This is hard to talk about: The violence being perpetrated in the name of Islam

[cali]

I know the U.S. perpetrates violence. that's hardly a topic I've shied away from. It's not controversial here to discuss it or condemn it. It happens multiple times daily.

It's more difficult (at least for me) to discuss the sectarian violence within Islam. It's not my religion. It's not my culture. There's been far too much bigotry against Muslims. Just yesterday I saw someone here mockingly remark about the "religion of peace". There have been folks here who agreed with Sarah Palin's repulsive comment "let god sort them out".

but the sectarian violence is crashing down in a huge wave: Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia.

Most of this sectarian violence is Sunni v Shia, but some are Muslim attacks on Christians such as the Pakistan church bombing and the Kenya Mall attack.

Why is this happening? What role has western interference played both historically and currently? How much of it can be attributed to the long schism within Islam?

I don't know. As I said, I don't know how to talk about this.

[leveymg]

1. We opened a pandora's box with serial regime change across MENA. Religious war was the inevitable

result in Syria given its particular history of Sunni-Shi'ia conflict and its proximity, strategic and symbolic importance to the major antagonists within the region: Saudi Arabia, Iran and Israel. The breakup of Libya sent tens of thousands of hardened fighters newly armed with sophisticated weapons into the other conflict zones, particularly Syria. Once ignited, civil war in Syria was bound to spread.

The Sunni-Shi'ia Jihad is a cancer that was once contained and stable. The Clinton-Petraeus serial regime change doctrine destabilized the region, and sectarian violence and terrorism is now metasticizing. Now, it will make the whole world violently ill.

[Renew Deal]

2. Clinton?

Bill or Hillary? What did Bill have to with regime change in the Middle East?

I think a lot of this stuff begins with the invasion of Iraq. It planted the seed.

[leveymg]

5. Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and CIA Director Petraeus led this policy. You're absolutely right

that the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the destruction of the secular Ba'ath regime there -- which resulted in the three-way breakup of Iraq into Shi'ia (southern), Sunni (central and western), and Kurdish (northern) semi-autonomous regions -- was an important precursor to the sectarian intra-Islamic war.

But, the region was fairly stable until early 2011 when simultaneous regime change operations were initiated in Libya and Syria, and the collapse of the Ghadaffi regime and movement of arms and fighters fed the Syrian civil war which is now spreading back into Iraq and several other surrounding countries.

[malaise]

22. +1,000

Divide and rule fueled by the West.

[JDPriestly]

36. I think we were responding to the tensions already existing in the Middle East.

I don't think "we opened a pandora's box."

WWI ended Turkey's dominance in a large party of the Middle East. From that time on, there were many problems. We should have left the Iranian attempt at democracy alone in the 1950s, let it develop as naturally, but it would be a tremendous misunderstanding of the facts to blame the US for the extreme Muslim intolerance in the Middle East.

And the proof is that the upper and upper middle classes of educated people in the Middle East who like Americans are not perpetrating the violence. It is the Muslim fanatics that are perpetrating the violence.

While I am at it, I posted this under World Forum under Media today:

At least 56 killed and more than 100 injured in attack on Christian church in Pakistan.
This report is dated September 22, 2013.

Peshawar -- In the most severe attack on Christians in Pakistan in hears, dozens were killed in a suicide attack in Pakistan Sunday. Two attackers blew themselves into up as the visitors to Sunday services in a church in the city of Peshawar left after the Sunday mass. At least 56 people lost their lives according to police reports including many women and children. More than 100 people were injured.

Peshawar - Beim schwersten Anschlag auf Christen in Pakistan seit Jahren haben Selbstmordattentäter am Sonntag Dutzende Menschen getötet. Zwei Angreifer sprengten sich in die Luft, als Gottesdienstbesucher gerade eine Kirche in der Stadt Peshawar nach der Sonntagsmesse verließen. Mindestens 56 Menschen kamen nach Polizeiangaben ums Leben, darunter auch viele Frauen und Kinder. Mehr als 100 Personen wurden verletzt.

http://derstandard.at/1379291616077/Zehn-Tote-bei-Selbstmordanschlag-auf-Kirche-in-Pakistan

The article further reports that there were about 600 people in the 130-year-old church when two explosions were heard. There have been anti-Christian protests in other cities in Pakistan including one in 2009 when about 1000 Muslims burned a church killing perhaps 7 people.

From the same article:

"Der Ministerpräsident sagt, dass Terroristen keine Religion haben", erklärte das Büro von Regierungschef Nawaz Sharif. "Es ist gegen die Lehren des Islam und aller anderen Religionen, Unschuldige zu töten."

"The Pakistani President said that terrorists have no religion," explained the office of Nawaz Sharif, head of the government. "It is against the teaching of the Muslim religion and all other religions to kill innocents."

