| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
A very interesting story on the rise of militias in Iraq from the Washington Post, "To the Dismay of Local Sunnis, Shiites Arrive to Police Ramadi"
RAMADI, Iraq - At a checkpoint on a bridge into this volatile Sunni Muslim city, an Iraqi platoon frisked a row of men and rummaged through their cars and trucks for explosives. The men scowled silently, making the soldiers uneasy."Of course they don't like us," said one of the soldiers, Anwar Abas, whose unit is overwhelmingly Shiite Muslim. "They don't like people from the south, so when we search them, they make faces at us." Abas and his fellow soldiers were recruited from tribes in the cities of Najaf and Diwaniyah, both more than 100 miles to the south.
Watching nearby, an out-of-work Ramadi policeman chafed at the sight of outside Iraqi forces. "Ramadi people need to be at the checkpoint," he said. "We need to control the city, not have someone from the south come do it."
But Ramadi has no functioning local security force. Fearful of or complicit with insurgents, it disbanded before January's national elections and now consists of a handful of traffic officers. As a result, hundreds of predominantly Shiite forces -- including ad hoc militia groups such as the Defenders of Baghdad -- are flowing into Ramadi as part of the latest strategy by Iraq's central government and the U.S. military to stem insurgent violence here...
Yet by pitting Iraqis from different religious sects, ethnic groups and tribes against each other, the strategy also aggravates the underlying fault lines of Iraqi society, heightening the prospect of civil strife, U.S. military analysts said...
U.S. officers say the surge in such external forces is needed to counter the insurgency's immediate grip on Ramadi, the capital of restive Anbar province in the Sunni Triangle, 60 miles west of Baghdad. It is one of Iraq's most dangerous cities, rocked daily by explosions. The city of 400,000 has lacked a functioning local security force since last winter, when the police and Iraqi National Guard disbanded wholesale as insurgents blew up all but one of Ramadi's police stations, the mayor's office and other government buildings...
"You get a Shiite outsider shooting a local policeman, and with a big incident like that, you can see the whole city rising up," said Capt. Bart Nagle, an intelligence officer with the 1st Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment in Ramadi. "This is the new dynamic, the new stage. I don't expect a quiet summer."
Adding to the volatility in Ramadi is the parochial bent of the Iraqi militia arriving in the city, part of a nationwide phenomenon in which tribes, religious sects and political parties are recruiting armed forces more loyal to their group than to the ideal of an impartial Iraqi military, according to U.S. and Iraqi officials.
"All these units came out of the woodwork after the elections" on Jan. 30, said Col. Edward Cardon, whose 3rd Infantry Division brigade is stationed in central Baghdad. "This is sort of a militia society."...
You can say that again...
Posted by Rebecca at May 8, 2005 8:34 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
More good, and everyday examples that Islam is the religion of peace. Wouldn't it be nice if we could say that about Judao/Christian Countries.
Posted by: Mackie![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 8, 2005 9:30 AM
Morning All!
Shamrock_UK~ Hope you catch this.
There are a Massive range of POV's here, and I fear one has to expect some responses to be a bit more... vehement than others. Understanding where a person comes from can take a while... and you haven't met Catherine yet!
I hope you keep posting.
Guys, the trading of insults with trolls, or those perceived to be trolls, is not doing anyone any good, eh? We have to stick with asking questions, and having the material on hand to counter theirs.
I do think there are Moderates- Naseem and Mr. Haidon being prime examples. However they will be trying to defend the faith even if it puts them on the line with other muslims. But we can't find them if we keep leaping to the attack every time one speaks up.
See you all Monday.
at May 8, 2005 9:50 AM
Guys:
Lately there has been A LOT of troll feeding going on at JW. Most of us know that this is a total waste of time and effort but occasionally the provocation is so egregious it can't be avoided.
