Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Feisal_90

Political shi'ism is treasonous

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

First of all let me clarify two things:

1) I'm Atheist and I don't care about religion. I was never Muslim and I joined this forum just to ask you a few things that I cannot understand;
2) For "political shias" I mean all the shia who support Hezbollah, Khamenei, Houthis, Assad and the shia political movements linked with Iran.

So let me start from the Iraqi invasion: in short the Americans invaded and the shia population supported the invasion and create a shia sectarian state that discriminated sunni muslims. Sunni muslims didn't accept the american occupation, and they have been targeted by pro-government forces. Now Iraq is an Iranian puppet thanks to America. ISIS was just the consequence of all this.

In Syria shia are just 10-13% of the population but they rule the country. When the Syrian people revolted, Assad was kept in power mostly by alawite shias in Syria, by Hezbollah and Iran. Then Russia invaded to help Assad to stay in power. Al Qaeda and ISIS were a consequence of all this.

In Yemen shias are just 35% of the population but they made a "revolution" (how can you call it a revolution if the majority of the population don't support Houthis?), and they want to take over the country even if the majority of the population is sunni.

In Lebanon Hezbollah rules even if shias are 27% of the country, while christians who make up 40% of the population, and sunni muslims who are 27% are marginalized. 

Now being an Atheist let me tell you that I have no sympathies for Saudi Arabia, and neither for Israel and America. I was a fan of Hezbollah before that they started betraying their sunni brothers. 
So in few words, political shias:

1) Take advantage of any imperialist power in the world, from Russia (in Syria) to America (in Iraq), but yet they curse America and pretend to fight against Zionism, while all I see is that they fight against sunni muslims;
2) Consider the Syrian uprising a western conspiracy against a sovereign and legitimate state, and they call the insurgents takfiri terrorists (and I partially agree with that), but when it comes to Yemen they support Houthis against the government, even if it's a shia terrorist group in the middle of a sunni country.

Till now I've not heard any justification for this behavior, except for conspiracy theories that talk about western conspiracies and refuse to believe the media. So let me ask you a question: If you say that sunni and shia muslims are equal and that Hezbollah and Houthis don't discriminate sunni muslims, then why don't you allow sunni muslims to join the ranks of these groups. Why are they shia groups and not nationalist groups that also include other sects of Islam?
 

Your behavior seems very hypocrite. Why do you ally with America when they allow you to take advantage of sunni muslims but you call for a western conspiracy when sunni muslims take aids from USA (like in Syria)? why do you always claim to fight zionism, but you never touch Israel and always fight against sunni muslims? 

 

I think that terrorism is mainly related to injustices: when Palestinians got their land stolen from the jews, they resorted to terrorism. When sunni Iraqis got their land stolen, they resorted to terrorism. When Syrian sunnis got discriminated by their government, they resorted to terrorism. Terrorism is the arm of the weak and of the poor. 
Let me clarify that the opinion that I have of sunni islamist groups is the same that I have about shia islamist groups: I have no respect for all of them. Being an Atheist, I don't see the reason why all these groups are sectarian and based on islam instead of being nationalists. 
 

Edited by Feisal_90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shia Muslims have a right to politics, we are not allied with the American government. Sunni iraqi's got their land stolen? on what basis? How? Where? Sunni's are not marginalized in Lebanon since they can be Prime Minister and a Shia is a speaker, however Shia's did fight the Zionists and won whereas the other sect struggled, We Shia's cannot afford to go to war with the Zionist's every bloody time because it would be suicidal because Zionist's will openly hit civilians and also have the help of certain Militants from the other sect... Shia's have always been marginalized since the times of the empires. You have not looked up our history, you have no clue what you are talking about and clearly you hold some form of animosity towards Shia's more than Sunni's. Also your whole post is a oxymoron within itself.

Salam Alaikum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, syeduddin said:

Shia Muslims have a right to politics, we are not allied with the American government. Sunni iraqi's got their land stolen? on what basis? How? Where? Sunni's are not marginalized in Lebanon since they can be Prime Minister and a Shia is a speaker, however Shia's did fight the Zionists and won whereas the other sect struggled, We Shia's cannot afford to go to war with the Zionist's every bloody time because it would be suicidal because Zionist's will openly hit civilians and also have the help of certain Militants from the other sect... Shia's have always been marginalized since the times of the empires. You have not looked up our history, you have no clue what you are talking about and clearly you hold some form of animosity towards Shia's more than Sunni's. Also your whole post is a oxymoron within itself.

Salam Alaikum.

Rekt :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed that it's the atheists who are very aggressive, always raging when trying to tell someone "there is no god." Or in this case, Shia=bad. You can just sense this person's blood pressure rise with every word of the post.

Their problem stems from looking at a statue and looking at themselves:

No archaeologist ever says, "this statue was found buried in a hillside in the outskirts of Rome, but it is not a statue. It randomly formed after billions of years. The carvings for the torso muscles, the hair, the facial features, the fingers, the legs. All just randomly formed. From Earth."