[leveymg]

47. I agree that much of this problem goes back to Sykes-Picot's "lines in the sand" division of the

Last edited Sun Sep 22, 2013, 11:14 AM - Edit history (1)

Ottoman Empire into colonial "protectorates" in 1919. The approach was to intentionally divide ethnic and national groups so as to keep them more easily conquered. The standard approach of both the British and the French within their own holdings was to put the second or third most powerful minority in control of colonial administration and to keep internal factions fighting each other. That in itself created lingering resentments that are at the root of many long-term conflicts after independence.

That's exactly what happened in Syria after World War One when the French shut down King Faisal's British-backed bid for independence and favored the Alawite minority over the Sunni majority. In 1963 there was a military coup and the Asad clan emerged as the leading faction of the Ba'ath Party. From 1976 to 1982 the Sunnis attempted a rebellion with Saudi and Israeli backing, the so-called Long War of Terror, that was brutally put down culminating in the bombardment of Hama that killed 10-20,000. The current civil war is really a continuation of that bitter conflict.

In early 2011, the State Dept. and CIA worked with French and British intelligence to whip up rebellion among Sunni exile groups, and the Saudis and Qataris worked on a dual track operation through the Sunni mosques. The outcome of religious war in Syria was preordained and quite intentional.

[ronnie624]

83. Excellent post. n/t

[CJCRANE]

3. This is fairly recent in historical terms

if you consider that the Afghan Mujahideen and foreign fighters were considered to be heroes in the 80s, which was the first major appearance of this type of religious fundamentalism in modern times.

Before that the main "freedom fighters" were marxist and nationalist, such the IRA, ETA, PLO, South American revolutionaries (just think of the stereotypical terrorist of the 60s and 70s - Carlos the Jackal - and think of the image of a freedom fighter wearing a beret).

Plus think of the strongmen of the arab world of the past few decades: Saddam, Nasser, Ghadaffi, Assad, Arafat. All of them were arab nationalists and socialists.

[burnsei sensei]

16. I know this is not a pretty thing to say,

but I think we should have allowed Afghanistan to fall to the Soviets.
Everywhere we've aided people not in constructed authority, there has been disaster, beginning with ww1.

[AtheistCrusader]

49. Vietnam too. We also horked up Iraq.

Probably should have broken Iraq into 3 nations, one Sunni, one Shia, one Kurdish. Can't tell me that we were incapable of keeping our own ally, Turkey from invading in that scenario.

If we had the ME's best interests at heart, after the second Iraq War, that's what we would have done, but we didn't. Too proud. Couldn't risk effectively ceding a chunk of Iraq to Iran, because we're too fucking proud...

[ronnie624]

84. The whole point of the US intervention in Afghanistan,

which included supporting terrorist attacks in the USSR, was to provoke the Soviet invasion, according to Zbigniew Brzezinski, in an interview by Der Spiegel, so it is possible that there would have been no invasion without US meddling.

[Skidmore]

4. Why does sectarian war happen in any religion?

Christianity has a history rife with such strife and some of its infighting is within our lifetimes. Ultimately these fights are rooted in dogma versus newer versions around the teachings of whatever prophet they follow. Islami sectarian strife is rooted in a disputes over who was rightfully Mohammad's heir to his religious leadership and what teachings should carry forward. Even though these theological have become masked by political and national interests, at the heart lies the belief that each group represents the will of God and his prophet on earth. Political grievances mask much historical animosity. The West has given them a target around which to unify. Absent grievances against colonial powers, the fight focuses on supremacy of theology.

On Kindle now so that must seem cryptic. I just hate fighting with the virtual keyboard.

[cali]

6. within our lifetime? Examples on a par as to that which is going on within Islam?

I don't know how much of it is actually rooted within dogma. There seem to be a lot of other factors.

And I think the comparison with Christianity within our lifetime, is a false equivalency.

[CJCRANE]

7. Northern Ireland, but that was on a smaller scale.

Europe had a 1000 years of war up until 1945 and a lot of that was religious based.

[cali]

13. Northern Ireland was just as much, if not more about colonization

And from the early to mid 19th century the wars in Europe were not largely based in religion.

[CJCRANE]

18. I'm pretty sure the same complexities apply about the intertwining of religion, culture, ethnicity

in the ME.

For example, don't forget in WWII the Nazis tried to eradicate an entire religious minority. A lot of European anti-semitism was based on christian ideas. It didn't just appear in a vacuum.

Plus there was the stuff in Bosnia and Kosovo in the 90s.

[Skidmore]

62. And the West's influence in the ME has also pretty much centered around

issues of colonization. As the ME nations sought to expel western nations from exerting influence and dictating governance, political dissent found a home within the mosque, beyond the perview of those who helped western nations pursue their interests. This is where the Iranian revolution found its roots and the mosques served as locations to gather and disseminate rebellion, both against political oppression and to halt the creep of westernization, which was perceived of as an assault on Iranian culture and Islam.