I'd like to point out that no muslim poster to this site (with the probable exception of Jsingleton and Thomas Haidon, who are anti-jihad) has ever been able to present a cogent, logical, substantive, well-reasoned argument that was on-topic and responded appropriately to a challenege. (As you all know, critical thinking skills are discouraged in islam and are indeed anathema to the true "believer".) The best they can do is resort to ad hominems, tu quoque and other meaningless tactics, always the same ones that they get from their same old tired websites, as well as post long cut-and-pastes that are also from those same and now-all-too-familiar (yawn) websites, which most of us regulars just skip right on over without reading since we've seen it all so many times before.
I'm not saying that a response or two isn't called for from time to time, but you troll-feeders (and you know who you are) are allowing the muslims to hijack entire threads and establish their OWN agendas, diverting us from Robert's and our own. Do you really want to give them that kind of influence or platform?
I suggest that if you can't keep yourself from endlessly engaging these trolls (which only encourages them, as they are always involved in either jihad or da'wa), you pony up at the donations link on the JW homepage to compensate Spencer for the bandwidth that they waste and abuse.
muslim trolls are drawn to this site like flies to a sh@t-pile, but that doesn't mean we have to buy into their efforts at manipulation and their stale, tired rhetoric. It's just getting so OLD.
BTW, the trolls hardly ever visit DW on a regular and consistent basis, so for those of you just as fed up with the infestation as I am, consider spending more time over there.
I plan to post this message more than once to get the message out. Sorry for the repetition, but it simply had to be said - AGAIN.
CGW
Posted by: CGW at May 8, 2005 9:53 AM
Gary and CGW,
Aptly put.
There is learning to be had in debating a worthy opponent. Trolls, by definition, are out to noisily muddy the waters. Trolls aren't worthy of debate.
at May 8, 2005 9:58 AM
I made a generous contribution last month.
Just working off a wee bit of my account.
So, I'll behave, now.
But, I'll miss brownwonder. And sorry, Fatima. You're on your own, now.
Posted by: PRCS at May 8, 2005 11:05 AM
Yeah but trolls make for interesting local color...in a way all muslim debaters are trolls because they are trying to defend the un-defendable. You can observe them using the tools of intellectual dis-honesty and mental gymnastics to prove a point...word magic...every non-muslim posting here already has Islam's number...you already have it figured out...so no debate is actually possible for people who have their minds made up...set in concrete...debate is for people who are unsure and can be swayed...otherwise, it's just intellectual sword fighting. The sword is a magickal weapon used to cut away the unwanted or to drive home the point. Having said that, let me say this... a good sword fight once in a while may be good for the soul, especially if your sword is sharp...have a good day...swami
Posted by: duh_swami at May 8, 2005 11:14 AM
I believe a good question is this:
How many people from the internet read these pages - but are not members of Jihad Watch?
How many of the young are looking through the internet for information in making a spiritual decision?
If it is many - then yes - I belive in very much debating Muslims whose intentions are only to defend Islam - so that all can see they are using a very dull sword.
If one young person refuses to join the 'holy war' because of it - is there any way we can add up the number of lives saved? or the pain of the families?
I don't think so
Posted by: Beth at May 8, 2005 1:37 PM
Also - I don't believe donations should ever be questioned. It is not an honorable thing to do.
Posted by: Beth at May 8, 2005 1:38 PM
Well Beth, thats basically what I said, the debate is not for the debators, it is for the unsure audience, unless the debator is also unsure...Do you really see any possible debate between Christianity and Islam? You know already that your not going to convince muslims of much...no muslim is capable of converting you...so whats the point unless it's to help educate the unsure. If there are no unsure present, then it's just an excercise to keep debating skills sharp...I hope your right that people are comming here and reading these writings, some of which are brilliant...I am humbled that Robert allows me to post my innanities and keep company with the cream of the crop...have a good day...swami
at May 8, 2005 3:02 PM
Do you really see any possible debate between Christianity and Islam?
duh_swami Yes! Yes I do. Because that is what it is coming to - like it or not.
