So far, what I have gotten from the above postings is that Wahabbi was a cleric-type person of some belief system, who got involved in politics with the Saud family.
Sort of. It has more to do with the dificulties the Ottoman Sultans had controlling the Empire in the period following 1650. The empire was sort of an illusion; from the outside it appeared monolithic, but from inside it was always on the verge of collapse. Wahhab was responding to mismanagement of the Hijaz, and to a rise in mysticism in Islam that occurred in the late 17th century and continued until the end of the 18th. "Fundamentalist" movements are often innovations that are oposed to new interepretation of religious doctrine,and seek to present themselves as "purified" versions of religion. Wahhab imagined he was instituting a species of Islam identical to that practiced in the 7th century Hijaz. One reason fundamentalist movements are often bellicose is that they seek to deal with contemporary dilemmas by the use of archaic means. The lack of contextual information provided in the Koran, and most other western religious texts, lends to them the potential for rather "creative" interpertation. Allegorical language is misread as concrete instruction to followers (Consider the reaction of Christian fundamentalists in the US to the teaching of evolution. Since evolutionary theory did not exist in the 5th century BCE (one interperetation for the likely time of the trascripition of oral tradition into the Torah) the fundamentalists, by their own narrow view, must conclude that it did not occur and that the allegorical language of the creation story is instead the presentation of factual data.).
Quote:CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - President Bush on Tuesday will seek to bolster support for his policies in Iraq amid a mounting U.S. death toll and public doubts.
The president, who is in the last week of an August vacation at his Texas ranch, will travel to St. Louis to make the case for sustained involvement in Iraq despite calls to either pull out or reinforce U.S. forces, and for continued engagement in the Middle East despite new violence that has stalled the peace process.
In a speech to the American Legion, a war veterans group, "the president will talk about (how) this is a significant moment of the war on terror and that despite the difficult conditions, we will prevail," White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said.
"He'll talk about our resolve to fight the war on terrorism and the importance of winning it to both the United States and to the world."
Robert C. Byrd in today's Washington Post:
Quote:What has become tragically clear is that the United States has no strong plan for turning Iraq over to the Iraqi people and is quickly losing even its ability to maintain order. The administration is stumbling through the dark, hoping by luck to find the lighted path to peace and stability.
Unprepared for Peace in Iraq
Hobitbob said:
Quote:"Fundamentalist" movements are often innovations that are oposed to new interepretation of religious doctrine,and seek to present themselves as "purified" versions of religion. Wahhab imagined he was instituting a species of Islam identical to that practiced in the 7th century Hijaz. One reason fundamentalist movements are often bellicose is that they seek to deal with contemporary dilemmas by the use of archaic means. The lack of contextual information provided in the Koran,
Thanks for this. This phenomenon has been observed in other movements, religious predominantly. I hadn't known that he was going back to the 7th century. Wowie.
Hobitbob said:
Quote:Allegorical language is misread as concrete instruction to followers (Consider the reaction of Christian fundamentalists in the US to the teaching of evolution. Since evolutionary theory did not exist in the 5th century BCE (one interperetation for the likely time of the trascripition of oral tradition into the Torah) the fundamentalists, by their own narrow view, must conclude that it did not occur and that the allegorical language of the creation story is instead the presentation of factual data.).
And most recently, and closer to home, residing as I did, and do, in the Bible Belt, witness the Southern Baptists.
BTW, Walter, I like your signature quote very much. And matters have gotten much worse, as communities within various societies have regressed to even smaller units. I think we are approaching a reemergence of tribalism.
BillW,
Wouldn't it be great if it were that easy. Just get a Jewish grandmother and a Palestinian grandmother in the same room with top negotiators....bring in tons of food....tell them the Hebrew and Arabic equivalent of "manga"....and whack them on the head with large wooden spoons when their discourse becomes uncivil or off topic.
KHALIS, Iraq - The toll of U.S. troops killed in postwar Iraq (news - web sites) surpassed the number killed in major combat on Tuesday, reaching 139 with the death of a soldier in a roadside bombing. The incident brought the death toll since May 1, when President Bush (news - web sites) declared an end to major combat, to one more than the number of troops who died during heavy fighting before that date. Since the war began March 20, 277 U.S. forces have died.
Some things I just don't get:
Quote:U.S. troops in Iraq may not have found weapons of mass destruction, but they're certainly getting their hands on the country's stock of Kalashnikovs and, they say, they need them.
The soldiers based around Baqouba are from an armor battalion, which means they have tanks, Humvees and armored personnel carriers. But they are short on rifles.
A four-man tank crew is issued two M4 assault rifles and four 9 mm pistols, but they rely mostly on the tank's firepower for protection.
But now they are engaged in guerrilla warfare, patrolling narrow roads and goat trails where tanks are less effective. Troops often find themselves dismounting to patrol in smaller vehicles, making rifles essential.
"We just do not have enough rifles to equip all of our soldiers. So in certain circumstances, we allow soldiers to have an AK-47. They have to demonstrate some proficiency with the weapon. ... demonstrate an ability to use it," said Lt. Col. Mark Young, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 67th Armor Regiment, 4th Infantry Division.
Charleston.net
"We just do not have enough rifles to equip all of our soldiers?" Where's that
billion dollars a week going?
Dys, using those numbers ... 270 killed in 5 mths = 54 mth.
