Revenge of the Sunnis

What the Arab Spring is really about.

BY EDWARD LUTTWAK | DECEMBER 7, 2011

The last decade has been marked by the rise of the Shiites in the Middle East. Through the bullet and the ballot box, Shiite parties have risen to power from Baghdad to Beirut -- thereby extending Iran's reach into the heart of the Arab world. Sunni rulers have viewed with much anxiety the new "Shiite crescent" that extends from Iran all the way to Lebanon.

But as a popular -- and now military -- uprising in Syria becomes more powerful, the Shiite ascendancy is coming to an end. With every day that passes, President Bashar al-Assad's grip on power seems to weaken: The United Nations assessed on Nov. 1 that Syria had entered a state of civil war and the country's economy is projected to contract by a disastrous 12 percent to 20 percent this year. And now, the regional Sunni powers are hoping to exploit the turmoil to launch a counteroffensive that could reverse their losses.

Shiite empowerment in the Middle East began with the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, which had the perfectly predictable effect of strengthening Iran -- not only its ruling theocracy as such, but also its hegemony over "Twelver" Shiites across the Arab world. In Iraq, most importantly, the Shiites have long outnumbered the Sunnis, but were marginalized and persecuted by the Ottoman Empire and then by all subsequent Arab regimes, down to the initially secular Saddam Hussein, who became a Sunni paladin after launching his war against Iran in 1980. Today by contrast, the U.S.-imposed democratic system virtually guarantees a Shiite-dominated government, with a natural affinity for the fellow Shiites of Iran.

In Lebanon, likewise, the Shiites have long been more numerous than the Christians or the Sunnis, but they were altogether weaker politically -- indeed, for most of Lebanon's history, they were more ignored than opposed. Today, by contrast, it is the emphatically Shiite movement Hezbollah -- which modestly calls itself the "Party of God" -- that is by far the most powerful party in the current Lebanese government, and its armed militia is stronger than the national army.

Then there is the very special case of Syria, where the Sunni majority is subjected by a nominally secular regime run by extremely heretical Muslims, chiefly backed by non-Muslim minorities both Christian and Druze.

The ruling Assad family's control of Syria has been a strategic boon to Iran due to its readiness to act as if they were fellow Shiites -- thereby connecting Iran, Iraq, and southern Lebanon into a contiguous "Shiite crescent," in the words of an alarmed Jordanian King Abdullah II. That is richly ironic, because President Bashar al-Assad and his inner core of followers who dominate the security forces are Nusayris, only re-branded in the 1920s as Alawites ("followers of Ali") to better claim a Muslim identity as Shiites ("partisans" of Ali), but whose very un-Islamic doctrines would expose them to murderous repression in Iran -- just ask a member of the post-Islamic Bahai community.

For ultra-Sunni Saudi Arabia, as well as its smaller neighbors -- Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates -- the Shiite advance has been most unwelcome. Religious differences have greatly widened in recent years: Shiite devotions, particularly in Iran, have increasingly focused on the hidden Twelfth Imam, whose actively implored world-ending return leaves Muhammad himself by the wayside. Equally, Shiite pilgrimages to the Hassan and Hussein shrines in Iraq -- idolatrous for rigorous Sunnis -- inherently compete with the Mecca pilgrimage.

AHMAD AL-RUBAYE/AFP/Getty Images

 

Edward Luttwak is author of The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire and an international consultant.

MISTERNITE

11:25 PM ET

December 7, 2011

While this article isn't

While this article isn't completely wrong, I have to take issue with some of the analysis that's presented here.

Firstly, and crucially, this article understands the Shiite-Sunni power competition works at an elite level. There's nothing new here. The issue is in who's being presented as a Sunni and a Shia, with implications of two hegemonic groups vying for power in the Middle East. In reality, the Shiite crescent which you mention is highly factionalised with some loose alliances. Iraqi-Iranian Shiite cooperation is based principally on a fear and distrust of the US amongst Iraqi Shiites. That alliance is likely to disintegrate as the US slowly begins to pull out of the country. In a similar sense, the Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah cooperation is not based on a hierarchical structure with Iran as top dog as this article implies. In reality, it's a coalition of actors with mutual interests. Rather than seeing this conflict in a sectarian conflict, an undoubtedly important aspect, take for instance the fact that these groups are all in opposition US hegemony in the region. It's as much an "Anti-US crescent" as much as it is a Shiite crescent.

Forgetting the misunderstandings within the elite-level understanding, I think this article doesn't do a good job of understanding the cultural nuances of the region either. Assumptions of devotion of the Shiites to the 12th Imam are greatly exaggerated - I think you'll face an arduous task of finding evidence of mainstream Shiite devotion that leaves the prophet by the wayside. This simply is not true.