The people who have become disenchanted with all religions of this world [and for good reason] are not interested in the very heart of what is ailing this world.
We have a bunch of 'religious' fanitics coming - millions according to some estimates.
The non-Muslim world's word means NOTHING - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to the 'extremists.
So dealing with them on a 'human' term offers NO solution.
And I guess the powers that be can bomb them all. But how does that put an end to the vicious cycle once and for all? allah will only send some more.
And as allah keeps sending them - just remember - the bombs that be - are a dreadful sight to study.
That study will leave you sick in the stomach.
I guess for some this is just too scary [and it is] But ignoring it - or dressing it up to be something that really isn't [a tactic of Islam] is not going to stop the destruction that is headed everyone's way. EVERYONE!
Debating the issue of 'terrorism' is the ONLY option we have - before the bloodshed gets out of hand - and it is well on its way.
at May 8, 2005 3:41 PM
This may sound callous, but while they are killing each other, it must surely take their mind off killing us infidels. Its hard to feel sorry for them.
But then again, the first victim of Islam, is the Muslims.
at May 8, 2005 11:26 PM
Beth...I think you missed my point...if you are firm in your faith and you dont waver, what is there to debate about? Christianity has nothing to debate with Islam in reality. True knowledge is not debatable. If you know that Christianity is the truth, then your knowledge is beyond debate. But, you can inform, and you should inform...and you do inform. Probably I see the word "debate" a little differently than you do...for instance I dont think there is any point in debating "terrorism", because there is no sane way to debate for it...otherwise we inform about it and learn to deal with it...You notice that Brownwonder does not really debate...she attempts to correct only, and says thats what she is doing...thats because she is solid in her beliefs...she knows she will get no converts here
and no one will convert her...so no debate is actually possible with her...yet posters can banter back and forth with her all day and it never really reaches the level of a debate...I think this is what some posters have refered to as wasting time with trolls...It's 8:50 pm here, so have a good time, whatever time it is where you are...swami
at May 8, 2005 11:54 PM
Christianity has nothing to debate with Islam in reality
Hi duh_swami.
I believe Christianity does have a beef with the allah of the Koran [note - I'm excluding humans under his deception]
The allah of the Koran calls the Son of God an abomination. That may not matter to most - but it should?
My argument should be of a Spiritual nature - [and it is not] that can not be debated here - [concerning eternal life]
What I am debating - is the acceptance of Islam within non-muslim societies [I do believe it is too late - thanks to all of the 'Tolerance' and 'Diversity' preachers of the 80s and 90s]
That forces all of us to face Islam - either with bloodshed - or logic.
I have chosen logic.
I believe the following wisdom is the key:
Zec 8:16 These are the things that ye shall do; Speak ye every man the truth to his neighbour; execute the judgment of truth and peace in your gates.
Eph 4:25 Wherefore putting away lying, speak every man truth with his neighbour: for we are members one of another.
For all who believe themselves to be Christians - that's a Royal Command - from Heaven.
Posted by: Beth at May 9, 2005 10:28 AM
I know I'm making a LOT of sense - I'm just a lousy writer!
As for trolls - if their only aim is to spread mischeif?
They won't stick around for very long.
I would rather put them to GOOD use - using them to get the Truth out.
How do you know that they are people working for CAIR?
I realish the thought - every time.
Smile
Posted by: Beth at May 9, 2005 10:39 AM
Trolls aren't worthy of debate.
Posted by: voletti at May 8, 2005 09:58 AM
You bet, voletti.
Beth,
It isn't that debate is wrong; however, it is useless to debate Muslims if you hope to convince them of the error of their ways. By the time they are old enough to post here, their views have been engraved in stone, and no change is possible. It can, as you suggest, be educational for those infidels who are fence-sitters, PROVIDED education, and not trying to convince the troll, is the goal, and PROVIDED that the debate is a real debate, and not an argument.
