Sunnis Vs. Shiites

[Racoon]

I do not understand this conflict between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. :confused:

 

Sunni's are the majority sect of Muslims worldwide, but the Shiites are the majority in Iraq... Thus causing so much more bloodshed there during this war, and in unifying a New Government. ;)

 

If they want to kill each other over a few differences, well....:)

What is it with this My Way or the Highway B.S.?

 

Can anyone help explain the actual differences between the two? (historically/religious viewpoint); and why the animosity to the point of Murder and Mayhem?

[TINNY]

I know a lot of cases in Iraq where a sunni man is married to a shiite woman. This might also be the case in Iran too. Would a shiite really want to kill her own husband?

 

The following Reuters report raises some disturbing questions.

 

Why were undercover British "soldiers" wearing traditional Arab headscarves firing at Iraqi police?

 

The incident took place just prior to a major religious event in Basra.

 

The report suggests that the police thought the British soldiers looked "suspicious". What was the nature of their mission?

 

Occupation forces are supposesd to be collaborating with Iraqi authorities. Why did Britsh Forces have to storm the prison using tanks and armoured vehicles to liberate the British undercover agents?

 

"British forces used up to 10 tanks " supported by helicopters " to smash through the walls of the jail and free the two British servicemen."

 

Was there concern that the British "soldiers" who were being held by the Iraqi National Guard would be obliged to reveal the nature and objective of their undercover mission?

 

A report of Al Jazeera TV, which preceeded the raid on the prison, suggests that the British undercover soldiers were driving a booby trapped car loaded with ammunition. The Al Jazeera report (see below) also suggests that the riots directed against British military presence were motivated because the British undercover soldiers were planning to explode the booby trapped car in the centre of Basra:

 

[Anchorman Al-Habib al-Ghuraybi] We have with us on the telephone from Baghdad Fattah al-Shaykh, member of the Iraqi National Assembly. What are the details of and the facts surrounding this incident?

 

[Al-Shaykh] In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate. There have been continuous provocative acts since the day before yesterday by the British forces against the peaceful sons of Basra. There have been indiscriminate arrests, the most recent of which was the arrest of Shaykh Ahmad al-Farqusi and two Basra citizens on the pretext that they had carried out terrorist operations to kill US soldiers. This is a baseless claim. This was confirmed to us by [name indistinct] the second secretary at the British Embassy in Baghdad, when we met with him a short while ago. He said that there is evidence on this. We say: You should come up with this evidence or forget about this issue. If you really want to look for truth, then we should resort to the Iraqi justice away from the British provocations against the sons of Basra, particularly what happened today when the sons of Basra caught two non-Iraqis, who seem to be Britons and were in a car of the Cressida type. It was a booby-trapped car laden with ammunition and was meant to explode in the centre of the city of Basra in the popular market. However, the sons of the city of Basra arrested them. They [the two non-Iraqis] then fired at the people there and killed some of them. The two arrested persons are now at the Intelligence Department in Basra, and they were held by the National Guard force, but the British occupation forces are still surrounding this department in an attempt to absolve them of the crime.

 

[Al-Ghuraybi] Thank you Fattah al-Shaykh, member of the National Assembly and deputy for Basra.

 

Text of report by Qatari Al-Jazeera satellite TV on 19 September (emphasis added)

 

Is this an isolated incident or is part of a pattern?

 

More significantly, have the occupation forces been involved in similar undercover missions? Syrian TV (Sept 19, 2005) reports the following:

 

Ten Iraqis - seven police commandos, two civilians and a child - were killed and more than 10 others wounded in the explosion of two car bombs near two checkpoints in Al-Mahmudiyah and Al-Latifiyah south of Baghdad while hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were heading towards the city of Karbala to mark the anniversary of a religious event.

 

And in a significant incident in the city of Basra, which is also marking the same religious event, Iraqi demonstrators set fire to two British tanks near a police station after Iraqi police had arrested two British soldiers disguised in civilian clothes for opening fire on police. Eight armoured British vehicles surrounded the police station before the eruption of the confrontations. A policeman at the scene said the two detained Britons were wearing traditional Iraqi jallabahs [loose cloaks] and wigs.

 

[italics added]

 

An indepth independent inquiry should be ordered by Britain's House of Commons into the circumstances of this event.

[someguy]

Can anyone help explain the actual differences between the two? (historically/religious viewpoint); and why the animosity to the point of Murder and Mayhem?

If I understand it correctly and I am pretty sure I do the difference is that the Shiites believe the rightful leader of the Muslims should be a direct decendant of the profit Muhammed. Of course they also believe they have those decendants. The profits line was broken shortly after his death. His son-in-law or someone in his bloodline, I think, was mudered when they were the rightful hiere to the throne. It was taken over by diferent people and they aid it does not matter who rules. This is the belief of the Sunni.

Why the animosity? It is religion. Everyone wants to kill the people who believe the wrong way in religion. Just kidding, but most of them do and that is why they can.

Some Guy

[TheBigDog]

Why the animosity? It is religion. Everyone wants to kill the people who believe the wrong way in religion. Just kidding, but most of them do and that is why they can.

