Posted on 03/18/2011 11:37:37 AM PDT by Peter from Rutland
Events in the Middle East have been alarming and we've all watched as these "Day of Rage" events have spread through Tusnia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Bahrain. Limited events also occurred in Jordan, Syria, Iran, Iraq and to a lesser extent in Saudi Arabia. While the cause of these can be debated, even as Julian Assange from Wikileaks fame takes credit for it, one thing is for certain. The tension between Sunnis and Shiites is coming to a head and is greater now than it has been for hudreds of years. In fact I predict a "civil war" coming between the Shi'a and the Sunni, first by proxy leading up to an all out war.
Just who are Sunnis and Shiites? Now days we identify the two sects mainly by country. Iran is 90-95% Shiite. Iraq, Azerbaijan and Bahrain are 65-70% Shiite. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other "Arab" countries are mainly Sunni. But what makes these two sects different? When and why did they split? There were two civil wars, or Fitnas, within Islam culminating in the split.
After Muhammad died a disagreement occurred over who would succeed him as the leader of Islam. The Sunni believed that succession should fall to the Sahabah (or the companions, disciples, scribes and family of Muhammad). The Shia (or Shiites) believed that succession should fall to Ali, the cousin and son in law of Muhammad who was married to his daughter. According to the Shia, Ali was given the role by Muhammad before his death. This is disputed by the Sunni. This dispute led to the first Fitna, or civil war within Islam. The history gets much more detailed than this but I will keep it brief for the purposes of this blog.
The second Fitna, or civil war, happened when the Caliph Muawiya was succeeded after his death in 680 AD by his son, Yazid. There was opposition to Yazid, namely from supporters of Husayn ibn Ali, who was the grandson of Muhammad and the son of Ali (the fourth Caliph who we mentioned before). Husayn and many of his supporters were killed by Yazid's troops at the Battle of Karbala (in Iraq). This battle is usually cited as the ultimate break between the Shiites and Sunnis.
So much for my Reader's Digest version of Islamic history. Let's get back to matters at hand. Bahrain, as we already stated, is mostly Shiite. They are ruled by a Sunni monarchy. Whether Iran is guilty of stirring up the Shiite majority or the Shiite in Bahrain did it on their own I do not know. I do know that Iran is happily watching this and most likely feeding it by proxy. This past week Saudi Arabia sent troops, tanks and other equipment to Bahrain to help their Sunni brethren keep control, much to the outrage and chagrin of Iran. Eastern Saudi Arabia, where most of the oil fields are, is also heavily Shiite. A Day of Rage in Saudi Arabia was scheduled on March 11th but was put down forcefully.
For centuries now we have had the Shiite on one side and the Sunni on the other but they've maintained a peace of sorts. The events in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia threaten to destory this. If the violence continues to escalate, and it will in my opinion, all heck will break loose and the situation is likely to open up into an all out war. The Bahrain monarchy will not give up willingly. Doing so will essentially hand the entire country over to Iran. Saudi Arabia will not let this occur for fear of it spreading and the House of Saud losing their country to the grip of the Shiites and of course, Iran.
Iran has proxies, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine. Siding with Iran is Syria. Saudi Arabia is seen as the most powerful of the Sunni nations and has many nations on its side including Egypt, Qatar, UAE, Bahrain (at least the government), Libya, Pakistan, Oman, Kuwait, etc. I'm sure I'm forgetting some. The balance is clearly in the Sunnis favor but it's tenuous at best.
Much like the Soviet Union and the United States did during the Cold War, this will be fought by proxy by both sides but in this case there is no mutually assured destruction. Sooner or later the situation will break out into all out war between mainly Iran and Saudi Arabia. When this occurs the Suez Canal and Persian Gulf will shut down and thus the oil supply to the West. If you think oil/gas prices are bad now, you ain't seen anything yet. Who will we back? Logic says the Sunnis but Obama breaks logic. Consider the following according to Shlomo Mansfield, an Israeli journalist.
1. Shia Islam has deep roots in Mombasa, Kenya where Obama has roots. They have an active missionary program and run a number of schools and hospitals.