Unfortunately, the education of the ignorant and the fence-sitters is too often not the goal. Far too often, the "debaters" are indulging in arguments from a defensive position.
It is terribly important to maintain focus here. The mission of this site is to educate visitors about Islam and to discuss ways to deal with it.
As both you and CGW suggest, an occasional argument (which cannot be considered a debate) can be illustrative or even serve as useful decathecsis, but we simply must not, as CGW points out, allow the trolls to "hijack" an entire thread.
By the way, why do you say you're a lousy writer? I can't say I agree.
Posted by: cubed
at May 9, 2005 3:34 PM
if you hope to convince them of the error of their ways
cubed, That is not my aim [it may be what I hope - but I am realistic]
No - I share what I know for those who are questioning it - as I believe there are many different minds who read these posts.
By the way - on another post - you gave an EXECELLANT point! [less I misunderstood]
I would like to see a united group of attorneys file a case against Islam - period!
I know nothing about law - but I do believe this is the Best start of ANY!
And those attorneys would win - with MUCH publication to the American people as they go [who are ready to physically remove some judges as it already is]
And I can not imagine that the international body would DARE make a peep - knowing full well what their own laws - they they themselves preach daily - have to say
at May 9, 2005 6:50 PM
Hugh wrote a typically first-rate piece some months ago on "Trolls." If I can find it I'll set up a link here, and I encourage those who can to print it as a ready reference, quotable on demand. If I can't find it I'll look at putting in one of my own past efforts. The point is that if one has the lines at hand it's far easier to slide them in and bring attention to what trolls do than it is to cast about for new ways of writing the same things.
Hugh's authority as an intellectual is likely enough to bring the troll-dancing to a halt when the concrete comes up as a printable reminder: "Hugh on Trolls. Link." If it takes a time or two to shake our panderers back to consciousness it's not a bad thing.
And what happened to our billboard?
I ocassionally post items and essays that seem to some of our readers to be either off-topic or totally cryptic. Risking that again, please try the following excerpts:
artsci.shu.edu/reesp/documents/Lenin--chto%20delat.htm
www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1902lenin.html
www.wsu.edu:8080/~wldciv/world_civ_reader/ world_civ_reader_2/lenin.html
If I missed that, go to google for Lenin: What is to be Done.
Why would we care about nitpicking arguments from Lenin contra Bernstein? Who would care about Marx's Critique of the Gotha Programme? Why do I beg people to look into the fights between Robespierre and Danton? Look at the same arguments fought among the Patriarchs of Christianity. Do we care who is right in the debates over Tertullian and Tatian? Homoousious or Homoiousious? Is it puerile and Scholastic? Or is it the same fight that's lasted from the dawn of intellignce in Man to this very moment?
I argue that Lenin is succinct and dynamic, amusing, and valuable to us as people who may decide the future courses of our nations. We may be the ones who decide our nations' futures because we do not act effectively.
I'm beginning to think that the time is come to act--differently.
If those among us who read Lenin and Marighella and some of the other pieces I've recommended, those who grasped the significance of those theoreticians of praxis; if those among us who feel the way I do that we can only win by organizing effectively against our enemies; if we have come to the point of readiness to act as a vanguard of the new revolution against the age-old reaction of peasant authoritarian occultism, Then I believe it's time that we act--differently.
Don't confuse this with a call to vigilantism, as some have done. Not being a pacifist doesn't mean one must be a vigilante. I do think it's time at least for some of us to pass from our passive state to one of activism. No fallacious "either/or" but a professionalist approach to revolutionary activity by goal-oriented vanguard-led organizers.
I'll check, as I always do, your later comments. In the meantime I'll try to locate Hugh's post on "trolls."
at May 9, 2005 10:12 PM
www.jihadwatch.org. Jan. 18, 2005. "A Note on Trolls from Hugh, Doing His Famous Impersonation of the Oldest of the Three Billy-goats Gruff."
Posted by: sonofwalker at May 9, 2005 10:20 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)