Some Guy

Even softening it to most is a disservice to believers. Most believers, regardless of their shosen faith, manage to live peacefully within their diverse communities. It is corrupt people who manipulate theology into warfare. In every religion I have studied the practitioners are offered choices. The choices we make are still our responsibility, regardless of who's name we choose to make them in.

 

We need to be careful in how we quantify the actions of the few (the very few) or actions that happened in ancient history as representing the vast and diverse population that exists today.

 

Bill

[Turtle]

I do not understand this conflict between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. :hyper:

 

 

No different than the protestants & catholics in Ireland.:evil:

[someguy]

Even softening it to most is a disservice to believers. Most believers, regardless of their shosen faith, manage to live peacefully within their diverse communities. It is corrupt people who manipulate theology into warfare. In every religion I have studied the practitioners are offered choices. The choices we make are still our responsibility, regardless of who's name we choose to make them in.

 

We need to be careful in how we quantify the actions of the few (the very few) or actions that happened in ancient history as representing the vast and diverse population that exists today.

 

Bill

While I agree with this to a point, the simple fact of the matter is that all of us allow "the few" who are willing to kill to do it. Mostly, I would say, out of laziness but nonetheless we allow it. I would not say most live peacefully as we are talking about the wars right now. Genocide and mass murders are done in the name of religion all the time. We may try to be peaceful people but we allow such atrocities because they believe differently. It is an effective way to dehumanize the enemy, saying they are heretics or nonbelievers in the "truth".

This is the reason why suicide bombers feel justified in their cause.

Some Guy

[someguy]

No different than the protestants & catholics in Ireland.:)

pretty much

[TheBigDog]

While I agree with this to a point, the simple fact of the matter is that all of us allow "the few" who are willing to kill to do it. Mostly, I would say, out of laziness but nonetheless we allow it. I would not say most live peacefully as we are talking about the wars right now. Genocide and mass murders are done in the name of religion all the time. We may try to be peaceful people but we allow such atrocities because they believe differently. It is an effective way to dehumanize the enemy, saying they are heretics or nonbelievers in the "truth".

This is the reason why suicide bombers feel justified in their cause.

Some Guy

Only a very very small fraction of the billions of people on earth are engaged in any kind of holy war where they kill others. Most are engaged in the peaceful winning of hearts and minds. That is a plain fact. Religion is sometimes used as a tool by corrupt individuals to convince others to engage in war. But that is a symptom of human frailty and corruption, not a symptom of religion. If they did not have religion as their cause they would invent some other.

 

Bill

[Cedars]

Only a very very small fraction of the billions of people on earth are engaged in any kind of holy war where they kill others. Most are engaged in the peaceful winning of hearts and minds. That is a plain fact. Religion is sometimes used as a tool by corrupt individuals to convince others to engage in war. But that is a symptom of human frailty and corruption, not a symptom of religion. If they did not have religion as their cause they would invent some other.

 

Bill

 

While I agree that few of the millions/billions of believers are engaged in an actual holy war against other human beings, I would disagree that the psycological and emotional warfare being committed against people of different ideas is all that peaceful.

[Racoon]

While I agree that few of the millions/billions of believers are engaged in an actual holy war against other human beings, I would disagree that the psycological and emotional warfare being committed against people of different ideas is all that peaceful.

 

 

Case in point! :hihi:

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13163802/

 

WTF are some people thinking?

[someguy]

Only a very very small fraction of the billions of people on earth are engaged in any kind of holy war where they kill others. Most are engaged in the peaceful winning of hearts and minds. That is a plain fact. Religion is sometimes used as a tool by corrupt individuals to convince others to engage in war. But that is a symptom of human frailty and corruption, not a symptom of religion. If they did not have religion as their cause they would invent some other.

 

Bill

The point I make is that we do not choose some other reason because it doesn't receive the backing that the religious ones receive. Religion by it's very existence is a tool that can be corrupted. The fact that it is used to convince others to engage in war is the entire point. Others, the silent peaceable people you are referring to, are coereced into war by the religious reasons used to dehumanize the opposing populations. The simple fact of the matter is that the suppossedly peaceable religious people back the war, so therefore they aren't very peaceable.

Some Guy

[Freddy]

In Iraq the Sunnis, the minority, were in power during Saddam's long reign. They have much Shiite blood on their hands. Added to this the long standing hatred between the two Muslim groups, that others have pointed out, you have the makings for a major bloodbath. When the US finally leaves Iraq the civil war that is already brewing will explode with the majority Shiites taking revenge for the decades of Sunni attrocities committed against them. Iran will be supporting their brother Shiites in this civil war and then the possible unification of the two Shiite states may come about. Thank Mr. Bush for his part in bringing this about! If he had stayed the course on al-queda and bin-laden we would have many less dead Americans and much less negative feeling toward the US around the world. Iraq was a grave mistake. We could have taken Saddam out with a cruise missile.

[Racoon]

Here is a decent video from MSNBC ..

It helps explain the precariousness of the War in Iraq..

I was a little confused why the Sunni's and Shiites were such bitter rivals.. then throw American forces in the mix.

This war is not going good.. :(

 

 

Fighting for Iraq: A regional powerplay - Conflict in Iraq - MSNBC.com