On a fundamental level, the problem with the cultural and religious understanding is who is being termed as a 'Sunni' and a 'Shiite' in this article. The idea of "rigorous Sunnis" who find Shiite practises "disgusting" and prayer rituals "downright menacing" is flawed. The understanding of "rigorous" individuals is referring to the Wahabi sect. A fringe element who happen to have some elite level access to Saudi ideology - loosely masking the US proxy power calculation. The idea that Sunnis as a whole now, suddenly getting angry at these cultural practises which they've lived alongside for centuries has no backing. At an elite level, yes, there is a power competition. The belief that this has seeped into the cultural has no founding.

 

FRISBEETARIAN

1:45 AM ET

December 8, 2011

You need to stop smoken and

You need to stop smoken and actually get your head out of whatever diseased cesspool of cranial decay you have yourself embedded in. Shiaas do not worship Hussein and Ali, they only venerate them. You might have them confused with Alaawites.

 

ALTHORRAND16@YAHOO.COM

8:05 AM ET

December 8, 2011

prostitution???

Mut'ah is Nikah for a specefied time.
Did the Sunni commentators of the Quran including Ibn Kathir, along with Imam Tabari, Qurtubi etc have no understanding as to what they were doing when they were advancing their arguments about Mutah under the commentary of 4:24?
[Forbidden to you] are married woman, except what your right hand possesses. This Allah has written for you, and all other women besides these are permitted to you, so that you may seek them out with your wealth, seeking chastity and not fornication. So when you have contracted temporary marriage [istimt'atum] with them, then give them their words. There is no sin on you for whatever you agree to after this. Indeed, Allah is Knowing, Wise.Al-Qur'an, Surah An-Nisa, Ayah 24
There can be no doubt that the Qur'an bears witness that Mut'ah was originally halaal. Supporting this are the actions of the Companions course know this. Imam Ibn Hajr Asqalani in 'Talkhees al Habeer fi Takhreej al Hadeeth al Rafa al Kabeer' Volume 3 page 159 (printed Cairo) provides a list of all those Sahaba and Tabayeen 'revered' by the AhleSunnah who deemed Mut'ah permissible:
"Sabra al-Juhanni reported on the authority of his father that while he was with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon hm) he said: 0 people, I had permitted you to contract temporary marriage with women…"
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3255

We read the following episode in Muwatta by Imam Malik:

??? ??? ?? ?????? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ????? ??? ???

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Khawla ibn Hakim came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said, ''Rabia ibn Umayya made a temporary marriage with a woman and she…"
Muwatta Imam Malik, Book 28, Number 28.18.42

"After the death of Holy Prophet [s], a group of Salaf deemed it Halal. Amongst the Sahaba they were Asma bint Abi Bakr, Jabir bin Abdullah, Ibn Masood, Ibn Abbas, Mu'awiya, Amro bin Huraith, Abo Saeed, Salama and Mu'abed bin Umaya bin Khalaf. He said that Jabir reported from the companions that (it was valid) during the reign of the Prophet, Abubakr and some part of Umar's reign. He said that it is reported from Umar that he forbade it only if there were not two just witnesses. Some of Tab'een deemed (it halal) such as Tawous, Atta, Saeed bin Jubair and the majority of the jurists of Makka."
Ali said: "Had Umar not banned Mut'ah then the only person to fornicate would be a wretched person."
Tafseer al-Kabeer, Volume 4 Page 41
http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/mutah/en/chap7.php

 

BOBKLAHN

2:45 PM ET

December 8, 2011

While this article isn't

Very well said.

 

9 VOLT

11:43 PM ET

December 7, 2011

Good article (though I'll

Good article (though I'll have to learn more about the "murderous repression" of Bahais in Iran).

One question: Would the Sunni Arab states be supporting the Sunni uprising in Syria if it were not for the U.S. and other western states pushing them? It seems the Arab League is acting only after being cajoled by the West.

 

FRISBEETARIAN

1:43 AM ET

December 8, 2011

Where did the author get his facts from?

I would like to ask the author of this article as to how he would know that the Shiaas are more numerous than the Sunnis and the Christians especially in the absence of a census.

Secondly, the largest party in the the Lebanese government is the Christian Free Patriotic Movement. Hezbollah actually has one of the smallest presences in the government among the parties.

The article starts with a strong premise and seems highly interesting, but the author's lack of knowledge of the basic facts in Lebanon renders him untrustworthy.

 

HAMMY

6:14 PM ET

December 10, 2011

adding to your comment, the

adding to your comment, the article also states that Kuwait has a majority of Shiites (similar to Bahrain) which is no where near the truth. the official Shiite population is near 20%, while unofficially some say its around 25%, which keeps them as a minority.

even within that 25%, lots of them are descendents of Saudi shiism, and dont follow twelver imam dictism or any of the ayatollahs. noit to mention liberal shiittes that are more keen in booze and parties than the holy shia shrines in Qum and Shiraz.

