Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

They do have their say Liban.

They are knocking shit out of each other, in between blowing each other up.

Sarcasm is the tool of fools arniegang.

Rethink your approach.

Liban wrote: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.

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

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?

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.

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

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).

Chocoholic wrote: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.

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.

shafique wrote: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

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

Lionheart wrote:

Chocoholic wrote: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.

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.

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.

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......

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

sniper420 wrote: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......

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..

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.

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

sniper420 wrote:

Liban wrote: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.

Thats a very insular policy. So pull up the drawbridge on Iraq, put anyone in there that wants to be in there and everyone else out? The bloodshed would be appalling and the country would end up as sophisticated and as able to represent itself on the international stage as a country like Burundi!

It would not be long before Iraq was looked upon by a more powerful neighbour with envious eyes and everything would be back to square one.

The only workable solution is to allow the international bodies to hold back the zealots and terrorists (one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist) until such time as a duly elected and effective internal government can establish a peaceful form of control. Unfortunately there are people involved here who have such a bigoted view of their own importance that they will continue to create and preach violence, no matter who is attempting to provide law and order. These people thrive on human suffering to impose their one sided views.

Look what happened when Iraq was left to it's own devices before...Saddam Hussein was able to install himself as a despot and the suffering began. There is no easy solution. The majority of sensible, peace loving, humanity must take the running and stand up and be counted. At the moment, they are cowed and afraid to do that, not by the invading forces, but by the tiny majority of brain dead, warmongering bigots who want control by the gun and not the rule of law.

If the US and British forces left the country now, the whole place would implode and then all we would hear was the bleating of people saying how unfair the whole situation is for the people of Iraq. Sense must prevail at the end of the day, but how far away that is...is anyone's guess.

Knight

Liban wrote: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

So u know the past can u tell me within 5 mins why didnt Caliph surrender in first place?

well where ur @ss is also ruled by so called ego-centric ruler......now why dont u unite some arab patriots and topple the puppet?

DK, you speak the voice of the West. One that is homogeneous in its justification of its actions as righteous and holier than thou.... And International bodies you say? No thanks, we all know who is the real power iehind them (back to square one).

Sniper, which Caliph?

And I am not ruled by anyone.

Liban wrote:DK, you speak the voice of the West. One that is homogeneous in its justification of its actions as righteous and holier than thou.... And International bodies you say? No thanks, we all know who is the real power iehind them (back to square one).

Sniper, which Caliph?

And I am not ruled by anyone.

the last Caliph of Baghdad......
not ruled by anyone eh? Can u pass me 10 billion dollars from the account of so and sp Shiekh?

sniper420 wrote:

Liban wrote:DK, you speak the voice of the West. One that is homogeneous in its justification of its actions as righteous and holier than thou.... And International bodies you say? No thanks, we all know who is the real power iehind them (back to square one).

Sniper, which Caliph?

And I am not ruled by anyone.

the last Caliph of Baghdad......
not ruled by anyone eh? Can u pass me 10 billion dollars from the account of so and sp Shiekh?

No, I will not.

sniper420 wrote:

Liban wrote:DK, you speak the voice of the West. One that is homogeneous in its justification of its actions as righteous and holier than thou.... And International bodies you say? No thanks, we all know who is the real power iehind them (back to square one).

Sniper, which Caliph?

And I am not ruled by anyone.

the last Caliph of Baghdad......
not ruled by anyone eh? Can u pass me 10 billion dollars from the account of so and sp Shiekh?

No, I will not.

Liban wrote:

sniper420 wrote:

Liban wrote:DK, you speak the voice of the West. One that is homogeneous in its justification of its actions as righteous and holier than thou.... And International bodies you say? No thanks, we all know who is the real power iehind them (back to square one).

Sniper, which Caliph?

And I am not ruled by anyone.

the last Caliph of Baghdad......
not ruled by anyone eh? Can u pass me 10 billion dollars from the account of so and sp Shiekh?

No, I will not.

proves u r a phony......

Liban wrote:DK, you speak the voice of the West. One that is homogeneous in its justification of its actions as righteous and holier than thou.... And International bodies you say? No thanks, we all know who is the real power iehind them (back to square one).

Sniper, which Caliph?

And I am not ruled by anyone.

Yes, I speak the voice of the west, but I like to think it is one of tolerance and reason. However you have to agree that leaving the whole state to it's own devices is tantamount to signing the death warrant of some group or other. The whole situation is sectarian, if there was more understanding and tolerance internally within Iraq, then maybe there would be a chance for a totally Islamic solution (notice I did not use the expression 'Arab').

Being a Brit, we have lived under the threat of violence in our own home country for many hundreds of years from a situation created in Northern Ireland by a succession of politicians and religious zealots. The only people who suffer in a sectarian guerrila war, are the innocent bystanders who end up being blown to kingdom come by a few morons in the name of 'freedom'. The same is true in Spain with the Basque movement and many other countries around the world where a minority group expects to control by the force of terror.

I do not claim to be an expert on the minutiae of the political and religious reasons for the conflict, I just wish it would stop and let the people of Iraq try to live a normal life. If you kick the US and UK forces out now...it will not solve the problem, only create a bigger one. The threat of escalation to encompass the whole Gulf region is real. If the US had not forced Saddam out of Kuwait in Gulf War 1, where would it have ended? At that time, the entire world, via the UN, was united in approving an action to push Saddam back behind his own border. The UAE, Qatar and Saudi Arabia were heavily involved in that action.

Can you advocate the actions of the warlords in Eritreya or Somalia who line their own pockets and create their own political power at the point of a gun by starving their own people of food donated by the international community? It is human nature to try to be ahead of the next man, we are a competitive species, this would happen in an Iraq without control and we would definitely be 'back to square one'...with another Saddam.

No one rules me either, certainly not the a-holes we call leaders back home!

nice post DK

arniegang wrote:nice post DK

Ta! White Man not speak with forked tongue!



Knight

i think you know more than you let on DK

arniegang wrote:i think you know more than you let on DK

I think I know more than some of the people who post one sided crap here!

Dubai Knight wrote:

arniegang wrote:i think you know more than you let on DK

I think I know more than some of the people who post one sided crap here!

Then you would know that only a strong Iraqi leader can stop the violence and not the losers the Americans/Brits put in power through sham elections or the gay love partners Bush and Blair....

Liban wrote:

Dubai Knight wrote:

arniegang wrote:i think you know more than you let on DK

I think I know more than some of the people who post one sided crap here!

Then you would know that only a strong Iraqi leader can stop the violence and not the losers the Americans/Brits put in power through sham elections or the gay love partners Bush and Blair....

And how do you KNOW that a person that any number of Western countries would approve of as leader of Iraq is a loser?

I think that democracy should be left to the people, but I can see why other countries take an interest in who gets into office and who doesn't. Maybe they are worried about religious fanatics getting in and destabalising the country with sectarian violence. Maybe they find relations better with more liberal politicians who operate on laws independent of religion?

Too bad Canada and Mexico couldn't secretly rig it so that Bush didn't get into office for a second term!