But the human being is also made from Earth. Both are made from Earth. Both are modified Earth.

Somehow, the one that can move, think and walk randomly formed. Only the less sophisticated one took intelligence to exist. Not the one that make the best chemists in the world blush.

Also be open to and accept other forms of Earth randomly forming. Like sandcastles. Or Egyptian pyramids. 

^ You need to figure yourself out. You wouldn't feel all this rage towards Shias. Who have been oppressed throughout history.

Happy Thanksgiving.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam brother Faisal, 

I am astonished at some details that you mention in your post - is it avoiding and omitting some parts of the truth, or have you simply no interest in reading a bit of history of the Middle East?

Shia Muslims have been prosecuted, killed en masse and discriminated against in any possible way by all ruling dynasties since the death of The Apostle of Allah (sawas), and that is a proven historical fact based on recorded history of that part of the world, and is generally and unanimously accepted by all historians of all cultures and nations - except maybe Wahhabis and such, although it is more likely that they consider the attempts to obliterate Shias all over the world a justified attempt to rid this world of heretics, deviants and infidels... 

It is also interesting that Shia Muslims live as a minority in almost all Arab and Muslim countries from the beginnings of Islam, but they are hardly ever mentioned, or their rights - or the frequent violations of those, until some Shia politician rises in some government - then his religious denomination suddenly becomes discussed and overshadows all his other capabilities, achievements and attributes - a Shia is, in the eyes of most non-Shias, even the secular ones - only a Shia, and he shall never be anything else but reduced to a heretic... So the hatred of Shias has survived and flourished through centuries, and it continues to flourish today.

Then, somehow, the woes and sufferings of Iraqi Sunnis, and their oh, so heroic struggle against the beastly occupators, that have been so treacherously greeted by Shia traitors - all this, somehow, always starts with the American invasion! Miraculously, no non-Shia, in Iraq or outside, seems to remember what was happening to Iraqi Shias for decades in their home country, where they just happen to be the majority of population, and the face of a mass-murderer, whose larger-than-life pictures hang from almost every building in the country for decades - it is somehow just eradicated from the memories of non-Shias... Iraq was ruled by the non-Shia minority for centuries, caliphs and kings, and recently politicians, but the mysteriously forgotten Saddam beat them all - he killed and murdered, and no one could escape, because his Secret Service was everywhere... Jails were bursting full, people were tortured on daily basis, they were thrown - slowly - into sulphuric acid until their bodies slowly desintegrated, girls were kidnapped on the streets and gang-raped by the government officials or Saddam's psychopatic sons, the natural resources of the country were depleted and sold, the millions vanishing in the Al-Tikriti family's pockets, and all their fellow non-Shia followers, and in the region around Al Tikrit, while the rest of majority Shias, and of course Kurds, stayed in extreme poverty, while they literally walked upon gold - the liquid one. They stayed in poverty - until they were imprisoned, killed or gassed, that is. And do not forget the restrictions on Shia religious rites, holy places, celebrations, commemorations etc.. And then, as if not enough suffering already, Saddam went to plan, calculate and execute his ultimate atrocitiy against Shia - to distinguish the whole dynasties of ancient Shia scholar families - sometimes killing all the male members, from old men to young boys... All that had the privilege to wear a black turban, thus showing proudly that his lineage went back directly to the Blessed Prophet (sawas) himself - they all had to pay with their lives! At the same time, the Sunni minority reaped the benefits of ruling and opressing the majority - so after being supporters of a monstrous mass-murderer and enjoying all the privileges while opressing brutally the majority of the population of Iraq for decades and decades -  you say that they are now fighting for their usurped rights and want their stolen land back... What land exactly do you refer to? Maybe as an impartial and fair atheist with no religious bias, as you say you are - you should ask an old Iraqi Shia woman or man, those who have lived under Sunni government of Saddam and who remember well those days and the "glorious justice" of burrying their sons during the Iran-Iraq conflict, which Saddam famously described as "sending our Iraqi Shia dogs to kill Iranian Shia dogs!!!" Strangely, I have never once heard of a Iraqi non-Shia protesting against the inhuman atrocities that were inflicted upon innocent Shias for decades in Iraq, or even refusing to share those privileges for Sunnis under Saddam, that were payed by the blood of Shias... ah, well, maybe it is still to happen in the future - we should keep hoping! 

And yet, inspite the Shia Resistance in South Lebanon fighting Israel for decades now - Shias do NOT fight Israel, according to you.

Then, inspite of Assad himself belonging to Ba'ath party, secular and socialist, his Sunni opponents in Syria ("moderate" and fanatical) are fighting him, as they stated over and over again, because he is a Shia Muslim (actually an Alawite, but who cares about details - for non-Shias, every lover of Imam Ali as. is a heretic and infidel). So again, when non-Shias rule predominantly Shia population, it's ok and nobody is mentioning their religious denomination, but should a Shia (or similar) rise to power - A Shia infidel is opressing us!!! Fight for true Islam!!! scream the masses... 