You hear the same sorts of criticisms levied by fundamentalist Christians now in this nation while they wrap perceived threats against their belief system in the flag and frame it as a fight against Islam and secularist as a war in which their "way of life" and freedoms have been threatened. I see very little difference between religionists and their perceived moral certitude and simultaneous persecution. I think it has more to do with good old basic group dynamics. The group will seek to expel any who threaten it and will coalesce around those who seek to preserve it.

[truebluegreen]

63. Lived in Ireland for a time, back in the late 70s.

According to my Irish friends, the troubles were rooted in civil rights and the divide-and-rule strategy of the elites. The "haves" deliberately fed sectarian violence to keep the underclasses from uniting. Not unlike the southern strategy of co-opting poor whites by oppressing blacks even more. Some things never change.

[burnsei sensei]

19. before ww1, 1914, Europe had had almost a century of peace.

Again, examples?
No one was fighting on the continent over religion in 1848.
No one was fighting on the continent over religion in 1878 or even in 1908.
The Wars of Religion, 1500-1650, made religion a personal matter, and most religious fighting ended thereafter.
That precedent, separating religion from public life is why the West, for the most part and where it still exists, is a quiet place religiously.

[Skidmore]

8. Ireland comes to mind and that is a pretty fresh

scar.

I think it is wearing blinders to ignore the infighting in Christianity. True that some of the great schism issues have subsided to uneasy truces over time but the underlying differences are still there. I would suggest that Islam is at a similar point in fighting for supremacy of sects as were Christians in Europe around the reformation. The Shi'a-Sunni split is far from being resolved and any time spent daily immersed in the cultures of one of these nations would inform as to how deep the animosities run.

[H2O Man]

9. We had an

ongoing spat of violence on "The Old Sod." Known as "the Troubles," Ireland was at war with itself and the colonial power England. It was masked as "religious": Catholic versus Protestant. But, of course, it was always about who controlled the lands that produced the most .....the most food and income. I suspect it is a model that fits in the current example.

[Skidmore]

10. Hi. Good to see you!

Haven't seen you in a while. Hope all is well with you and yours.

[uppityperson]

98. There was that holocaust thing that was against Jewish people and antisemitism based in Christianity

Though a really odd sort of Xianity.

What is going on in Muslim countries is not "just" religion but also land and power. It may be split along sect lines, but it is not necessarily about just religion.

[randome]

24. They are hardly unified.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Skidmore]

32. True, but there is a tendency for some of these groups

to fight together when their interests converge.

[JDPriestly]

39. It is always due to ignorance.

As Christians in Europe and America have become better educated and know more about other religions, we have become more tolerant. People in predominantly Muslim countries have not had the opportunity to learn a lot of the truth about other religions. And the Christians in those countries are either proselytizing missionary types, or parts of separate cliquish social groups (often due to the very intolerance that their tight-knit adherence to a Christian social group exacerbates) and thus are easily separated out and persecuted. It is not the fault of the Christians. But they are very small minorities in large populations usually so they have developed their own communities. That prevents Muslims from knowing much about them. It is not an excuse for the violence, but rather an explanation and perhaps a clue as to how to begin to end the violence. Education is the key.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

77. Because religious leaders like power and power corrupts. nt

[KG]

11. it's impossible to logically discuss something as illogical as religion.

[Soylent Brice]

57. this^

...is the correct answer.

[LiberalEsto]

12. Other religions have committed violence too

My parents came from Estonia. The people of Estonia endured centuries of serfdom because of the violence of the Catholic church.

Before 1200 the Estonians and their neighbors the Latvians were free pagan people, but early in the 13th Century they were attacked by German crusaders seeking to forcibly Christianize them by order of the Pope. Estonians and their neighbors, the Latvians fought back against the German crusaders. The Estonians resisted for about 20 years, until the Danes moved in from the north and captured the principal city, Tallinn, while the Germans took the rest of the country.

In 1343 the Estonians rose up, renounced Christianity and fought for their freedom, burning manors and killing every German they could find. This was called the St. George's Night (Jüriöö) uprising and lasted nearly three years, until the rebellion was crushed by the invasion of the Teutonic Order. The indigenous Estonians were forced into serfdom under the German ruling class, which remained in power during subsequent Swedish and Russian conquests.

Estonians were not freed from serfdom until 1816, and it took more than another century before they could wrest independence for themselves for a brief period, before being subjugated by the Soviet Union during WW2. They did not regain independence until 1991.

Estonians aren't the only people who have suffered because of Christianity.

