U.S. Forces Fight Militiamen in Najaf

Remember Mt.Casicno Remember the holly city of New York. the mulsums have on restect for their own people much less a mosque this is an excuse or the people would not let them store weapons in them or the Clerics would call a fatwa for sader head they have a rich history in killing their own!!!

Part of the American Tribe

God bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and All who Fight with her give Them Strength and Courage to stay the Course to Victory Amen

Ps we will win!!!!

Is there ever going to come a time when this PC nonsense is stopped? Holy sites My foot! If you wage war using a "Holy" building then it is a battle ground and is NOT Holy....

Perhaps if one or two of these "Holy" Battle grounds were leveled the "warriors/cowards" might find more acceptable places to warehouse weapons and engage the enemy?

Until we begin to back up what we say with force, we are going to remain weak in the eyes of the enemy, and the world.

My question is what audience are we playing to? the Leftists? the Media? The World? or the Iraqis?

Also could someone please type the word "DHIMMI" as it is pronounced for me? I have never heard it spoken...I want to forestall the embarrassment I felt when as a 10 year old I pronounced Penelope as PENNYLOPE:) THanks!

susanc:

"Also could someone please type the word "DHIMMI" as it is pronounced for me? I have never heard it spoken..."

Good question. Why don't you ask Robert Spencer directly and then post it for us?

A foolish consistency may be the hobglobin of little minds, but really, a little consistency here is called for. Perhaps the damage was caused by the Infidel forces (still unknown, but they will be blamed). If so, it was because in the middle of war, the forces of Moqtada al-Sadr, the ABD graduate student in theology who simply can't come up with a thesis topic and has chosen qital, combat, killing the Infidel and enslaving any female soldiers he manages to conquer, as his special project.

In any case, would now not be the time for a moment of silence, to observe all the desturction, of Catholic and Protestant, and Nestorian and Coptic, and Maronite and Melkite churches, of synagogues, including all 39 of those in the Old City of Jerusalem destroyed by the Jordanians between 1948 and 1967, of Zoroastrian places of worship, of the tens of thousands of Buddhist and Hindu temples destroyed during Muslim rule, of the untold Buddhist statuary of Afghanistan and western China, and the ancient libraries of the Mandeans, and the Nestorians, and the Buddhists, and the Hindus, all destroyed by Muslims, of Joseph's Shrine, reduced to rubble just within the last few years, and the attacks on all the other shrines sacred to Jews, throughout Judea and Samaria, of the deliberate destruction of Coptic Churches by Egyptians even in the last century, of Assyrian churches by the Iraqis in 1933, of Armenian and Assyrian churches by Turks, Kurds, and Arabs, most systematically and thoroughly between 1915 and 1925. If the Nazis were to have expressed righteous indignation to the American government in 1938 because a country club in Greenwich, Connecticut would not admit Jews or blacks as members, we would know how to answer them. If Muslims -- the Sunni among them would of course be shedding crocodile tears over a Shi'a shrine -- make noises, here is a case where the tu quoque, but much worse argument deserves to be used. And with a vengeance.

I'm tired of these nitwits and their 'holy' places where murder is planned and committed and where weapons are stored. It seems that Muslims are free to fight and kill from their "holy" places; yet, should a Westerner fire back at the Muslim in the "holy" place, outrage about the "desecration". The lesson to be learnt from this is that any atrocity which results in the death of Westerners will never be condemned by Muslims, not even when the atrocity is done from within a "holy" place. Hypocrites.

If you think the left is not biased about its reporting from Iraq, then consider the posted report as evidience to the contrary.

Do we need to be constantly updated every time brick separates from mortar at one of these "holy shrines"? Do these reports serve any good except to make our troops seem like a bunch of barbarous thugs intent on destroying Islam's famous churches?

I am sure that in the minds of the journalists reporting this minor incidents, that they hope to cast us in as bad a light as possible. They say they have no bias, but what they choose to harp on reveals their true beliefs.

We should with no apologies at all do whatever it takes to root out the bad guys wherever they are. Why without apologies? Please see the article by Nonie Darwish on Front Page Magazine .com. She explains why apologizing in Islamic culture in counter productive and only leads to more strife.