 

SAFOORA KHAN

2:09 AM ET

December 8, 2011

I disagree with the

I disagree with the assertions of this article. As a Shite, living in middle east ,I have come across extreme shite frustrations within Bahrain and Saudia Arabia..the final battle is yet to be fought.
When the shite population of saudi provinces will revolt -and revolt they will as they have no stake in saudi wahabi kleptocracy- the entire political arrangements will fall in middle east like a house of cards.
Why is that in the entire middle east, I am considered an Iranian agent just because I am shite??
Being a Shite doesn't automatically imply that I take my orders directly from Iran or agree with iranian nationalist agenda or with the Ayatollahs about their messianic sermons.This is a reductionist and myopic suggestion,based on historical stereotypes, and is racist and false.
Shite Muslims are individuals,who form their own political and religious opinions quite independent of Tehran.Many of us actually hate the Iranian ayatollahs and their moth eaten rigidity more than sunni's.
But the struggle for political rights is the right of every citizen and my religion should not be used to deprive me of my rights ( a crime many sunni states commit against their Shite citizens).So if shite Arab citizens hate their rulers-its not because Iran told them to-But because their rulers forced them to.
So I would say to the writer.....Its about POLITICS STUPID NOT RELIGION!!!

 

BOBKLAHN

2:51 PM ET

December 8, 2011

Taking orders from Iran.

Coming to the defense of Iran if attacked is no where near taking orders from Iran.

If Canada were invaded the US would most certainly come to her aid. Does that mean the US takes orders from Canada?

In the real world, when the US was attacked on 9-11, France came to our aid, sending more ships, planes, and troops to Afghanistan than Britain did. Does anyone suggest France is taking orders from the US?

 

JACKNEALDEE

2:29 AM ET

December 8, 2011

Who harbored them and hid and

Who harbored them and hid and protected them? The Sunnis. They can't do very much unless they have people willing to cover them.
leather jacket

 

NAQI.AKBAR

2:50 AM ET

December 8, 2011

inaccuracies

The writer has not studied history. Hasan is buried in Madinah (KSA) while Hussain is buried in Kerbala. I hope such inaccuracies are avoided; as they put into question any scholar/writer credentials.

 

NAQI.AKBAR

2:50 AM ET

December 8, 2011

inaccuracies

The writer has not studied history. Hasan is buried in Madinah (KSA) while Hussain is buried in Kerbala. I hope such inaccuracies are avoided; as they put into question any scholar/writer credentials.

 

KALEMARO

3:12 AM ET

December 8, 2011

??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com

??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com - ??????? ???????? http://forum.kalemaro.com -

 

ALIHYDER

4:54 AM ET

December 8, 2011

First of all this guy doesn't

First of all this guy doesn't even have his facts striaght. He says "Shiite pilgrimages to the Hassan and Hussein shrines in Iraq " are competing with visits to Mecca and Media. Hasan and four other Imams are buried in Medina not in Iraq. This guy needs to pick up a book or visit wikipedia. Then he claims that Mutah is a new thing started recently. Honestly this is the most misleading superficial reporting ever.

Divide and Conquer, thats what i see here

 

ZUHAIRHALY

4:55 AM ET

December 8, 2011

Sunni never take revenge

Sunnis can not take revenge from any other tanzeem or religion.

Islam is a name of sacrifice and they have been sacrificing from the first day of history. :)
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Suspected Shiite militiamen killed at least 46 Sunni Arabs in a weekend rampage of revenge killing in a city north of Baghdad, an Interior Ministry official said Sunday, raising the toll in the latest sectarian bloodletting there to 63.

A string of bombings in the northern city of Kirkuk killed 10 people, including two girls who died when a man detonated explosives strapped to his body in front of the al-Mallimin girls high school in downtown Kirkuk, police officials said.

The U.S. military reported the deaths of a Marine and four soldiers. The Marine was killed in combat in Anbar province, the Sunni heartland west of Baghdad on Saturday.

......A husband, wife and two of their sons were killed, and two daughters-in-law critically wounded Sunday morning when gunmen burst into their home in Mosul,
Iraq's third largest city 225 miles northwest of Baghdad. Police Col. Eid al-Jibouri said the identities of the attackers and their motive were unknown.

KIRKUK, Iraq (CNN) -- Bombs killed at least 16 Iraqis Sunday in Baghdad and in the oil-rich northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk.

In Kirkuk, six car bomb blasts -- four of them within a 30-minute period -- killed at least eight people and injured as many as 40, local police reported.

The first car bomb exploded at the entrance to a popular market around 10:30 a.m. local time. The second went off 10 minutes later in an area of the city that has several checkpoints and where Iraqi security forces patrol.(Watch what life is like inside the 'Triangle of Death' -- 2:32 Video)

The third blast came at around 10:50 a.m. outside a police building. That explosion was also close to an Islamic school for girls, police said, and some of the students were among the casualties.