So you see, some things you say are simply wrong and some are right, some are complete lies and fabrications, and some just centuries-old accusations of us Shia, but one thing your post definitely is NOT - it is not a surprise to any of us here... We have all those lies, insults and accusations in our genes, so to say, and however the oponents disguise themselves ( claiming to be non-takfiris, secular, open-minded, even atheists), still their words echo the same hatred that was hurled at Imam Ali (as), as those "nice friends and followers" of the Messenger of God (sawas) abandoned the Imam (as) and a handfull of his friends to wash the dead body of the beloved Messenger (sawas), while they gathered to make sure that the Messenger's family (as) never ever get their right to rule. And up to this minute, nothing has changed. 

What I mean is, had you said yes, you have been slightly wronged throughout the history, just slightly - well, THAT would have surprised me!!¨

So untill we all meet on the judgement day and face our beloved Apostle Muhammad al Mustafa (sawas) and his Pure Family (as), and finally know who was right and who was not - may Allah te'ala lead this troubled Umma and defeat our enemies, from inside and out, ameen.

 

Kindest regards and salam, Amina

 

 

Edited by Amina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, syeduddin said:

Shia Muslims have a right to politics, we are not allied with the American government. Sunni iraqi's got their land stolen? on what basis? How? Where? Sunni's are not marginalized in Lebanon since they can be Prime Minister and a Shia is a speaker, however Shia's did fight the Zionists and won whereas the other sect struggled, We Shia's cannot afford to go to war with the Zionist's every bloody time because it would be suicidal because Zionist's will openly hit civilians and also have the help of certain Militants from the other sect... Shia's have always been marginalized since the times of the empires. You have not looked up our history, you have no clue what you are talking about and clearly you hold some form of animosity towards Shia's more than Sunni's. Also your whole post is a oxymoron within itself.

Salam Alaikum.

I mean that Al Maliki purged all sunnis from the government and sunnis Iraqis aren't represented in politics even if they make up 40% of the total population. In Lebanon I don't see why Hezbollah doesn't accept christians, sunnis, and why not, also atheists? it's probably because it's called hezbollah (the party of god), but again: why a shi'ite terrorist group in the middle of a country which is just shi'ite at 27%? what about the remaining 73%? I am aware of all the discriminations that go in both directions (from sunnis who discriminate shia to the opposite), but my question is: why? are you claiming that it's self defense? I don't see any self defense, you could have made an egalitarian government in Iraq, instead you switched from Saddam Hussein to a shi'ite sectarian government that allows Iranian militias to rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Amina said:

Salam brother Faisal, 

I am astonished at some details that you mention in your post - is it avoiding and omitting some parts of the truth, or have you simply no interest in reading a bit of history of the Middle East?

Shia Muslims have been prosecuted, killed en masse and discriminated against in any possible way by all ruling dynasties since the death of The Apostle of Allah (sawas), and that is a proven historical fact based on recorded history of that part of the world, and is generally and unanimously accepted by all historians of all cultures and nations - except maybe Wahhabis and such, although it is more likely that they consider the attempts to obliterate Shias all over the world a justified attempt to rid this world of heretics, deviants and infidels... 

It is also interesting that Shia Muslims live as a minority in almost all Arab and Muslim countries from the beginnings of Islam, but they are hardly ever mentioned, or their rights - or the frequent violations of those, until some Shia politician rises in some government - then his religious denomination suddenly becomes discussed and overshadows all his other capabilities, achievements and attributes - a Shia is, in the eyes of most non-Shias, even the secular ones - only a Shia, and he shall never be anything else but reduced to a heretic... So the hatred of Shias has survived and flourished through centuries, and it continues to flourish today.