To the guys at the top, no more apologies. Remember we are still trying to figure out that whole wedding party thing from last week. To them, if we apologize because we may have made a mistake, it will infuriate them even further. This is not the time or place to own up to mistakes made on the ground. If we stick to our denial, we are not guilty--or so their logic goes.

Read Nonie's article, print it and show it to any liberal nit wit who makes the mistake of bringing up apologizes.

Have you read it yet? What are you waiting for?

Could we strike a military/theocratic balance regarding assaults on Islamic "holy" sites by using "holy" weapons? Wouldn't it cancel out any desecration?

I was thinking about something along the lines of the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, as noted by the great theologian, Monty Python.

"And the counting of the number shall be three..."

;-)

Hasn't this fat boy cleric run out of ding dongs to dive in front of our tanks and artillery yet?

Sheesh.........We're going to rebuild that hellhole anyway, what's another shrine......level it, with Sadr and his pals inside and let's be done with this already.

If Bush knew how many people in America didn't believe in being politically correct, we could finish the job and be done with it.

America and Americans come before any ungrateful Iraqi, Palestinian, Saudi or anyone else from that wonderland. We need to stop tip toeing around these ingrates and do the job no one else on the planet had the nerve to do.

We will continue our PC warfighting strategy so as not to inflame the "Arab street". Didn't you know that?

If we are careful and avoid damaging the "Holy Shrines of Shia" the "Arab street" will continue to love us from the streets of Gaza to Riyadh to Najaf.

Bob Owens:

You posted:
"I was thinking about something along the lines of the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, as noted by the great theologian, Monty Python.

"And the counting of the number shall be three..."

;-)

Posted by: Bob Owens at May 25, 2004 02:54 PM"

We could always try "farting in their general direction". :-)

CGW & susanc:

"Dhimmi" is pronounced "DIMMY" - like someone who's not too bright!

Btw, I got a BIG smile out of somebody's term here about a week or so ago, describing the many Left-wing &/or pro-Arab/Moslem professors, doctors and lecturers who infest Western universities and educational institutions as "ACADHIMMIES"!

The "wedding party" may or may not have been as harmless as claimed. The US Army has tendered a quantity of concrete items that show that it was a TERRORISTS' party (though there might indeed have been a wedding included amongst the festivities).

The Arabs and Moslems cry that airstrikes were brought down on the "party" because of them innocently pursuing their "traditional celebrations" of firing into the air.

Iraq's a war-zone: it's pretty stupid to be shooting into the air there, "traditional celebration" or not!

The point is that it's about time they realized that there are a number of their "traditions" that badly need dumping! This is a good one with which to commence - but there ought to be MANY more to follow!

In one news item on this topic al Sadr was cited as saying the Americans had used Iraqi ordnance to blast the shrine. That suggests to me that some of the debris was Iraqi and not US in origin. I flat out do not buy the idea that the US is employing Iraqi ammo. So, one must conclude the damage was caused BY Iraqis themselves, not by US attacking al Sadr forces holed up in a holy place.

Now perhaps al Sadr's people fired the shells (probably mortar rockets) themselves, but I strongly suspect they were fired by the Baath/al Quaeda group in order to incite increased support for al Sadr against Americans, who would then retaliate recklessly against al Sadr, accelerating the cycle of violence between the two main foes of Baath/al Quaeda. The most likely way Baath can regain power is if somebody else (US) weakens the Shia first. Their (Baath) best chance is through civil war AFTER the US decimates the Shia and then withdraws.

Upon further contemplation, UN Envoy Brahimi’s “plan” looks more appealing, if Iraq’s future is that it’s to be racked by a snarl of civil wars (dwarfing Lebanon’s of 1975 - 1985). It’d be best for the Allies NOT to be caught in the clashes there; they should pull back to the sidelines, then engage - at minimum - in the stringent quarantine of the conflagration in Iraq, working out of existing - and plausibly some new - regional strong-points.

But how much better would it be if it was the Arab League who’s terminally trapped up in this prospective turmoil in Iraq, while the Coalition watches on with interest from its nearby bases? If there’s definitely not going to be peace in Iraq, why not steer for such a consequence?