The fourth car bomb exploded at about 11 a.m. outside a teachers' institute, police said.

The fifth and sixth explosions happened nearly simultaneously at about 2:25 p.m., one at the site of the second blast near the checkpoints and the other apparently targeting a car dealership.

The explosions all appeared to come from parked cars and not suicide car bombers, officials said.

Kirkuk, home to Arabs, Kurds and Turkmens, has been a cauldron of ethnic tension.

On September 17, a series of bombings killed at least 23 people in the city.

Revenge-seeking militiamen seized six Sunnis as they left Friday prayers and burned them alive with kerosene in a savage new twist to the brutality shaking the Iraqi capital a day after suspected Sunni insurgents killed 215 people in Baghdad's main Shiite district.

Iraqi soldiers at a nearby army post failed to intervene in Friday's assault by suspected members of the Shiite Mahdi Army militia or subsequent attacks that killed at least 19 other Sunnis, including women and children, in the same neighborhood, the volatile Hurriyah district in northwest Baghdad, said police Capt. Jamil Hussein.

On Saturday, coalition forces killed 10 insurgents and an Iraqi civilian in three simultaneous raids north of Baghdad and destroyed a factory used to make roadside bombs, the U.S. military said. The civilian was a teenager fatally wounded in the fighting in the city of Taji. A pregnant woman also was hurt.

New method of brutality
Most of the thousands of dead bodies that have been found dumped across Baghdad and other cities in central Iraq in recent months have been of victims who were tortured and then shot to death, according to police. The suspected militia killers often have used electric drills on their captives' bodies before killing them. The bodies are frequently decapitated.

But burning victims alive introduced a new method of brutality that was likely to be reciprocated by the other sect as the Shiites and Sunnis continue killing one another in unprecedented numbers. The gruesome attack, which came despite a curfew in Baghdad, capped a day in which at least 87 people were killed or found dead in sectarian violence across Iraq.

In Hurriyah, the rampaging militiamen also burned and blew up four mosques and torched several homes in the district, Hussein said.

Residents of the troubled district claim the Mahdi Army has begun kidnapping and holding Sunni hostages to use in ritual slaughter at the funerals of Shiite victims of Baghdad's raging sectarian war.

Revenge-seeking militiamen seized six Sunnis as they left Friday prayers and burned them alive with kerosene in a savage new twist to the brutality shaking the Iraqi capital a day after suspected Sunni insurgents killed 215 people in Baghdad's main Shiite district.

Iraqi soldiers at a nearby army post failed to intervene in Friday's assault by suspected members of the Shiite Mahdi Army militia or subsequent attacks that killed at least 19 other Sunnis, including women and children, in the same neighborhood, the volatile Hurriyah district in northwest Baghdad, said police Capt. Jamil Hussein.

On Saturday, coalition forces killed 10 insurgents and an Iraqi civilian in three simultaneous raids north of Baghdad and destroyed a factory used to make roadside bombs, the U.S. military said. The civilian was a teenager fatally wounded in the fighting in the city of Taji. A pregnant woman also was hurt.

New method of brutality
Most of the thousands of dead bodies that have been found dumped across Baghdad and other cities in central Iraq in recent months have been of victims who were tortured and then shot to death, according to police. The suspected militia killers often have used electric drills on their captives' bodies before killing them. The bodies are frequently decapitated.

But burning victims alive introduced a new method of brutality that was likely to be reciprocated by the other sect as the Shiites and Sunnis continue killing one another in unprecedented numbers. The gruesome attack, which came despite a curfew in Baghdad, capped a day in which at least 87 people were killed or found dead in sectarian violence across Iraq.

In Hurriyah, the rampaging militiamen also burned and blew up four mosques and torched several homes in the district, Hussein said.

Residents of the troubled district claim the Mahdi Army has begun kidnapping and holding Sunni hostages to use in ritual slaughter at the funerals of Shiite victims of Baghdad's raging sectarian war.

This is what the Sunni can do..!!

Thanks

Paperless agenda

 

WALID-B

5:55 AM ET

December 8, 2011

E. Luttwak's Errors

About temporary Muslim marriages, Sunnis have them too but with a slight variation. The Shia call them "Nikah Mut'ah" and the Sunnis call them "Nikah Misyar".

Kuwait's majority of Muslims are not Shia. Sunni Muslims are 85% and the Shia only 15%.

Lebanon's cabinet majority is not made up of Shia's Hizbullah. Of the cabinet's 30 ministers, Hizbullah has only 2 ministers but these are part of a majority coalition headed by the Christian Free Patriotic Movement.

