?
Exactly what many of us knew would happen as soon as we pulled out of the country. Iraq will revert back to a fanatically Islamic regime backed by Iran. They will display considerable chest beating when it comes to the Western world. Other radical and fanatical Islamic sects will gravitate to the Iraqi model. The Mideast will become a de facto caliphate. They will goad us into a war by attacking Israel. Bottom line we should not be hesitating bombing the rebel fighters into pudding; not for the good of the Iraqis, but for our own future security. Of course this is just MHO.
Which, of course, is a direct consequence of having pulled into it with a whole war machine in the first place, and of having armed Iraq so that it could better oppose Iran in the 1980s.
"Will"? Are you saying that somehow that did not happen when Saddam was brought down?
Is that at all a novelty? Has it been any different at any point in the last century or so?
That is unlikely in the extreme. There is nothing special about Iraq, particularly in the religious sense. Plenty of better-structured candidates have been attempting to raise the new Caliphate for decades at least, and there is little chance of it actually happening in the predictable future.
Or by funding Fox News. Whichever is cheaper or more entertaining.
Let us all be grateful for that.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
This should be no surprise.
Obviously the US needs to provide a continual support base for the Iraqi government to bring back the situation under a modicom of control. If you ask me, we should not have meddled in the first place, but obviously it's all spilled milk now.
Btw wheres the UN concerning all this?
Obviously the US needs to provide a continual support base for the Iraqi government to bring back the situation under a modicom of control. If you ask me, we should not have meddled in the first place, but obviously it's all spilled milk now.
Btw wheres the UN concerning all this?
kashmir
Well-Known Member
I agree, plus they should have already done it.
I believe no matter what happens, they will always be in civil war.
At least fighting back will keep them disorganized.
You cant let ppl like the ISIS grow and get strong.
If 800 of them can displace half a million people, imagine what 10,000 of them can do...
Nope, we cant let them plant roots any more then they already have.
What scares me is how many people share this opinion. How many times must we relearn the lesson that trying to fix problems caused by ill informed violence with more ill informed violence is not going to work. It is like trying to cure lung cancer with cigarettes.
If the USA really cared about peace in the middle east the first thing we would do is end the importation of fossil fuel. Then stop sending weapons to everyone. But that would inconvenience the people who really run this country so it won't happen.
Tom
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
People will kill continue to kill each other over minor theological differences due to cultural norms.
Or, in other words, business as usual.
kashmir
Well-Known Member
people that say that USA shouldn't attack the ISIS because they will be even more hateful of us, is like saying the cops shouldn't arrest murderers and the judge put them in prison because when they get out, they will murder more people, if we just leave them alone, they will stop.
people that say that USA shouldn't attack the ISIS because they will be even more hateful of us, is like saying the cops shouldn't arrest murderers and the judge put them in prison because when they get out, they will murder more people, if we just leave them alone, they will stop.
No. It's like saying that cops shouldn't spray random street corners in south Chicago with gunfire hoping to end crime.
Tom
kashmir
Well-Known Member
No, now you are just making irrelevant comparisons.
Shooting random street corners is not the same thing as defending innocent people and shooting at the enemy, who btw attacked first, attacked innocent people over their own greed for power
It is if you don't know who is innocent, who's the enemy, or even who all is being hit. That is really random. And has been shown not to work. It is what created this mess. WE attacked first. What do you think "Shock and Awe" was? What is being proposed here is more of the same disastrous policies that are bringing the world to the brink of Armageddon.
Tom
kashmir
Well-Known Member
We know who the innocents are, they were displaced, they are not beheading people and burning down cities right now.
And stop it with the who attacked first, no one attacked the ISIS, they are brand new, they just came into existence because they seen they can take what ever they want from the innocents :yes:
MD
qualiaphile
ISIS was formed and created in the Syrian civil war, and most of their funding came from Saudi Arabia, a trusted 'ally' of the west.
kashmir
Well-Known Member
I assume nothing stops them, its all about getting attention and free stuff.
Nothing any of them do makes a lick of sense.
People want peace over there but it isnt those guys, they want power and control at the expense of even killing babies by throwing them off of buildings and beating what is left of the bodies with clubs and then setting them on fire.
Attacking people we don't know is what brought about the ISIS.
And yes we attacked them first. They are people in Iraq. We attacked them in a such a stupid way that we cleared a path for ISIS. We aren't going to get rid of ISIS with bombings any more than we got rid of Taliban and Al Queda that way.
How many times will we have to relearn that lesson? How many innocent people must suffer and die before it sinks in?
The human race is doomed, IMHO, because people like you and ISIS keep believing that some more violence will result in peace your way.
Tom