[cali]

15. Of course other religions have committed violence. I'm trying to discuss

what is happening currently within Islam. It's almost impossible to do that. People rush off and say but Christianity was/is horrible/worse.

[burnsei sensei]

20. So convenient, isn't it?

nt

[Violet_Crumble]

23. And part of that would be because some claim that only Islam has these violent segments...

Like this very recent post

'Islam's borders everywhere are very bloody. It's not like other world religions, which have found a way to harmonize (to some extent) the modern world with faith.'

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023707574#post15

[Donald Ian Rankin]

65. I think that's one word away from being a fair comment.

That word being your pick of "everywhere" or "very".

Far-right, often violent, fundamentalism does seem to be so much more prevalent in Islam than in any other major religion that I think it's fair to term it a qualitative and not just a quantitative distinction.

Pretty much every country with a significant Muslim population has a violent extremist fringe, but in many places that fringe is thankfully small and not very bloody; in a fair number of places it's a violent mainstream and very bloody, but thankfully that's not true everywhere.

[jessie04]

71. wow.

"Pretty much every country with a significant Muslim population has a violent extremist fringe"

[Donald Ian Rankin]

79. Would you care to provide a counter-example? N.T.

[CJCRANE]

26. I don't think anyone is saying Christianity is worse...

just no better.

Historical context is important. In the Cold War (which isn't that along ago) we were focused on communists. The concept of religious fundamentalism wasn't an issue. For instance, most people had no idea Sunni and Shia were until after the invasion of Iraq in 2003 which indicates it wasn't a major issue before that time.

I always say that religion is mostly irrelevant because people of all religions divide into liberal, moderate and conservative. A liberal christian, a liberal muslim and a liberal jew will have more in common with each other than with their co-religionists.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

66. But present-day context is also important.

And the present day context is that, here and now, Christianity is much, much better, as are most other major religions.

Modern-day Islam is arguably not much worse than Christianity was hundreds of years ago. But then the enlightenment happened...

[heaven05]

33. I agree

This recent Islamic religious violence between different sects and against christians raises many questions. The shooters in the mall let muslims out before they started their killing. I think their holy jihad for sect dominance and against christians is in full swing around the world. Against christians because of our initial invasion in Iraq in 2003-4. That started the holy war. One sect against another started this time because of differences in belief brought to the surface precisely because of the violence of our war against them and their differences on how to respond to the 'christian' attack against them. It much more complicated than that with oil, economics, american imperialism and western arrogance. Ignorance because american imperialists at PNAC didn't think it though. All they saw was oil profit, that's it. It was the match that lit the fire of long simmering tensions between the sects. Secularism kept the tensions tamped down. Once that authority was removed, people and sects who thought their way of thinking about 'god' was the correct way to think started the drive for dominance. It's spreading, WW3 is not long off, I think. The drive for profit started all this, this time.

[JDPriestly]

42. I think a lot can be learned from the change of heart. We were not so long ago a Protestant

nation that was intolerant of Catholics. France and Italy were Catholic countries and were intolerant of Protestants. That our Constitution guarantees freedom of religion has made it easier for us to become a tolerant nation. And then we have tried to learn about each other's relgions.

I strongly disapprove of religious schools below the university level because they prevent people of different religions from appreciating the fact that we are underneath the differences in dogma similar very similar people. Our similarities are far more and far more important than our differences. That is the knowledge that makes tolerance possible.

[dhol82]

17. interesting

bit of history i was not aware of. will have to go do some reading.

visited talinn about 5 years ago. beautiful city.

[LiberalEsto]

31. Probably why Estonia is one of the least religious countries

A second reason is the decades of enforced atheism by the Soviet Union.

I've been to Tallinn and the rest of Estonia twice, to see relatives there.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

76. So you bring that up to excuse muslim violence? It's a logical fallacy to do so. nt

[Loudly]

82. The least religious people in Europe. They sound awesome!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Estonia

[hrmjustin]

86. Yes other religious people of other religions have committed violence.

But the reality is we have to address the issues Islam has today or they will ever address it.

Just like Progressive people of faith and secular people fight against the religious right in this nation, Muslims must fight back against their extremists.

[LuvNewcastle]

14. It's a shame all we've lost through the centuries because of

the intolerant religious people among us. I read a book about the Spanish Inquisition a while back, and it talked about how up until the time of the Inquisition, there were lots of towns in Spain where Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived together. They were so friendly with each other that some of the families intermarried with each other. They believed that they all worshiped the same God and saw no reason for hostility. The intolerant Catholic Church came along and started torturing and killing people who wouldn't go along with their orthodoxy. All that good will went down the drain.