Lebanon's Shia have not been in the majority for that long. At Lebanon's independence 68 years ago, they constituted less than 20% of the population and were therefore not only ignored as Luttwak claims but also trampled on. They currently make up the largest block with about 45% of the total population but still have the same basic ruling rights as they had when they were at only at 20%, minus the trampling part for obvious reasons.

Luttwak's calling Assad's Syria "heretical" gives away his rabid Suni anti-Shia sources. He should have been aware that while Syria is ruled by a minority Alawite (Shia) regime, it's ruling the country under Sunni Sharia laws and Sunni civil administrative and educational systems.

Shia empowerment in the ME did not start in 2003 but 24 years earlier with the Shah's abdication and it wasn't the Americans that gave anything to Iraq's Shia other than the destruction of their country.

For an academic and expert on military matters, and being a bragging American government spy, Luttwak is sloppy about his facts . Laura Rozen profiled him in the JDF 3 years ago; he has an obsession with Iran and it explains the aim of his Shia-disparaging article:

http://www.forward.com/articles/13515/

 

ALTHORRAND16@YAHOO.COM

7:15 AM ET

December 9, 2011

What is the position of children born from Mut'ah?

This issue should be examined in a rational way and should not be used to inflame sectarain divisions. The aim should be to discover what has been decreed halah or haram by the Prophet and Allah almighty.
There is no difference between the children of Nikah or Mut'ah. Both are considered legitimate under the Shari'ah - they inherit from their parents, and all Islamic laws apply with regards to paternity. if you dispute this then what would be the status of those children born in time of the prophet as result of mutah. just search for ibn Abbas's debate on Mut'ah if you want to know who they are.
Mut'ah is a type of marriage, used in the same way as a permanent marriage (Nikah) in order to make a man and woman physically halaal to each other. A Mut'ah is a temporary marriage that ends at a fixed period. Imam of Ahl as-Sunnah Waheed ad-Deen az-Zaman, in his footnotes of Sunan ibn Majah, defined Mut'ah as follows:
Mut'ah is a type of Nikah until an agreed time. It can be for a day, two days, a month, one year, three years etc.
Waheed ad-Deen az-Zaman. Sunan Ibn Majah. Volume 2, p. 76
Imam Nawawi in his commentary of Sahih Muslim, relied on the definition of Mut'ah advanced by Imam of Ahle Sunnah Qadi Iyad as follows:
"Ulema agree that this Mut'ah is a Nikah in which the husband and wife do not inherit from eachother and separation would take place on the completion of the Specified time without Talaq".
Sharh Sahih Muslim, Volume 4 page 13
Similar rules that apply for Nikah apply for Mut'ah - if certain types of women are haram for a man to contract Nikah then the same rule applies with Mut'ah. A man cannot contract Mut'ah with a married women, as is the case with a normal Other rules along this line are stipulated in our books of fiqh, which will be discussed in the appendix.(see link below)
Iddah (Waiting Period) in Mut'ah
Iddah is obligatory upon women in Mut'ah, just like in Nikah i.e.
A woman cannot enter into Mut'ah marriage, till the time she has become pure by observing the 'iddah (waiting period) from her earlier husband.
And after expiration of Mut'ah marriage, again she has to observe 'iddah, before getting married (either Nikah or Mut'ah) to any other person.
Mut,ah was allowed during the time of the Prophet and was practiced until Umar banned it . The Companions continued to believe it was legitemate.
We read in Ahlul Sunnah's authority Neel al Authar Volume 6 page 53 B Nikah Mut'ah:
Ibn Hazm narrated in Al-Muhalla from a group of companions other than Ibn Abbass and said: 'It was fixed that it is halal by a group of the Al-Salaf, that included the companions:
Asma' bint abi Bakar, Jabir bin Abdullah, Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn Abbass, Mu'awiyah, Umrro bin Al Hurayth, Abu Sai'd and Salma the sons of Umayyah bin Khalaf …
Amongst the Taabi'een who deemed Mut'ah to be Halal were al Taus, Ata and Saeed bin Jabayr'.
Online Nayl al Autaar, Volume 6 Bab-al-Mut'ah
the following Sunni sources that Sahaba and Sunni scholars believed that Mut'ah is permissible and there verse of Mut'ah was Muhakam i.e. intact without any abrogation.
Tafseer Fatah ul Qadeer, Volume1 page 14
Tafseer Khazan, Volume1 page 23
Tafseer Mu'alim al Tanzeel, Volume1 page 63
Tafseer Tabari, page5 part 15
Tafseer Kashaf, Volume 1 page 20
Tafseer Gharaib al Qur'an, page 4 part5
Tafseer Kabeer, Volume3 page 9
Tafseer Manar, Volume 5 page 15 by Rashed Manar
Umdah' tul Qari , Volume 17 page 246
We have already cited the Maliki notion that there is no verse that abrogated the verse of Mu'ah , let us once again cite it:
"Should one that practices sexual intercourse through Mut'ah be punished? Malik's students said that no penalty should be applied because the (Mut'ah) contract is doubtful and since there is disagreement over it (being Halal or Haram) and also due to the fact it wasn’t made haram by the Qur'an".
please click on the link below for much more detailed discusion.
http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/mutah/en/chap8.php

 

ESCONDIDOSURFER

6:57 PM ET

December 11, 2011

Temporary Marriage. What a

Temporary Marriage. What a nice innovation to accomodate sin! The more we learn about Islam the more we find that they are in no place to criticize the morality of Christians.