Then, somehow, the woes and sufferings of Iraqi Sunnis, and their oh, so heroic struggle against the beastly occupators, that have been so treacherously greeted by Shia traitors - all this, somehow, always starts with the American invasion! Miraculously, no non-Shia, in Iraq or outside, seems to remember what was happening to Iraqi Shias for decades in their home country, where they just happen to be the majority of population, and the face of a mass-murderer, whose larger-than-life pictures hang from almost every building in the country for decades - it is somehow just eradicated from the memories of non-Shias... Iraq was ruled by the non-Shia minority for centuries, caliphs and kings, and recently politicians, but the mysteriously forgotten Saddam beat them all - he killed and murdered, and no one could escape, because his Secret Service was everywhere... Jails were bursting full, people were tortured on daily basis, they were thrown - slowly - into sulphuric acid until their bodies slowly desintegrated, girls were kidnapped on the streets and gang-raped by the government officials or Saddam's psychopatic sons, the natural resources of the country were depleted and sold, the millions vanishing in the Al-Tikriti family's pockets, and all their fellow non-Shia followers, and in the region around Al Tikrit, while the rest of majority Shias, and of course Kurds, stayed in extreme poverty, while they literally walked upon gold - the liquid one. They stayed in poverty - until they were imprisoned, killed or gassed, that is. And do not forget the restrictions on Shia religious rites, holy places, celebrations, commemorations etc.. And then, as if not enough suffering already, Saddam went to plan, calculate and execute his ultimate atrocitiy against Shia - to distinguish the whole dynasties of ancient Shia scholar families - sometimes killing all the male members, from old men to young boys... All that had the privilege to wear a black turban, thus showing proudly that his lineage went back directly to the Blessed Prophet (sawas) himself - they all had to pay with their lives! At the same time, the Sunni minority reaped the benefits of ruling and opressing the majority - so after being supporters of a monstrous mass-murderer and enjoying all the privileges while opressing brutally the majority of the population of Iraq for decades and decades -  you say that they are now fighting for their usurped rights and want their stolen land back... What land exactly do you refer to? Maybe as an impartial and fair atheist with no religious bias, as you say you are - you should ask an old Iraqi Shia woman or man, those who have lived under Sunni government of Saddam and who remember well those days and the "glorious justice" of burrying their sons during the Iran-Iraq conflict, which Saddam famously described as "sending our Iraqi Shia dogs to kill Iranian Shia dogs!!!" Strangely, I have never once heard of a Iraqi non-Shia protesting against the inhuman atrocities that were inflicted upon innocent Shias for decades in Iraq, or even refusing to share those privileges for Sunnis under Saddam, that were payed by the blood of Shias... ah, well, maybe it is still to happen in the future - we should keep hoping! 

And yet, inspite the Shia Resistance in South Lebanon fighting Israel for decades now - Shias do NOT fight Israel, according to you.

Then, inspite of Assad himself belonging to Ba'ath party, secular and socialist, his Sunni opponents in Syria ("moderate" and fanatical) are fighting him, as they stated over and over again, because he is a Shia Muslim (actually an Alawite, but who cares about details - for non-Shias, every lover of Imam Ali as. is a heretic and infidel). So again, when non-Shias rule predominantly Shia population, it's ok and nobody is mentioning their religious denomination, but should a Shia (or similar) rise to power - A Shia infidel is opressing us!!! Fight for true Islam!!! scream the masses... 

So you see, some things you say are simply wrong and some are right, some are complete lies and fabrications, and some just centuries-old accusations of us Shia, but one thing your post definitely is NOT - it is not a surprise to any of us here... We have all those lies, insults and accusations in our genes, so to say, and however the oponents disguise themselves ( claiming to be non-takfiris, secular, open-minded, even atheists), still their words echo the same hatred that was hurled at Imam Ali (as), as those "nice friends and followers" of the Messenger of God (sawas) abandoned the Imam (as) and a handfull of his friends to wash the dead body of the beloved Messenger (sawas), while they gathered to make sure that the Messenger's family (as) never ever get their right to rule. And up to this minute, nothing has changed. 

What I mean is, had you said yes, you have been slightly wronged throughout the history, just slightly - well, THAT would have surprised me!!¨

So untill we all meet on the judgement day and face our beloved Apostle Muhammad al Mustafa (sawas) and his Pure Family (as), and finally know who was right and who was not - may Allah te'ala lead this troubled Umma and defeat our enemies, from inside and out, ameen.

 

Kindest regards and salam, Amina

 

 

I don't see why you point discriminations made by sunnis as a justification. Are you saying that if you get discriminated in another place, in another historical era, you have the right to take revenge against the first sunni muslim that you meet? this doesn't make sense. 
Saddam Hussein's government was inclusive of all religious sects. 60% of ba'athist politicians in Iraq were shia muslims, and shia Iraqis are 60% of the total population, so that's was just right, and you can't blame sunni Iraqis for what Saddam did. I can't say the same about Assad's government, which is almost exclusively made by shia muslims. I don't find fair to take revenge against sunni Iraqis for Saddam Hussein, and I find very hypocrite that you mention all of Saddam's crimes (and you are correct), but you fail to see any wrong doing by Assad. 
You're just trying to make Saddam's crimes a shia vs sunni issue to justify all the crimes against sunnis in post-Saddam's Iraq, but you are completely wrong and unfair. You seem to hate sunni muslims very much. 
Which land did they got stolen? the Northern part of Iraq, which was ruled by americans and shia muslims. ISIS wouldn't exist now if you included sunnis in the government, or at least avoided to discriminate them. 

PS: For the others, this is a political discussion. I never tried to convince you to become Atheists, so please could you avoid to turn into a religious discussion? thanks. 

Edited by Feisal_90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Feisal_90 said:

I'm Atheist and I don't care about religion.

It seems that you are more confused and a closet Sunni than you are 'Atheist'.
Look at Libya and see what will become of Syria if President Asad is gone.