2. Kenya has close ties with Iran. Ahmadinejad has visited there and they have signed numerous agreements concerning energy, agriculture, commerce, trade, etc.
3. Obama's relative, Railia Odinga, whom he traveled to Kenya with as a US Senator, favors Shariah law for Kenya. He was instrumental in bringing about the Iranian-Kenya agreements signed by Ahmadinejad.
4. Obama's chief personal advisor, Valerie Jarrett, who many say runs the White House, was born and spent her formative years in Iran. She has a very favorable view of the country.
5. During the Presidential campaign, Obama said he would sit down with Ahmadinejad and discuss matters without preconditions, in spite of his being a holocaust denier and saying he wanted to destroy Israel.
6. During the campaign Obama had a private meeting with Hassan Al-Qazwini, an Iraqi-born Shia who leads a Dearborn, Michigan mosque, the largest American mosque. The press was not allowed to be present. They later admitted that they discussed the Middle East and Obama accepted a copy of Qazwini's book, "American Crescent". This same mosque has hosted Black Muslim, Louis Farrakhan, as an "honored guest." So has Trinity United Church of Christ of Chicago where Obama attended church (Rev. Wright).
7. After Obama was elected, Iranians danced in the streets and called him "brother." Arabic Sunni clerics, on the other hand, made death threats against him for hiding his identity as a Muslim.
8. During the campaign Obama said he would go after jihadist Sunnis in Pakistan and Afghanistan but wanted US troops out of Iraq where the Shia are in a majority and are trying to subdue Sunni influence. Coincidence?
9. During the elections in Iran, when the government brutally cracked down on protesters in the streets, there was hardly a voice of alarm or criticism from the Obama administration as compared to Egypt and Libya. Why?
Now consider who China and Russia will back. If the past is any indication they will back Iran. Will the Third Fitna happen? Pray it doesn't and likewise pray the Sunnis win if it does. The last thing the West wants is the Middle East ruled by Iran. In the meantime, drill baby, drill!
Makes sense to me, I’m afraid. Obama may have bowed to the Saudi King, but I have been increasingly persuaded that he is on the side of the Shiites.
Certainly during the current crisis he has gone against the interests of the Saudis, and they are disgusted with him at this point, most especially for his abandonment of Mubarak, a crucial decision that will lead to endless trouble.
What about Turkey? No general mideast war will happen in which Turkey will not play the defining role.
You might find this thread interesting:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2690945/posts?page=7#7
I made a reference there to this thread.
While this doesn’t sound very tolerant, may I just say - GREAT - let them all kill eachother.
Wouldn’t it be great if the Palestinians joined the fray...one less batch of crazies to nuke later.
*Would make life easier for many in the world. *
Yeah, all those oil fields on fire and tankers sinking in the straits of Hormuz will sure make life easier for everybody. Yup.
Holy crap.....now we have Hussein Obama and a Muslim cabal in the White House ! This is a nightmare !
You know, I totally forgot about them. I believe mainly Sunni.
“You know, I totally forgot about them [Turkey]. I believe mainly Sunni.”
I think the Turks would pretty much hold the balance of power—they have a far more professional and well-equipped military than anyone else around. Pakistan will be immobilized worrying about India. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey would be a formidable alliance in a regional war—they have both the population and the military assets to make Iran and Syria’s lives quite miserable. And I don’t think Syria would be much of a player anyway. Like Pakistan and India, Syria would be immobilized worrying about Israel.
Iraq is irrelevant now as an offensive player. They have no serious assets for offensive warfare and civil war is a lot more likely than offensive war. That’s why they are one of Iran’s playgrounds for terrorism and political disturbances and in the event of a fitna, Iraq would pretty much be the Poland of the middle east—caught right in the middle without the ability to defend itself. (Interesting what that says about the strategic positioning of US troops in Iraq.)
That’s probably why Iran wants nuclear weapons more than anything else. Right now, it can only expand by terrorism and proxy. It would expand by open war if it could. But it would be beaten badly by that alliance, unless it had nuclear weapons.
So as of now, it looks like stalemate and terrorism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.