 

ALTHORRAND16@YAHOO.COM

8:38 AM ET

December 12, 2011

Form a line, one religion/sect at a time please!

Sin is when a deed is performed which goes angainst laws of God. Since Christians and muslims disagree on basic religiouse definitions like God, it will be pointless to debate about temporary marriage, it will be like starting to bulid a house from second floor.
The debate on temporary marriage is usually debated between muslims as a way of trying to understand what is or is not allowed in islam.
Islam and Christianity differ on their approach to sexuality and how to fulfill sexual desires. suppresion of sexual desires is not only unhealthy for individual but is also harmful for the society as it is highlighted in many abuse cases in clergy who are not allowed to marry.
Islam allows sexual pleasure but in accordance with the commands of God.
Temporary marriage is a solution for many who dont want to commit fornication but who cannot afford a perminent marriage. see above posts for concerns about resluting children.
Lets not forget about rising divorce figures , where by all marriages can become temporary.
I wish all the Christians a happy Christmas and hope and pray for a speedy return of Jesus so that he can help fill this world with peace and justice.

 

WALID-B

6:03 AM ET

December 8, 2011

E. Luttwak's Errors

About temporary Muslim marriages, Sunnis have them too but with a slight variation. The Shia call them "Nikah Mut'ah" and the Sunnis call them "Nikah Misyar".

Kuwait's majority of Muslims are not Shia. Sunni Muslims are 85% and the Shia only 15%.

Lebanon's cabinet majority is not made up of Shia's Hizbullah. Of the cabinet's 30 ministers, Hizbullah has only 2 ministers but these are part of a majority coalition headed by the Christian Free Patriotic Movement.

Lebanon's Shia have not been in the majority for that long. At Lebanon's independence 68 years ago, they constituted less than 20% of the population and were therefore not only ignored as Luttwak claims but also trampled on. They currently make up the largest block with about 45% of the total population but still have the same basic ruling rights as they had when they were at only at 20%, minus the trampling part for obvious reasons.

Luttwak's calling Assad's Syria "heretical" gives away his rabid Suni anti-Shia sources. He should have been aware that while Syria is ruled by a minority Alawite (Shia) regime, it's ruling the country under Sunni Sharia laws and Sunni civil administrative and educational systems.

Shia empowerment in the ME did not start in 2003 but 24 years earlier with the Shah's abdication and it wasn't the Americans that gave anything to Iraq's Shia other than the destruction of their country.

For an academic and expert on military matters, and being a bragging American government spy, Luttwak is sloppy about his facts . Laura Rozen profiled him in the JDF 3 years ago; he has an obsession with Iran and it explains the aim of his Shia-disparaging article:

http://www.forward.com/articles/13515/

 

WILLSON19

11:17 AM ET

December 8, 2011

In a equivalent sense

In a equivalent sense, the particular Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah cooperation is not based on a hierarchical structure along with Iran as best dog as this article implies. In reality, it's a coalition of actors with shared interests. In lieu of seeing this kind of conflict in the sectarian conflict, an undoubtedly essential requirement, take for instance the fact these groups are typical in level of resistance US hegemony in the region. It's the maximum amount of an "Anti-US crescent" around it is a Shiite cres.

Forgetting the misunderstandings within the elite-level comprehension, I think this article doesn't do an adequate job of knowing the cultural how to go about the mattress region either. Assumptions of devotion from the Shiites to the Twelfth Imam are significantly exaggerated -- I think you'll confront an arduous activity of locating evidence of well known Shiite devotion that will leaves the prophet by the wayside.

This kind of simply is incorrect. One question: Would the particular Sunni Arab states be assisting the Sunni rebellion in Syria whether it were not for the U.S. and other traditional western states pushing them?

 

GWALD89

7:02 AM ET

December 8, 2011

How'd Al Qaeda get into Iraq?

At the same time that Syria served as a conduit between Iran and Hezbollah, they kept the flow of Al Qaeda fighters into Iraq, who not only killed Americans but Shiites too. Who can forget the bombings in Karbala. And I don't remember Iran objecting.
In 1991, or even 2003, did any Sunni states back up Saddam? These regimes don't actually care for fellow members of their sect, and will allow them to be killed as much as they can without losing face. Did Syria or Iran lift a finger to help Hezbollah in 2006, when at first it appeared they were on the ropes?
The pattern so far has been to promote conflict where possible to one's advantage, but there has been no true ally like behavior. They don't really cover each other's backs. So my guys vs your guys multistate war is unlikely, based on past precedent.
Interesting that Luttwak leftout Turkey, which of course has also promoted revolution in Sunni states, and said peep about Bahrain.