Sunnis have been American puppets throughout our contemporary history. Puppets tend to be tossed once they serve their purpose- So if America tosses their Sunni puppets to the dustbin, how can it be the fault of the Shias?  If Shias should follow the stupidity of the Sunni politics then they too would be occupied. Why should they do that? Instead of parroting your puppetmaster's mantra against the Shias...all you Sunni folks should learn a thing or two from them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the OP raises one very valid point - widespread common shia support of bashar al assad is absolutely despicable.

Neither Hezbollah nor Iran are masum or guided by a masum or appointed by a masum or sanctioned by a masum, and just because they support Assad, that doesn't mean supporting assad is hukm Allah. 

We should be grateful to Iran/ Hezbollah for defending Zainabia, May Allah continue to give them success, but there is a difference between supporting those defending the shrines (which will happen with assad or without) and defending assad while he drops barrel bombs on sleeping sunni children. 

the irony here is the word "unity". for many years those who defend assad the loudest have been the pro- unity crowd. now the actions of their leaders have destroyed shia-sunni unity almost all over the world.

the rest of OPs post is nonsense. sunni in iraq are less than 20% of the country. now they are complaining that they are not in charge of 100% of the country. 

 

*edit* also OP is lying about being born an atheist. his name is Fesal so he was obviously born to muslim parents

Edited by DigitalUmmah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I think the OP raises one very valid point - widespread common shia support of bashar al assad is absolutely despicable.

As you'd probably know I have no love lost for Assad nor have I ever cheered the exclusionary, dictatorial Baathist regime made up of Alawaites originally empowered by the imperialists to keep the majority Sunnis in check but - and this but is important - in the current scenario, the actions of the US and their Gulf Arab lackeys have left us with no sane choice. Given how things stand today, we should  forget Syria for many decades to come if Assad is violently overthrown. In the bigger scheme this would also cause a loss of Shia resistance and directly benefit Israel.

The stakes are high. We can either learn it the hard way or we can do some forwarding thinking to see how things would stand in a post Assad Syria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Feisal_90 said:

I don't see why you point discriminations made by sunnis as a justification. Are you saying that if you get discriminated in another place, in another historical era, you have the right to take revenge against the first sunni muslim that you meet? this doesn't make sense. 
Saddam Hussein's government was inclusive of all religious sects. 60% of ba'athist politicians in Iraq were shia muslims, and shia Iraqis are 60% of the total population, so that's was just right, and you can't blame sunni Iraqis for what Saddam did. I can't say the same about Assad's government, which is almost exclusively made by shia muslims. I don't find fair to take revenge against sunni Iraqis for Saddam Hussein, and I find very hypocrite that you mention all of Saddam's crimes (and you are correct), but you fail to see any wrong doing by Assad. 
You're just trying to make Saddam's crimes a shia vs sunni issue to justify all the crimes against sunnis in post-Saddam's Iraq, but you are completely wrong and unfair. You seem to hate sunni muslims very much. 
Which land did they got stolen? the Northern part of Iraq, which was ruled by americans and shia muslims. ISIS wouldn't exist now if you included sunnis in the government, or at least avoided to discriminate them. 

PS: For the others, this is a political discussion. I never tried to convince you to become Atheists, so please could you avoid to turn into a religious discussion? thanks. 

Do you have any sources that claim saddam's bathist politicians (whatever that may mean) existed 60 precent out of shia ? As far as i know the revolutionary command council during the 80s and beyond only contained sunni's . 

Edited by CaptainGalaxy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I think the OP raises one very valid point - widespread common shia support of bashar al assad is absolutely despicable.

Lets say President Asad is out. What then? What will happen to Syria and Syrians?

Supporting President Asad should not to be seen as a Shia thing but as a human one....specially specially in light of ousters of Gaddafi in Libya or Dr. Najib in Afghanistan. no? I would have included Egypt as well but thank God that the army put the terrorists MB in jail and saved Egypt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marbles said:

As you'd probably know I have no love lost for Assad nor have I ever cheered the exclusionary, dictatorial Baathist regime made up of Alawaites originally empowered by the imperialists to keep the majority Sunnis in check but - and this but is important - in the current scenario, the actions of the US and their Gulf Arab lackeys have left us with no sane choice. Given how things stand today, we should  forget Syria for many decades to come if Assad is violently overthrown. In the bigger scheme this would also cause a loss of Shia resistance and directly benefit Israel.

The stakes are high. We can either learn it the hard way or we can do some forwarding thinking to see how things would stand in a post Assad Syria.

Jibby what was there before the assad family? cant it just go back to that?

25 minutes ago, Wahdat said:

Lets say President Asad is out. What then? What will happen to Syria and Syrians?

Supporting President Asad should not to be seen as a Shia thing but as a human one....specially specially in light of ousters of Gaddafi in Libya or Dr. Najib in Afghanistan. no? I would have included Egypt as well but thank God that the army put the terrorists MB in jail and saved Egypt.