Now we have intolerant Muslims fighting between each other and making pronouncements encouraging violence with non-Muslims. Some people in Israel want a purely Jewish society there. We have fundies in pulpits across the country demonizing Muslims. Religious orthodoxy and intolerance is poison to human relations. Why do some people continue to let fanatics control their countries and their relations to others? Nothing will change until the good people in every religion stand up to the zealots among them and tell them to shut the fuck up.

[seveneyes]

21. I blame the teachers of violence

It does appear that Islam has a large number of followers that have been taught to use violence in defense of their religion. Young minds are very impressionable and those that survive and come up through the ranks, then go on to teach even more violence. Until this circle has some sanity injected, and the misinterpretations ended, the killing will continue.

[LuvNewcastle]

29. The people in those countries have tough lives and a lot of them

feel they don't really have anything to lose by blowing themselves up. If more of them actually had something to lose by going off to war, there would be a decrease in the violence toward each other and outsiders. If they had more opportunities to make their lives better, they would concentrate more on that instead of looking for enemies to kill. Economic development is the key to making them happier, more peaceful people.

[seveneyes]

58. Economic development is a good start

And until that is in place, birth control would be an even better start. When there are more people than occupations to consume their time, criminality usually takes root. If you keep adding more humans into an overflowing region, all hell breaks loose eventually.

[Turborama]

25. The Al Shabaab terrorist attack in Kenya isn't as simple as being an attack against Christians

The Kenyan military have been at war with Al Shabaab in neighboring Somalia for quite a while. I'm on my phone now, but check out this overview from Time...

http://world.time.com/2013/09/21/terror-in-nairobi-behind-al-shabaabs-war-with-kenya/

[Solly Mack]

27. Article(s), opinion pieces/papers, that people

may enjoy. (or not)

Food for thought.

The myth of the 1,400 year Sunni-Shia war

Sunni –Shia Tensions Are More About Politics, Power and Privilege than Theology

The Origins of the Shia-Sunni Split


I am not well informed enough to say for certain but I don't think the conflict simply a religious one, of dogma and differences within Islam.

[BlueMTexpat]

44. +1 million! eom

[randome]

28. They need a new Gandhi. A 'Jesus', even. The world could use one.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Lizzie Poppet]

40. Islam needs its Enlightenment, basically.

Yes, there is much the rest of the world can do (like not interfering in the Islamic world's politics every damn time some oil company's bottom line is at risk), but for the most part, reform has to come from within. If the fundamentalists prevail and keep much of the Muslim world mired in medieval attitudes (and the associated tendency to export its violence), then the inevitable outcome is an "us or them" conflict between Islam and the rest of the world. That would be a tragedy of horrific proportions.

[treestar]

55. Yes, the separation of church and state

Is one thing that Islam needs some advance on. It seems to cling to the authority of government. Like it can't hang on without being enforced. A religion shouldn't need government force to perpetuate it, or it's not a true religion. I'd say to them, hey look, Christianity was separated from government authority and it still survives.

[MineralMan]

30. Wars in the name of religion are as old as history.

The problem lies largely in the belief that some have that the particular sect of the particular religion they belong to is the only valid belief system. Such exclusivity breeds hate and violence.

It's not Islam. It's not Christianity. It is religion itself that teaches that.

Read the Old Testament and you can see that this has been a continuing process for centuries.

[The2ndWheel]

50. It's organization itself

What organized effort, and you can pick any kind, doesn't believe that that particular organization is the only valid organization?

That's part of why violence almost needs to happen. To figure out who makes the rules. To figure out where borders will be drawn. The border issue being a large one where the Middle East is concerned.

[MineralMan]

52. While you're partly correct,

religious belief is somewhat different, since it supposedly has to do with deities, capable of condemning nonbelievers to things like eternities of suffering and pain. Personally, I think that's all nonsense, but many people believe it.

Borders are certainly an issues. In the Middle East many of the borders there were drawn by people who live nowhere near them, specifically European border drawing following WWI. After WWII, Israel was also squeezed in there, with its own disputed borders. Mostly, those borders make no sense to the people who live there, who come from different heritages, religious beliefs, and tribal groups.

So, the Middle East is always fraught with problems, many of which go back many centuries.

But, the West isn't free from such nonsense, either, and artificial borders in Europe were also drawn with little attention paid to natural divisions of language, culture and even religion.

Humans are a warlike species. Orginally, it was an issue of survival. Today, it's an issue of ideology, primarily, and religion, too.

I'm not optimistic that that will change.

[jessie04]

51. +1000

.

[seveneyes]

100. Murdering mall shoppers in cold blood is not a good definition of war

This latest act serves only to terrorize innocent people.

[MineralMan]

101. I see. Whatever you say, then...

[sulphurdunn]

34. Fundamentalist

belief systems, secular or sectarian, breed hatred of the "other" as an organizational principle. History is rife with the consequences.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

35. Not to put too fine a point on it, Islam needs to police itself and take action against violence.

We just passed the 50 year anniversary of the bombing of the Birmingham, Alabama, church that killed four young girls. One of the men responsible is still in jail, which is good.