 

MASSAGENS TANTRICAS

9:10 AM ET

December 8, 2011

Did the author get his facts from?

i Agree ....Shiaas are more numerous than the Sunnis and the Christians especially in the absence of a census. Thanks for sharing!

 

WALID-B

9:45 AM ET

December 8, 2011

Massagens Tantricas

The world's 1.6 billion Muslims are about 85% Sunni and about 15% Shia.

The only country that is almost totally Shia (over 95%) is Iran. Other countries with substantial Shia populations ranging from 40% to 70% of the total population are Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Azerbaijan, and Bahrain.

There are more Christians than Muslims in the world.

 

SIDROCK23

10:38 AM ET

December 8, 2011

is edward Luttak a saudi puppy?

this moron has basically been spoon fed the same saudi wahabbi nonsense, that all shias are ar iranian stooges. first of all, if u had ur facts straight you would see that majority of shia in the world follow the teachins of ayatullah sistani and not khameni. second, of all the terroist groups out in the world today, how many are shia? u consider hezbollah a terrorist group, but when was the last time they attack the U.s? now let me remind you about al qaeda, taliban, lashkar e taybah, lashkar e janghavi, just to name a few. not to mention the many other sunni groups from chechnya, indonesia, phillapines, nigeria, etc. are all wahabbi (sunni) groups., how many shia were innolved in 9/11? or the attacks on the U.S.S cole? train bombings in madrid and london? its the saudi and UAE sponosred wahabbi islam that is a cancer and disease on the world and yet, its their positions that U.S and europe support. u are digging your own graves by supporting these savages. former CIA agent and middle east expert Robert Baer said it best, in this conflict you are much better of siding with the shia than the sunnis. listening to guys like edward luttak (his last name tends to have some sort of a saudi-wahabbi tilt in it, maybe one of the parents was a saud) is only to lead to deception and betrayal.

 

WALID-B

11:38 AM ET

December 8, 2011

SIDROCK23

You are wondering about Luttwak; he is not Saudi, Wiki has this on him, which makes his ignorance of the Shia so odd:

"Luttwak was born into a Jewish family in Arad, Romania, and raised in Italy and England. He attended the London School of Economics and Johns Hopkins University, where he received a doctorate. His first academic post, before moving to the United States, was at the University of Bath. He became a professor at Georgetown University in 1975. In 2008, he became a Senior Advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C..

He has served as a consultant to the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council, the United States Department of State, the United States Navy, United States Army, United States Air Force, and several NATO defense ministries. He was a member of the National Security Study Group of the United States Department of Defense, and an associate of the Japanese Finance Ministry's Institute of Fiscal and Monetary Policy. With three other partners, he established and operated a self-sufficient forest-conservation ranch in the southern Amazon basin.

Luttwak has been a frequent lecturer and consultant, and is known for his unorthodox[says who?] policy ideas, suggesting for example that major powers' attempts to quell regional wars actually make conflicts more protracted.

He served on the editorial boards of Geopolitique (France), the Journal of Strategic Studies, The European Journal of International Affairs, and the Washington Quarterly. He speaks English, French, Hebrew, Italian, Spanish and other languages.

Intelligence operative

In addition to his persona as a "public intellectual," Luttwak is also an independent intelligence operative who is involved in clandestine activities that include "field operations, extraditions, arrests, interrogations (never, he insists, using physical violence), military consulting and counterterrorism training for different agencies of the U.S., foreign governments and private interests," he told Laura Rozen of the weekly The Forward newspaper.[2]

In May 2008 the New York Times published an opinion piece by Luttwak in which he argued that then-presidential candidate Barack Obama "was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood" and would be considered an "apostate" by the world's Muslims if he were to become president (see Apostasy in Islam).[3] Luttwak was widely criticized by those authors who consider this analysis a misrepresentation of sharia, or Islamic law, including by the public editor of the New York Times, Clark Hoyt

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

 

TERRY BRENNAN

12:55 PM ET

December 8, 2011

It's about the perception

I think that Luttak is expressing the Saudi perception, rather than facts. He is explaining that some Sunnis think this way, and that this explains their actions. I never get the sense that he believes what these Sunnis believe. I also get the sense that he disapproves, but that his job is to understand and interpret. So please don't go too ballistic on him.

 

BOBKLAHN

3:00 PM ET

December 8, 2011

Interesting column... But...

Interesting column, but a few details left out. Having followed the Iraq situation all along, I am aware that the active hostility in Iraq between Sunni and Shia is mainly based on Sunni attacks on Shiite communities.

