Posted on 06/12/2014 11:09:09 PM PDT by WilliamIII
Lose-lose situation. If the Shiites lose, Iraq is a terrorist state. If they win, Iraq becomes a client state of a terrorist state.
And, no doubt, soon the Saudis as the largest Sunni power in the region will be forced to step in on the side of ISIS to counterbalance the expanded Shiite role in this conflict. And that’ll shortly thereafter pit the Gulf kingdoms and ISIS against the Shiite power structure, with “Iraq” as the battleground.
Oh well, at least it’ll be interesting to see the borders redrawn in a region that people actually care about. It’ll be the first that I’m aware of since the breakup of those various Eastern European countries, and China taking over Tibet.
something unexpected needs to happen to the al Saud dynasty leadership
Bump
Sunnis are the natural rulers of Iraq even though there are more Shiites due to higher birthrates. Sunnis have always had their act more together and were more modern. Also seem smarter in that area. I’ll bet that if you looked at what Iraqis got university educations in Europe and the US you would see mostly Sunnis
The only thing that can alter this natural Sunni domination is Iran.
This Sunni-Jihadist takeover of Mosul and other cities is a reversion to the norm of Sunni rule. It is a rebellion against the Shiite central govt of Maliki
An Islamic civil war? Need more popcorn.
It would appear that when Muslims run out of Jews and Christians they focus their Satanic blood lust on other Muslims.
This is all like something out of a Tolkien novel.
Vallerie Jarrett serves her Iranian overlords so well.
President butthead Obama destroyed any chance the Iraqi’s ever had of freedom from terrorism. So he’s now wasted all the blood and treasure we spent trying to save them. How in the world do people like Obama sleep at night?
Just sayin'
Excellent. Let them fight each other.
All of a sudden, I WANT to see Iran conduct a nuclear test, on Mosul.
Win-win if they exterminate each other.
This Sunni-Jihadist takeover of Mosul and other cities is a reversion to the norm of Sunni rule. It is a rebellion against the Shiite central govt of Maliki
BUMP
“With Republicans still in control of Congress, the October 2006 article named two prominent Republican members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) and found that neither could answer basic questions on the difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims.18 Given the notoriety of the article, Stein’s follow-up interview in December 2006 with the incoming Democratic Chairman of the House Permanent Subcommittee on Intelligence (and senior member of the Armed Services Committee), Congressman Silvestre Reyes, proved equally distressing when it turned out that the Democrats’ chosen leader believed al-Qaeda to be a predominantly Shia organization.”
Much more historical/educational material…here…(for any FReepers/lurkers interested)
http://www.aina.org/reports/iwesaj.pdf
Although this sounds like a positive development in the end I don’t believe it will be.
Iran doesn’t do anything that is not in their own interest.
Truth probably is that no matter if Maliki gave the Sunnis a bigger role in the government, the same outcome would have happened. It is totally wishful thinking to think they would actually share rule. The whole time they would be backstabbing, maybe literally, each other.
If his turns into a region-wide Sunni/Shiite civil war, look for the price of oil to go up.
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.