When churches or mosques or Sikh temples or synagogues are attacked in North America or Europe, the police are on it and investigate whether there is a gang or conspiracy behind it and then they root it out and break it up.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

67. I strongly disagree.

I don't think that practicing the same religion as someone makes you responsible for their actions.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

75. Not my point.

Not responsible, but it is simply in their own best interest.

Most muslims, a large majority, are peaceful and against violence. Every act of violence in the name of Islam brings disrepute and reaction against the religion.

Further, a lot of muslim violence is one sect against another sect. If the world-wide muslim community was more condemnatory of violence and gave more support to their governments to combat violence and ousted clerics that advocate violence, then there would be fewer muslims killed and injured in sectarian violence.

Obviously, this is not a uniquely muslim problem, but this thread is about muslims and not about the buddhist violence in Burma.

[burnsei sensei]

105. The religious community should never be a cover for personal responsibility.

nt

[cantbeserious]

37. Religion Is One Form Of Societal Control - The Controllers Have Wars To Maintain Control

eom

[Sunlei]

38. religious passion kills more often than not. :(

[BlueMTexpat]

41. Although our headlines may keep repeating the Sunni-Shia theme,

because most are so clueless that they believe that is the sum total, the real violence - just as it is in all man-developed religions I have even seen/experienced/studied - is caused by RW wacko fundies against moderates/modernists.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of well-heeled fanatics in the ME thanks in large part to our generally ignorant interference and breathtakingly idiotic foreign policy in the region.

The "difference" between Sunni & Shia Islam is actually less than that between Catholicism and Protestantism, although we did have lots of very bloody religious wars in Europe before those two main threads of Christianity finally decided to make nice. But, IMO, the "long schism within Islam" seems to be a much bigger problem for non-Islamic elites than for those who are Sunni or Shia. Yes, we all see a lot of violence perpetrated and TPTB generally assign those labels to explain them. But the bloodshed is caused by the fundies - who follow their own wack-a-doodle reasoning with no respect whatsoever for human life (except perhaps for the unborn) and certainly no respect for their fellow practitioners, no matter what label.

It is, after all, our own homegrown "Christian" fundies who cause a lot of our own problems. Most who are religious generally agree to disagree on specifics but agree on the broad principles. It is the same with Sunni & Shia Muslims.

[factsarenotfair]

59. Oh, that's a very good point.

It's not really Sunni vs. Shia as much as it is fundamentalist vs. the more enlightened.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

43. The largest Muslim country is Indonesia

Accounts for upwards of 12% of the entire Muslim population in the world. I may be just ignorant, but I don't think I've ever heard of an Indonesian terrorist. I'm reasonably certain all this stuff has more to do with the individual countries involved in all this violence, plus inept Western meddling, than it has to do with anything in Islam.
The Sunni/Shia thing was and is an inevitable clash since, as someone around here pointed out in an earlier thread, the colonial powers frequently left behind rulers from whichever was the minority in the country, which of course is now leading to clashes between the two as the majority tries to assert control. Peaking now, but maybe in 10 years things will settle down.

[Lizzie Poppet]

46. Indonesian terrorism exists, but is almost exclusively domestic.

Check it out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents_in_Indonesia

I think Islamic terrorism is a mix of the factors present in individual countries and the violent fundamentalism that has taken root all across the Islamic world. The latter factor may or may not be truly defensible within Islamic doctrine and canon (I'm not qualified to say...), but the propensity towards extremist violence has certainly become something present all across the Islamic world.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

48. Thanks for the info. n/t

[treestar]

53. One doesn't want to be thrown in with the freeper type discussion of it

But it is a problem in today's world (yes Christians and others have done it, but not today for the most part).

The ones where they get so upset over depictions of Mohamed, that they are willing to be violent over it, are of most concern.

Jesus would be envious - his devotees are not that passionate.

And so that's the problem. Religion needs to be moderated. One can be too devoted and too passionate about it.

[geek tragedy]

54. people on the left don't like to talk about Islamist violence and terrorism because

treating it as worth discussing implies that it's an important issue that requires a policy response, and in general anti-terrorism policies are unpopular on the left, as they are seen as advancing anti-civil rights and pro-imperialism agendas.

So, the general approach at places like DU is to ignore it.

[sufrommich]

56. This is what religious extremism looks like.The

specific religion is irrelevant.Religious extremism has always resulted in violence,always.Those who pretend that it is only certain religions who are prone to violence ignore history.The problem is getting people to understand that they embrace this extremism at their own peril,as it always ends with tit for tat violence and destruction.