Wahdat - Salam, its been a while

My argument is less to do with bashar being the only option left now - even I cannot disagree that he is the only choice we have. 

my point is that it has not always been this way - right at the start of the arab spring his immediate and disproportional violence against (mostly) peaceful protesters is exactly what lead to the civil war today. he could have handled it in so many different ways - engaging with the populace/ discussions, parliamentary meetings, changes to law, even overseeing a transfer of power. however he chose violence. 

my problem is that right from the outset, shia have supported him despite his atrocities. this i feel is unacceptable. how on earth can we rightly curse saddamned hussain, who was a baathist like assad, for his crimes against civilians, while singing the praises of assad for his crimes against civilians?

as for a possible solution, I just dont know man. the"moderates" are propped up by israel and the USA, as are ISIS. on the other side you have assad barrel bombing entire civilian areas. in the middle are regular syrians being ground into dogmeat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is that not all manifestations were pacifists.  Syrian friends sunni or alawite said to me that already the first weeks there were government building destroyed , police man killed and People Who said during the protestations "Christian to beirut ! Alawite to the cemetery ! " and à big part of syrien population again nowadays support bachar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, alidu78 said:

The problem is that not all manifestations were pacifists.  Syrian friends sunni or alawite said to me that already the first weeks there were government building destroyed , police man killed and People Who said during the protestations "Christian to beirut ! Alawite to the cemetery ! " and à big part of syrien population again nowadays support bachar. 

The entire arab spring was planned, coordinated and executed by a western think tank based in (If i remember correctly) Austria. I am at work so there is limited internet so I cannot provide links, however if you see 2 recurring symbols in protests anywhere in the world - it is organised by this same company. one is the emblem of the raised fist in a circle on flags, one is naming a "revolution" after a colour, for example the "green" revolution which almost toppled ahmedinejad in the elections. if you see any of these symbols - its a fake protest, fake revolution. 

these emblems and symbols were EVERYWHERE in the so-called "arab spring". this includes syria. I fully supported assad at the start. I have been to syria obviously numerous times for arbaeen so have a lot of personal good experiences with both sunni and shia syrians. I knew from the start that the revolution against him was staged, and aimed only at strengthening the west and weakening Iran. I was actually IN syria the week the violence started. 

my problem is assads response to the trouble causers. he used a flame-thrower to kill a rat, but the flame-thrower burnt down his entire house instead. at this point, we as shia should have morally distanced ourselves from him instead of only increasing the volume of our support for him.  

I do not doubt that assad as wide support - after all he is still in power - however he must leave now, or vastly change the legal framework of his rule. even this seems unlikely now that the violence will not end any time soon, in order to bring the factions to the table. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DigitalUmmah said:

Wahdat - Salam, its been a while

My argument is less to do with bashar being the only option left now - even I cannot disagree that he is the only choice we have. 

my point is that it has not always been this way - right at the start of the arab spring his immediate and disproportional violence against (mostly) peaceful protesters is exactly what lead to the civil war today. he could have handled it in so many different ways - engaging with the populace/ discussions, parliamentary meetings, changes to law, even overseeing a transfer of power. however he chose violence. 

my problem is that right from the outset, shia have supported him despite his atrocities. this i feel is unacceptable. how on earth can we rightly curse saddamned hussain, who was a baathist like assad, for his crimes against civilians, while singing the praises of assad for his crimes against civilians?

as for a possible solution, I just dont know man. the"moderates" are propped up by israel and the USA, as are ISIS. on the other side you have assad barrel bombing entire civilian areas. in the middle are regular syrians being ground into dogmeat. 

WoS brother,

First mistake- the use of the term 'Arab Spring'
Second mistake- that Arab Spring has anything to do with ordinary people.

Do you ever wonder how come 'Arab Spring' started in Tunisia...waited waited waited to be finished there...and then it went to Egypt.....when it was done in Egypt after rocks were thrown...it went to Libya.........and only after Libya the Syrians started their so called spring?

Doesnt this make you suspicious at all? And within 5 days democracy activists were weaponized and turned into rebels. This too is suspicious a bit dont you think so?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

I think the OP raises one very valid point - widespread common shia support of bashar al assad is absolutely despicable.

Neither Hezbollah nor Iran are masum or guided by a masum or appointed by a masum or sanctioned by a masum, and just because they support Assad, that doesn't mean supporting assad is hukm Allah. 

We should be grateful to Iran/ Hezbollah for defending Zainabia, May Allah continue to give them success, but there is a difference between supporting those defending the shrines (which will happen with assad or without) and defending assad while he drops barrel bombs on sleeping sunni children. 

the irony here is the word "unity". for many years those who defend assad the loudest have been the pro- unity crowd. now the actions of their leaders have destroyed shia-sunni unity almost all over the world.

the rest of OPs post is nonsense. sunni in iraq are less than 20% of the country. now they are complaining that they are not in charge of 100% of the country. 

