|
"Iraqi and US officials blamed the bloodless but symbolic attack on Samarra's Golden Mosque on al-Qaida, saying it wanted to wreck the project for democracy in Iraq; al-Qaida accused Shia of carrying it out as an excuse for attacks on Sunnis."
The article reveals dreadful facts--Sunni families slaughtered, Shias slaughtered, and back and forth--starting with the Shia Mosque bombing (which was bloodless). The Sunnis seem to be getting the worst of it (seem to be the most verifiable of the killings). The killers are described as black-clad men--it doesn't say black mask, but there seems to be a general lack of ability to identify them. Sunnis think they are Shias. Shias think they are Sunnis. (Who are they?)
Example: "Umar al-Umari, an employee at the Ministry of Transportation, said armed men were storming Sunni houses and killing everybody inside. // 'It's a sectarian cleansing. They are breaking into Sunni houses and killing everybody inside. No government or US forces are seen in the area.'"
The first paragraph I cited (above) seems to imply that al-Qaida and the Sunnis are allied (which I do seem to recall now, and that it occurred fairly recently--some sort of alliance, or alleged alliance). The Sunnis have most certainly been targeted for exclusion from the government and from oil profits, by the US, and of course by the Shias (and Kurds). The Sunnis (secular Muslims--much more liberal) were the well-educated professionals, engineers, technicians, teachers, lawyers, military commanders, etc., who created modern Iraqi society and held it together, prior to the invasion. They would likely be the most savvy business people in dealing with the US and US contractors, oil giants and other corporations--a force that the Bush junta, from the very beginning, sought to eliminate. So anything the Bush junta says about this now (that they want a unity government) is extremely hypocritical--and a lie. IF the Sunnis are now allied with al-Qaida (extreme fundamentalists, or....who, what are they, in Iraq?), the Bush junta pushed them into it. The Sunnis are not normally anarchic. They must feel very provoked, indeed.
And what are we to make of this bombing of the Shia mosque? Whose interests would be served by blowing up a Shia mosque, and provoking Shias to slaughter Sunnis (if that's who is really doing the bulk of the slaughtering)? The US, it seems to me--the Bush junta. They benefit. They are the profiteers. They thrive on mayhem. Although this is being played as a political debit to Bush--gee, now he can't bring the troops home--no one is, or can, hold the Bush junta accountable for anything, including the Iraq disaster. They just go on pursuing their objectives of mass thievery, war profiteering, torture, domestic spying, selling our ports of fundamentalist Arab sheiks, and filling the pockets of the rich, no matter what anybody says, no matter how many people object (over 80% of Americans now against the war; and it was near 60% way back before the invasion--doesn't matter what the American people think).
So this mayhem, a) harms Sunnis, whom the Bush junta would just as soon exterminate, b) keeps US troops in Iraq, c) keeps Bush junta fingers on the oil tap, d) keeps the entire US military machine in the Middle East, poised for an attacks on Iran, Syria and any other independent Arab/Muslim government that doesn't heel to the junta on whatever the junta wants.
I'd say, all in all--given the benefits to the Bush junta, on their real objectives (as opposed to the phony "spin")--that the junta or its operatives did the Shia mosque bombing.
And I don't quite know what to make of a supposed al-Qaida/Sunni alliance. For one thing, I don't know who al-Qaida/Iraq is. Does anybody?
The Al Jazeera article concludes with this: "Abroad, there has been concern that Iraqi sectarian violence could inflame the entire Middle East if it got out of hand."
I'm not quite sure what they mean by "abroad." Possibly Europe. The only regional country that could benefit from Muslim tribes and religious factions being at each other's throats is Israel (which makes one wonder if Mossad was involved in the Shia mosque bombing).
------------------------
A little more analysis
Here's how I see it, with my limited knowledge:
Sunnis: excluded, persecuted, angry; history of being modern secularists.
Shias/Iraq: poor, and poorly educated, fundamentalist Islamics; anti-Sunni (past persecution by Sunnis of Shias), the majority in Iraq, currently in cahoots with US to get some of the oil profits.
Shias/Iran: better off, also fundamentalist Islamics (but with a young population that wants more freedom); religious/tribal connection to Iraqi Shias; fearful of attack, under threat from US; US destroyed their democracy in 1953 and installed the horrible Shah (25 years of torture and persecution); self-determination under the mullahs = oil profits are theirs, creating relative prosperity.
al-Qaida/Iraq: ???
al-Qaida/OBL: wants a pan-Islamic caliphate (as of old); get the west out of Islamic countries; Israel (and its alliance with the US) presents the biggest obstacle to this; they may care about Palestinians, but that is not their chief motivation--they want an Islamic empire; religious purists, fundamentalists (derived from Saudi Wahabiism, but I don't know if that's still a factor; would seem to be closer to Shias (re fundamentalism), but are they?; alliance with Sunnis makes no sense).
Kurds (north Iraq, and Turkish border): independence-minded; using every opportunity to advance independence; nominally allied with the US (gravy train); seem to be religious moderates.
And somebody comes in and blows up the Shias most sacred shrine in Iraq. Iraqi forces can't handle the threatened civil war. US can't leave. Who benefits?
Not the Shias/Iraq: interferes with their oil deal; disturbs the peace; gives their gov't no end of trouble; slows down their move into power.
Not the Shias/Iran: they want the US out of the region, and away from their border--US is a constant threat. (--the pending opening of the Iran oil bourse, traded in euros, may be a factor--dunno; disruption of Iraq/US oil production?--but the mosque that was blown up is sacred to Iranian Shias as well, I believe; doubt if they would blow that up for ecomonic gain; and they would more likely to be allied with the Iraqi Shias than with anyone else.)
Probably not the Sunnis: just means more persecution for them; could be anger, though, and bid for more power in the gov't.
Not al-Qaida/OBL: they want the US out of the region. (--that's their overall stated objective; but keeping the US distracted while they take over Afghanistan again might be a motive; still, I doubt they would blow up a mosque).
Not al-Qaida/Iraq: if they are like al-Qaidi/OBL, blowing up mosques is not okay; blowing up the new permanent US military bases would make more sense; and if they are something else--say, mere hoodlums, the benefit to them may be robbery or mafia-like takeovers of territories, or if Bush junta or Mossad chaos-makers, they would benefit in support, gravy train, arms, money, and possibly opportunities for looting (or, as CACI-type mercenaries, maybe even medical and retirement benefits).
The weight of this analysis still bears upon the Bush junta as the chief beneficiary of the Shia mosque bombing and consequent mayhem. That doesn't mean they did it; just that it makes sense. Also, the Bush junta has zero interest in "democracy" in Iraq (just as they have zero interest in it here). They want to STAY in Iraq for war profiteering and oil reasons. The current situation suits that purpose just fine.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