[hrmjustin]

60. The fact is people who will kill others in the name of religion will use any excuse.

I pray for the victims and my heart goes out to Muslims who see their religion hijacked by these militants.

[JCMach1]

61. The seeds go back to the 19th century when the British promoted Wahhabism and Conservative Islam

as a counter to those 'radical', troublesome Sufis (I know seems weird know, but Sufis were the problem then as they resisted colonialism).

Once oil production ramped-up in KSA, the Kingdom has been fervently (backed by petrol dollars) spread the gospel of radical Islam.

US 'evil' axis with the KSA has typically put us by proxy on the side of Jihadis as we rarely can openly oppose Saudi foreign affairs. The only exception has been Al Quaeda, ONLY because they had the audacity to call for the overthrow of Saudi's king.

the Sectarian divide is an existential threat to the Saudi and Gulf rulers... so much of the KSA's resources have gone to put out that threat.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

78. The seeds go back to the origins of Islam & other religions. The Crusades did not help matters. nt

[snooper2]

64. Some people actually follow their holy book

That's why they are called fundies....

We have a few left in the U.S., literally follow the "bible"...most people just give it lip service. Muslim's have a much higher percentage of fundie, maybe in 150 years that will change-

[Sand Wind]

68. This is a complex issue. And a difficult one for different reasons. To just beginning an answer,

It is necessary to avoid the desire to obtain a simple answer, because there is not. It's a whole beam of complex and interrelated circumstances who converged. A big book could be written to answer this question.

At first both questions of Cali.

1-interference of the West: yes, it is a factor, mainly the colonial period and then certain consequences of the diverse imperialisms of the periods of decolonization. But it could only be the one of an accidental factor which contributed to wake an already present strength.

2-the schism. Yes, this contributes to the problem, but more as an opportunity which makes it worse, and not as a cause.

Allow me now to enumerate quickly somes of the causes which, according to me, are the base of the violence in the Islam. But I have to prevent you that it is psychologically painful for all the Muslims to approach these themes, that it is widely taboo, and that many of my coreligionists could want to kill me to hold such words. So don't use my words with other Muslims except with a lot of caution.

1-The place of the word of the Prophet ( pbsl ) in the Koran: the fact that it is directly the Word of God, rather than an education(teaching).

2-The natural place that the war take in the time of the Prophet ( pbsl ). In his life, and then in the Koran.

3-The lack of centralized structure.

4-The will of a pure monotheism.

5-A nihilism aggravated and more powerful than in the other monotheisms, in the text of the Koran.

6-The particular and ambiguous circumstances of the passage of the oral towards the writing of the words of the Prophet ( pbsl ).

7-The family structures, the fact that the Islam was an important tool of the finalization of the passage of the fatri-linear structures towards "modern" patriarchal structures.

8-The vision of the political power in the text of the Koran, and in the history of the Muslim peoples. Here the tyranny which makes that only the religious institutions find enough depth to resist and offer an alternative, or a legitimity to the power.

9- The "Aristotelism" in the Muslim's cultur.

There is more points...

[riderinthestorm]

85. You're probably the first Muslim I've ever encountered who points to Muhammed's wars

and the precedent setting nature of them as part of the conflict.

As well as the patriarchy and the nihilism.

Your insights are really interesting. Thanks for posting.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

87. Thank you for a thoughtful post. You make a lot of good points. nt

[truebluegreen]

69. It is in the interest of the rulers of Islamic nations to direct

the anger and bitterness of the have-nots toward outsiders and/or infidels, thus protecting themselves. The presence of and meddling by the US and other Western powers makes it an easy sell. Like Northern Ireland, it is about power and money.

[FarCenter]

70. The Christian advantage is that most Christians don't believe in Christianity anymore.

In most "Christian" nations, there is a lack of religious fervor, with relatively low church attendance and a pretty disengaged population.

The US is somewhat of an outlier in having a lot of fundamentalist Christians. At the opposite end would be most of northern Europe, where the state-sanctioned churches are mostly vacant. In many countries, Christianity is a largely female religion. Latin males go to church 4 times -- baptism, confirmation, marriage and burial.

When the Muslims stop believing their religion and begin to disregard their clergy, a similar moderation should result.

[Arugula Latte]

89. "Imagine no religion..."

... what a wonderful world ...

[Sand Wind]

73. Kick for your bravery. Nt

[daleo]

74. Many early religions practised human sacrifice

Sometimes I wonder if there isn't a little of that left in every organized religion's DNA, but it comes out as a more generalized violence. It may be a part of the meme known as Religion's last universal common ancestor.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

80. Foxholes

[Nye Bevan]

90. How did religion spark off the Falklands war?

Or the War of 1812?

Or the American Civil War?

I guess the answer to your question is "no".