It might be successfully set in train through harnessing the very hypocrisy of the UN. Its majority desires to witness an American “retreat” so much that the General Assembly could be “hastened” to pass any ruling that entails a US withdrawal, even one in PHASES. Ideally, it should be slated for early next year - in eight or nine months from now, by next February at the latest.

Energetically pro-Washington Iraqi Kurdistan (15 miles from Iraq’s northern oil-fields) and the extreme southern area of Iraq - with its numerous oil-fields and refineries, plus the depots, silos and and port-facilities on the Persian Gulf - definitely ought to be the very last zones evacuated in the Coalition’s projected redeployment, to its secured sites nearby.

These two oil-rich tracts, blockading Iraq north and south while they’re in Allied control - which they must remain, to the final millisecond of the dance - would be perceived by the Arabs as “hostages” (a concept they’d have no bother in grasping), held against their own performance - or misbehaviour - in the ordering of this business as it unfolds.

The US should make it unambiguous that if the Arab League and the OIC (including IRAN) cause it any trouble whatever re Iraq (or in its environs), then that will make America suspend its plans to vacate these two valuable and strategic territories, for many years.

The change-over would be synchronized with the arrival of the strutting expeditionary brigades of the Arab League and OIC, accompanied by units from their decrepit, 3rd-world clients. These battalions, incidentally, will quite probably be cynically, profligately, utilized as mercenaries, in the inevitable frictions which are bound to arise between individual major contributor-Members, as they scramble to split up Iraq, unable to resist the spur of competition from their “confrères”.

Notwithstanding, under the Arab League’s nefarious patronage, there’ll probably be heaps of employment (“wet work”) available for the innumerable - mutually-hostile - local, Iraqi, gangs and gunmen. - There’ll be murder, after all, prevailing in every corner of Iraq at that stage.

For their different reasons, Somalia, Albania and diverse others of the League and the OIC might be unable to join in the UN “insertion” - and, circumstantially, Turkey may or may not choose to enter. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Libya, Kuwait and Brunei, who can afford it, will hire formations to field in Iraq, tho not Syria or the Sudan, et al, who can’t. They and those Moslem states with political pretensions, such as Egypt, Pakistan and Malaysia, will send in their own men.

So will IRAN, the wildest card in the pack: it could never bear the risks of non-intervention.

Growing, internecine strife can be confidently predicted among the assorted Arab “peace-keepers” once they’re in Iraq - eventually coalescing, probably, into one side led by Egypt and another, its rival, dominated by the Sauds, with countries like Jordan, Yemen, Tunisia and Bangladesh bidding to stay “in the middle” for as long as they can.

However, both of the Sunni Arab adversaries might feel impelled to combine, to oppose and roll back any inroads into Iraq by the Shi’ite Iranians.

The true shape of the hostilities will ultimately depend on how Iran jumps when things break loose, and upon the role it’ll then play. It’d do no harm to keep an eye on Saudi Arabia either, since its fate, as well, could largely decide the direction in which this potential conflict flies off.

In addition, timing’ll be a key consideration: in a brief year-and-a-half, Tehran’ll have at least one A-bomb and in three years, ten - with no shortage of missiles for delivery up to c2,500 miles.

It’d be just dandy all round if the UN’s mooted Islamic contingents can bring peace to Iraq. Lots more likely, not only will they badly fail to do so, but - compounding their deficiency - they’ll soon be at one another’s throats, on top of being stuck square in the middle of the hourly horrors of an Iraq gripped in a maelstrom of civil wars.

Should this transpire, they’ll inevitably be locked in battle over it within weeks, disqualified from pulling out because they’re all close neighbours of Iraq’s - hence unable to abide any of their “brothers” dominating it (which they’ll each strive to do). Iraq will become a killing-ground for Iraqis, but also an inextricable one for the Arab League, the OIC and their cronies.

That’s NOT THE WORST outcome for the West, if it turns out that the bulk of Iraqis (and the conscious and unconscious aiders and abettors of Islamo-fascism in the West) won’t let it be - and help it to be - the prototype in the dar el-Islam for peace and democracy which, a year ago, Washington, London, Canberra and Warsaw hoped it would.

The denial of victory to the enemy’s almost as sweet as victory itself - but it’s no substitute.