 

*edit* also OP is lying about being born an atheist. his name is Fesal so he was obviously born to muslim parents

It's not just about Assad, but also about Houthis. That's where the hypocrisy starts to be high: Houthis is a terrorist group, it's the shia version of Al Qaeda. Its slogan means: "God is great. death to America, death to Israel, curse on the Jews, victory to Islam". While I'm against political zionism I don't see the reason of anti-semitism. Orthodox jews are the first to oppose Israel, so why do you always generalize? why don't you stand with the Yemeni government instead, which fights both Al Qaeda and Houthis? 

PS: I'm 100% British and I was grown in Italy. The nickname is from the singer Feisal Alawi, it's not my real name. I will not even answer to those who lie and pretend to think that I am Arab or sunni just because it's easier to discuss this way. Be honest, afford the truth and discuss honestly without using the straw man fallacy or I'll ignore your answers. 

Edited by Feisal_90

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CaptainGalaxy said:

Do you have any sources that claim saddam's bathist politicians (whatever that may mean) existed 60 precent out of shia ? As far as i know the revolutionary command council during the 80s and beyond only contained sunni's . 

My sources are official news. If you believe in conspiracy theories and don't trust the western media, it's impossible that you're going to accept any source. If instead you believe those news, tell me and I'll show you the proof that the ba'ath party included also shia in a great percentage. 

4 hours ago, alidu78 said:

Assad government made exclusively with shia ??? Its a joke ?

Excepted him pratically all syrian ministers are sunni or christian.

 

Read carefully my post, I haven't said that. I've said that it gives privileges to shia muslims and that they're over-represented in politics. Also, no political opposition was allowed. Syria has never been a democracy, so why did you support the Iraqi invasion but you don't care about democracy in Syria? I see this as a huge contradiction.

3 hours ago, alidu78 said:

And you say shia were puppets of american invasion i will just remember to you the fact that there were also shia groups against american invasion.

I'm aware of the Mahdi army (and I'm a fan of Abu Azrael). But the truth is that after 2005 it has turned into a sectarian conflict. Now I'm not saying that just shia discriminated sunnis. Of course it also happened the other way around, but since shia were close to the Iraqi government they were able to carry on violence against the sunni opposition. The ba'ath party turned from secular to islamist. Even the ba'athists joined the islamic state, why? 


So the invasion of Iraq was fine, it was not a western conspiracy, but the Syrian revolution was created ad hoc by America. The Syrian opposition is 100% jihadist so it's not legitimate, but Houthis has the right to take over Yemen, right? I see a lot of contradictions. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bismehe Ta3ala,

Assalam Alikum.

I want to put the Shia brothers in check here.  Know that mothers are not sending Rajal Allah to fight for any dictator or regime.  The Shia women are sending there husbands, brothers and sons to protect Sayyida Zaynab and Sayyida Rouqiya and to prevent infiltration at the borders where Shias and other religious minorities (18 sects in Lebanon)  would be massacred.  This war is about survival and protecting our deen.  

To the closet Sunni brother, we don't expect any help from the sunni community.  But if you are from the moustad3feen, oppressed, or any injustice has befallen you, the resistance will support you verbally, politically, and morally.  Time will tell who will free the Quds.  They are coming....soon, Insh'Allah.

 

M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ChattingwithShias said:

The "oppression" of the Sunni Iraqis is just being mad that they are not in the position of power and oppressors anymore. The Shi'as never did to the Sunnis what was done to them under Saddam

 

I spoke to a few soldiers who returned from iraq in 2006. the LEAST horrific thing I can tell you is that saddamned hussain had a VHS collection in one of his palaces of shia women being tied down and raped with power drills that were turned on. the things that I cannot tell you will kill you inside. 

the fact that sunni in iraq are whining about being marginalised is an absolute joke. the shia are the majority and the shia have been opressed for decades. its time they were fairly represented in parliament. victory to iraq, victory to the iraqi people

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wahdat said:

WoS brother,

First mistake- the use of the term 'Arab Spring'
Second mistake- that Arab Spring has anything to do with ordinary people.

Do you ever wonder how come 'Arab Spring' started in Tunisia...waited waited waited to be finished there...and then it went to Egypt.....when it was done in Egypt after rocks were thrown...it went to Libya.........and only after Libya the Syrians started their so called spring?

Doesnt this make you suspicious at all? And within 5 days democracy activists were weaponized and turned into rebels. This too is suspicious a bit dont you think so?
 

brother in my earlier post i explained how I share your opinions on the arab spring. my post mentioning it was just as a marker in time in the context of my post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, DigitalUmmah said:

brother in my earlier post i explained how I share your opinions on the arab spring. my post mentioning it was just as a marker in time in the context of my post. 

In that case I fail to get your point of blaming President Asad for trying to do his job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On November 26, 2015 at 2:04:11 AM, Feisal_90 said:

Sunni muslims didn't accept the american occupation, and they have been targeted by pro-government forces. Now Iraq is an Iranian puppet thanks to America. ISIS was just the consequence of all this.