The great majority of attacks on US forces in Iraq have been Sunni in origin. The attacks of 9-11 were totally Sunni, Wahabi to be specific.

Reading the annual report of the National Counter Terrorism Center I find they list aproximately 14000 terror attacks, worldwide, each of the last couple years. Of those attacks they credit over 9000 to Sunnis. Not one is credited to Shiite groups or individuals. There are several attacks listed against Shiite targets, several against targets in Iran, none by Shiite perps or by Iran.

Time to pull back and get a better view of the real world situation.

 

9 VOLT

3:51 PM ET

December 8, 2011

Iran is not the Problem

And yet U.S. officials all go around touting Iran as the "number one state-sponser of terrorism". I'd wager more Shia have died in terrorist attacks than Americans.

 

WALID-B

4:56 PM ET

December 8, 2011

BOBKLAHN

Time to pull back to get a better view of what Luttwak is really up to. He's got too much of a background to be making such simple mistakes so we'd have to conclude that his article demonizing the Shia is another torpedo aimed at Iran.

 

GRANT

12:46 AM ET

December 9, 2011

Why exactly are we listening

Why exactly are we listening to Edward Luttwak? He might have some points but this is the same man who wrote in an NY Times op-ed that if Obama became president it would be apostasy to Muslims.

 

LALKA

10:17 AM ET

December 9, 2011

Surprised

I am surprised at the lack of research in the article. Where is the statistical proof that Shites outnumber Sunnis in Kuwait and Lebanon?

Also, what about the practice of cursing that is a core ideology of shism? And Taqiyyah which is essentially a shite concept? It is the only religion where they teach hatred instead of love. The writer seems to have written this article in a hurry. My advice: better re-read the article twice and fact-check next time.

 

KEYBASHER

11:36 AM ET

December 9, 2011

I'm not getting it

Exactly how does Shiite Iran gain from the fall of Sunni Arab governments?

 

KASEMAN

1:24 PM ET

December 9, 2011

Luttwak

Luttwak is a general of the neoconnery tribe who has the predictable Zionist agenda.... one of the most visible drummers for both wars on Iraq. A faix historian whose knowledge of matters Muslim, Shia, Sunni, Arab, Persian and Iran, is superficial, limited to the conceit that these 1.5 billion are a homogenous lump of violent anti American morons.

On Iraq, before the invasion, one third of all families were mixed. The secterian violence is the consequence of the total breakdown of civil society orchestrated by the US occupation and the civil war thereon has been deliberately incited by the US, especially by Bremmer, a managing director at Kissinger Associates.

Besides Saddam's persecution, the Shia were the front line troops in Saddam's (not Iraqi) war on Iran backed by the US. Losses were terrible but very few Sunnis were casualties. In the gulf war, Bush the Father of democracy urged the Shia to rise against Saddam, with promises of support but when Saddam launched his genocide on them post hostilities, Gen Schwatznegger did nothing, basically backed him, deliberately stabbing the Shia in the back. Only Iran helped. The Shia remember this and will never forget the betrayal.

But they are Arabs and do not take orders from Persians..never have even befrore Islam.

Too bad Luttwak, a Hungarian Jew, cannot have any empathy for people that have suffered as much as the European Jews have under European Christians.
The strong suppress the weak, who suffer as they must.

 

WALID-B

4:41 AM ET

December 10, 2011

KASEMAN

Luttwak is not the first Hungarian-born Jew to have it all wrong about Arabs and milk his disinformation for all he could get out of it. Before him there had been Raphael Patai (1910-1996) that he wrote the prentended encyclopedic "Arab Mind" that identified all 400 million Arabs living in about 20 different countries on 2 continents as one homogeneous atavistic group sharing a like mentality. The book full of bogus generalizatins based on the author's sparse sampling of a few Arabs was used by the US military to train its Iraq-bound officers in how to deal with the the indigeous Iraqi population and according to Seymour Hersh, it became the Bible of the neocons and sort of the training manual in humiliating the prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

 

OBSERVER912

1:47 PM ET

December 11, 2011

Quite good

I find this article quite good.

Excluding some facts that might need reconsideration (such as Shiite constituting majorities/minorities, especially in the eastern province -my information puts them at 20% max) it does manage to pin some useful dynamics in the region.

Sunni disgust at some Shiite actions are real and, as the author mentioned, most of such activities have only recently been noticed by Sunni popular opinion.

Shiite over-denial is a usual symptom when being associated with Iran. The generally (and over-) used guise is that they are just fighting American and Israeli imperialism.

 

ARCONDICIONADO11

8:10 AM ET

December 29, 2011

Author get his facts from?

i Agree ....Shiaas are more numerous than the Sunnis and the Christians especially in the absence of a census. Good Work ! Thanks for sharing!
massagista
avioes venda