[Bernardo de La Paz]

92. Unfortunately you are right. Mostly.

While it is true that no atheists started a war to promote atheism, there are many wars started because of non-religious motivations.

However, ..., it could be said that the American Civil War was fought over the Bible's endorsement of slavery upheld by the Confederacy by means of asserting "state's rights".

[Sand Wind]

81. It is natural for the left, the ones who was implicate in the decolonization's philosophy and from

the atheist to not wanting to answer directly to the specific question of Cali.

[hrmjustin]

88. The left does not want to answer this question?

[Sand Wind]

94. Statistically, because the left is aware to not singularise some class of people, and will

Prefer to not give argument to the Islamophobe of the right.

[hrmjustin]

95. I see what you mean. Yes some are worried that they may look bigoted if they say something.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

91. Not sure which atheist you refer to. I answered Cali's specific question previously in post 78:

Cali asked

What role has western interference played both historically and currently?

I answered

The seeds go back to the origins of Islam & other religions. The Crusades did not help matters.

You made a detailed post explaining how there are seeds in the origin of Islam. Do we disagree?

[Sand Wind]

93. No, we do not. It was more a statistical remark of my part. Nt

[MisterP]

96. Nairobi seems more vengeance for the 2006 invasion--US shelling of Mogadishu, Kenyan and Ethiopian

forces on the ground; they probably want (the secularist) Barre's Greater Somalia, too--Kenya's got a million in the frontier province but Britain ignored all that in 1963; we got rid of the (curiously pluralist) ICU and brought Peace and Freedom to the land once and for all (leaving their fighters with no command and radicalizing them)

the US paid conservative Muslims in Indonesia 1963-65, East Timor 1975-99, and Pakistan almost from the get-go, and encouraged and even created ultraconservative Sunnis in Afghanistan and Lebanon in the 80s, and again in Libya and Syria in the 10s (so they might be feeling left out of the piggy bank); Nigeria and Yemen have ginormous regional differences that already led to bloodshed ("why are Africans so Uniquely ViolentTM?&quot before Shiism or Salafism got involved; in the 50s our Puzzle Palaces thought the Reds were Uniquely ViolentTM and that shaped our support for very conservative Muslims until 1979, when we were blindsided by Iran (plus Nicaragua and Panama, part of Uniquely ViolentTM Latin America) and we spent a LOT on backstabbing Israeli/Druze/Falangist/Shiite/socialist/Palestinian Christian/Palestinian Sunni/South Lebanese Sunni fights and the USS <i>Vincennes</i> in the 80s ('cos the Palestinians and Shiites were Uniquely ViolentTM)

and we have to rank all these deaths against the death tolls of good, secular, liberal democracies just trying to bring freedom to the benighted (the Naqba, Algeria, Afghanistan, Sabra and Shatila, Afghanistan again, Iraq): nor can we use the ideologies that those countries concocted to justify their wars

and none of this is an excuse for the bloodshed--in fact, even the most "restorationist" Muslims aren't gaga over al-Qaeda's franchises, which aren't that big: they're just mobile and well-fueled by khat

[stevenleser]

97. I look at it starting with the relative age of the religions. What was Christianity like 600 yrs ago

Christianity is approximately 600 years older than Islam. It has had that much more time to moderate.

600 years ago Christianity was approaching the Spanish Inquisition, was still 100 years from the Protestant reformation, and was a willing partner in feudalism and other middle age cruelties and realities.

[cthulu2016]

99. That is anti-historical.

The idea is historically without basis. Islamic culture showed no such six-century lag effect during the era when the Islamic world was more sophisticated and progressed than Christendom.

[stevenleser]

102. True in one sense, but all religions have had fits and starts in terms of progress.

Your complaint that it isnt linear as far as Islam is concerned doesn't change or negate the point. We have fundy Christians and Jews still around to this day. It doesnt change the fact that we have reformed Judaism that is pretty progressive and we have various Christian denominations that are too.

[NuclearDem]

103. Sunni-Shi'a conflict is nothing new.

But the poverty and disorganization afflicting the Middle East is definitely recent.

Christian tensions became fairly tempered as quality of life in the West rose. The Islamic world really did the opposite, a golden age of relative stability, peace, and prosperity collapsed along with the Ottomans in the early 20th century, thanks in no small part to the discovery of oil and the Empire's Axis allegiance during WWI.

Colonialism only made things worse.

[on point]

104. It is about the insanity of religion not just Islam. No different than Christians a few

Centuries ago. This is what the west was up to before the Enlightenment and separation of church and state. Religions go through life cycles where they feel they must impose their beliefs on others, or be forced to admit they are fantasy folk tales worthy of derision. The Islamic religion is just further back in their life cycle. Everyone suffers while they work it out just as the rest of the world did while Christianity worked out their arguments between competing canons of none sense