The group has claimed responsibility for over 6,000 attacks in Iraq[4] including the October 10, 2006 attack on Camp Falcon, the assassination of the American military commander in Najaf, the May 6, 2006 downing of a British Lynx helicopter and the October 3, 2007 attack on the Polish ambassador.[8] Their most known attack however, is the January 20, 2007 Karbala provincial headquarters raid where they infiltrated the U.S. Army's offices at Karbala, killed one soldier, then abducted and killed four more American soldiers. After the raid, the U.S. military launched a crackdown on the group and the raid's mastermind Azhar al-Dulaimi was killed in Baghdad, while much of the group's leadership including the brothers Qais and Laith al-Khazali and Lebanese Hezbollah member Ali Musa Daqduq who was Khazali's advisor was in charge of their relations with Hezbollah. After these arrests in 2007, Akram al-Kabi who had been the military commander of the Mahdi Army until May 2007, led the organisation.[6] In 2008 many of the groups fighters and leaders fled to Iran after the Iraqi Army was allowed to re-take control of Sadr City and the Mahdi Army was disbanded. Here most fighters were re-trained in new tactics. It resulted in a major lull in the group's activity from May to July 2008.[6]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asa%27ib_Ahl_al-Haq

 

Whatever trash the radical sunni media is being feeding you guys for years, know very well that the sources of the news are the Americans and their friends. They are feeding on the fire that you (sunnis) are now its coal and wood.

They are manipulating you to move in directions that serve them. A call for jihad in Afghanistan, A call for Jihad in Bosnia, A call for Jihad in Syria blah blah. All proved to be an american wars that you willingly fought for them, paid for it lives and money and your religion reputation 

For what?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wahdat said:

In that case I fail to get your point of blaming President Asad for trying to do his job. 

my point is that there are ways to deal with false revolutions that do not involve mass carpet bombing entire sunni towns and cities full of mostly innocent civilians. 

Edited by DigitalUmmah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in Bahrain and Iraq it's ok to let the shia population take revenge over the sunni minority, but in Syria even if the people didn't accept their dictator, the revolution must be crushed because otherwise there is a risk that Al Nusra targets the shi'ites in Tartous and Latakia. This is a huge double standard. And btw why my posts must be approved while you can post freely? too bad, if I were in Iran you would kill me for writing this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Feisal_90 said:

It's not just about Assad, but also about Houthis. That's where the hypocrisy starts to be high: Houthis is a terrorist group, it's the shia version of Al Qaeda. Its slogan means: "God is great. death to America, death to Israel, curse on the Jews, victory to Islam". While I'm against political zionism I don't see the reason of anti-semitism. Orthodox jews are the first to oppose Israel, so why do you always generalize? why don't you stand with the Yemeni government instead, which fights both Al Qaeda and Houthis? 

PS: I'm 100% British and I was grown in Italy. The nickname is from the singer Feisal Alawi, it's not my real name. I will not even answer to those who lie and pretend to think that I am Arab or sunni just because it's easier to discuss this way. Be honest, afford the truth and discuss honestly without using the straw man fallacy or I'll ignore your answers. 

Rubbish. Houthis are actually Zaydis who are much closer to sunni than shia, they even freely mix and attend sunni masjids in yemen instead of 12er ones.

They are not a terrorist organisation, they are section of the population, and nothing justifies the saudis bombing residential areas.

Whoever is telling you this info is lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Feisal_90 said:

My sources are official news. If you believe in conspiracy theories and don't trust the western media, it's impossible that you're going to accept any source. If instead you believe those news, tell me and I'll show you the proof that the ba'ath party included also shia in a great percentage. 

Read carefully my post, I haven't said that. I've said that it gives privileges to shia muslims and that they're over-represented in politics. Also, no political opposition was allowed. Syria has never been a democracy, so why did you support the Iraqi invasion but you don't care about democracy in Syria? I see this as a huge contradiction.

I'm aware of the Mahdi army (and I'm a fan of Abu Azrael). But the truth is that after 2005 it has turned into a sectarian conflict. Now I'm not saying that just shia discriminated sunnis. Of course it also happened the other way around, but since shia were close to the Iraqi government they were able to carry on violence against the sunni opposition. The ba'ath party turned from secular to islamist. Even the ba'athists joined the islamic state, why? 


So the invasion of Iraq was fine, it was not a western conspiracy, but the Syrian revolution was created ad hoc by America. The Syrian opposition is 100% jihadist so it's not legitimate, but Houthis has the right to take over Yemen, right? I see a lot of contradictions. 

 

I dont know why you dont show me the resource directly , if its according to you a representative source.

 

I got my information from a book called : Iraq Since 1958: From Revolution to Dictatorship by Marion Farouk-Sluglett, Peter Sluglett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...