Feb 24 2008
al-Qaeda Massacring Iraqi Muslims In Droves
Want to know how bad it is for al-Qaeda in Iraq? Look at who they attack – both Shiite and Sunni. Clearly al-Qaeda is trying through bloody oppression to cower the Iraqis. That is a dumb move which will only bring more Arab Muslim into armed opposition to al-Qaeda. Here are today’s examples of massacre and carnage in Iraq – and it is not from US Forces but al-Qaeda fanatics.
The biggest attacks where upon Shiite pilgrims who are traveling to Karbala, Iraq:
A suicide bomber struck Shiite pilgrims Sunday as they were taking a break during the days-long walk to a Shiite shrine south of Baghdad for a major religious gathering, killing at least 40 people.
…
Earlier, extremists attacked another group of pilgrims with guns and grenades in the predominantly Sunni Baghdad neighborhood of Dora, killing three and wounding 36, police said. Officers describing the attacks spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to release information.
…
Earlier in the day, a steady stream of pilgrims — some carrying green, black or red banners — walked along a highway out of Baghdad en route to the shrine. Among them were many families, including children and black-robed women.
There are only a few delusional liberals in the West who don’t see these horrific acts for what they are: al-Qaeda fascists killing Muslims on a holy pilgrimage. al-Qaeda is not at war with the West or the Great Satan America. It is it war with Islam and wants to wrest control of the religion from its more peaceful factions. Islam is a tool for al-Qaeda to gain world dominance, nothing more. And that reality is starting to settle in with the Muslim community as each attack emphasizes how al-Qaeda’s actions defy their vaulted words.
The other noteworthy attack of the day was the assassination of a Sunni leader of the Awakening movement, the movement which spearheaded the Muslim break with al-Qaeda.
Sheikh Ibrahim Mutayri al-Mohammedi, a senior member of the Awakening Council in the city, was killed along with one of his aides at his home on Saturday.
Police said the five men who carried out the attack belonged to al-Qaeda in Iraq and were killed in the explosion.
Several leaders of Awakening Councils have been killed in the past year.
I understand those here in America in the throws Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) will never understand what this means to Iraqis and Muslims, but what today shows is Sunnis dying because they are trying to destroy the people out massacring Shiite pilgrims. All al-Qaeda ever accomplished with their blood lust is vapid and breathless press coverage in the West and rising opposition with the Arab Muslim community.
Trust me when I say the influence of the Western media, dying because of its overdosing on liberal bias in the press corpse for so many decades, is not going to offset the rising anger in the Muslim community. al-Qaeda’s attacks are forcing Shiite, Sunni and Kurds of Iraq to join forces in self defense, driving them towards the US position and away from Bin Laden’s delusions of world dominance. If al-Qaeda wasn’t rampant with blood thirsty fanatics they would see the better path is to lay back and let the differences in the groups begin to create fractures. But insanity doesn’t usually come with rational thought.
Instead we have al-Qaeda fighting the Arab Muslim world. It is imperative that this year’s presidential election address the potential for the US to support allies in the ME who will isolate al-Qaeda from becoming a regional or world-wide force, if not see al-Qaeda destroyed out right. And we will not be able to explore this potential by retreating and letting our Iraqi friends fight al-Qaeda alone.
Update: It seems I am not the only one who wants to explore what is possible in terms of creating success. Here is very coincidental article in the Washington Post on the very this very point:
No one can return from the battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan, as I recently did, without believing that these are wars that can still be won. They are also clearly wars that can still be lost, but visits to the battlefield show that these conflicts are very different from the wars being described in American political campaigns and most of the debates outside the United States.
…
The military situations in Iraq and Afghanistan are very different. The United States and its allies are winning virtually every tactical clash in both countries. In Iraq, however, al-Qaeda is clearly losing in every province. It is being reduced to a losing struggle for control of Nineveh and Mosul.
…
Military victory is far more marginal in Afghanistan. NATO and international troops can still win tactically, but the Taliban is sharply expanding its support areas as well as its political and economic influence and control in Afghanistan. It has scored major gains in Pakistan, which is clearly the more important prize for al-Qaeda and has more Pashtuns than Afghanistan.
Democrats and those willing to shed their BDS need to remember a key word in global security: momentum. We don’t need to, and should not, reverse our successes in Iraq as a false choice to focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan. We have chased al-Qaeda back to their homeland where they are surrounded. We need to continue to on to success and deliver justice on those responsible for 9-11. And we need to win so no one else will get the dumb idea we will not crush those who attack us. It is peace through strength that brings peace. Weakness, failure, faltering resolve all bring violence because the vultures see an opening they think they can exploit.
The critics of American presence will not see any of that. They will see continued violence in Iraq=our fault= we should boogy. End of story.
AJ without sounding like a kiss ass anyonewho reads your posts has to be amazed of the wealth of info they get from you. My personal opionion anyone who does not donate at least $50 a year should think of it as a magazine that they buy per week except with much more info!
“the Taliban is sharply expanding its support areas as well as its political and economic influence and control in Afghanistan.”
I would say that was accurate late last summer or early this past fall but I do not believe it holds true today. This winter the Taliban were ejected from the only town they controlled outright. In the past week or two they have had two major commanders wiped out in Helmand province.
The Taliban’s base of support is under pressure inside Pakistan and the Islamists have lost their role in the provincial governments there. This spring will not likely see any offensive in Afghanistan.
Contrary to what this article says, I believe that things are better in Afghanistan. The trouble is that any reporter going there from the US is going to be so culturally estranged from the local people that he isn’t going to really be able to get a true look at what is going in. Afghanistan is culturally much different than Iraq is. Iraq is closer to us. We can go into an Iraqi town, find a diner and sit and talk to people. Walk into a town in Afghanistan and you aren’t likely to find any shops of any sort. There is little national identity in Afghanistan, the people are mostly tribal in their identity.
Here is what I think we should do:
A rather large undertaking in building a very good road network to provide national automotive communications. Same with a terrestrial phone network. Create national broadcast media and pick a national language. Broadcast as much national culture and sport as you can find. Televise games by the Afghanistan national soccer team, for example. Build a national cultural identity. Over that national broadcast network, broadcast kid shows so that children from every part of Afghanistan will have the same cultural underpinnings and references when they grow up. Start with kids shows on radio and TV and work upwards in age. Provide shows nationally that people can talk about if they should meet or speak on the phone no matter where they live. Make the country culturally smaller and similar.
crosspatch:
years ago at IU I had a Chinese history professor named Teng. He had left China during the Cultural Revolution. He said the thing that Mao did that had more to do with his success than anything else, was unification of language and identity. He talked about how each part of China had its own dialect and identity but Mao changed that. Now there are still dialects in China, and there are still remote rural areas, but the Chinese people today can listen to a broadcast from the central government and most everyone will understand what they are hearing.