Rounding off to 5000 dead in Nam
5000/54 = 92.6 months or 7.7 years
In 7 years 5000 dead
Don't any one tell me this is no freaking nam!!!!
Here's an example of the problems of fundamentalist Islamic influences in Iraq and our chances of ever forming a democratic government unbound by religion and opposing religious forces:
Link to NEWS ARTICLE
I know someone has mentioned this Scott Ritter piece in yesterday's NYTimes. I can't find the mention, nor any sign that someone may have posted it. Please excuse if this is a duplication -- or perhaps it's an important enough piece of info to post twice!
Quote:A Weapons Cache We'll Never See
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/25/opinion/25RITT.html
From the linked article supplied by Lightwizard:
Quote:But some Iraqis harbor suspicions that Iran wants the United States kept preoccupied by an unstable Iraq, rather than turning its attention next door to the Islamic Republic, and so is supporting Mr. Sadr or worse, the scattered remnants of Ansar al-Islam, a militant Islamic group that American officials believe has been plotting attacks against Western targets in Baghdad.
and....
Quote:Outside the Shiite community, some officials believe that Mr. Sadr serves as a useful tool. While the ayatollahs might fret about the militants, they serve as a vivid example of the holy war that could be unleashed should the occupation fail to deliver.
The question now is whether the older, more established clerics can win over the Shiite rank and file, or whether frustration will spread the appeal of an Islamic state.
The moderate clerics believe that the fastest antidote for radicalism is providing security, jobs and electricity, which they say will sway Shiites away from extremism.
Better hop to it, coalition forces.
Tartarin wrote:I know someone has mentioned this Scott Ritter piece in yesterday's NYTimes. I can't find the mention, nor any sign that someone may have posted it. Please excuse if this is a duplication -- or perhaps it's an important enough piece of info to post twice!
Excused - and it's so important to post it twice!
Wahhabism episode number 2 from the book "Hatred's Kingdom" by Dore Gold former UN ambassador.
While Wahhabism represents a small percentage of the total Muslim Population( approx 1.2 BILLION) it remains the dominant religious creed in Saudi Arabia. Many regard Wahhabism as a radical and violient departure from the mainstream Islamic tradition. Former NYTimes Arab affairs commentator Youssef M. Ibrahim stated, "The money that brought Wahhabis power throughout the Arab world....financed networks of fundamentalist schools from Sudan to northern Pakistan." TALIBAN leaders, were in fact a product of these Saudi funded academies, which are known as Madrasas.
Mohamed Charfi, a former minister of education in Tunisia, wrote in the New York Times:
"Osama bin Ladan, like the 15 Saudis who participated in the criminal operations of Sept 11, seems to have been the pure product of his schooling. While Saudi Arabia is officially a moderate state allied with America, it also has been one of the main supporters of Islamic fundamentalism because of it's financing of schools which followed the the intransigent Wahhabi doctrine. Saudi-backed madrasas in Pakistan and Afghanistan have played a significant role in the strengthening of radical Islam in those countries".
THE REAL PROBLEM
Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Salih al-Jarbu asserted in a book written after Sept 11 that "Osama bin Laden is a natural continuation from Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab."
This is a crucial point, for even when Americans have considered the source of the hatred that impelled the terrorists, many have not known where to look. In the days and weeks following Sept 11, many wondered whether Islam was the enemy. But Islam is not the problem. Rather, the problem is the exTremists in the Middle East who have manipulated Friday sermons in the mosques, textbooks in the schools, and state-controlled televisions to one end: TO SYSTEMATICALLY PERPARE YOUNG PEOPLE TO CONDONE THE COLD-BLOODED MURDER OF INNOCENT CIVILIANS.
Continued (How Wahhabism fostered the ideology of hatred that spawned suicidal terrorism?)
The pressure to lead them towards a democracy and not a theocracy will have to come from a coalition of nations including France and Germany, whether we like it or not. NATO and the UN are ultimately going to be involved. The only reason they won't be is the administration is confident they can establish a democracy and not a theocracy. I don't think they have a chance.
Perception - I'm having a problem here. This is a discussion site. You are quoting, piece by piece, from a book by Dore Gold on Wahhabism.
Much greater (and, I suspect, better) information, presented from a broader perspective, is given us by Hob. As needed.
Almost everything you quote has something to do with fostering distrust of radicalism as evidenced in the book. What exactly is your aim? Information is clearer and has far more depth from Hob.
Could you please let these episodes go, and get back to the general discussion?
LW - It's also possible we don't belong there in that capacity anyway. We are different people. More and more it seems that when we talk about democracy we talk more about the material wealth desired, rather than an enrichment of the values of life.
And we set no examples here when it comes to theocracies - the Ten Commandments episodes going on in Alabama - that's a struggle of religious beliefs against the law. Hardly what we should like to set forth.
A lot of things would have been different if there weren't so many conflicting statements about this from the beginning. And from the beginning there was never anything about what the Iraqis wanted or felt. Any information came from a group of ex-partriates who hadn't been in their country for years, and were going more on wishful thinking than anything else. But what did the Iraqi citizens hope for? Were they considered, included? That's where we went wrong from the beginning.
Democracy to Iraq? Defined how?
My objective is to pinpoint Wahhabism as the source for the development of suicidal terrorists. When I asked Hobitbob to tell us about Wahhabism, he downplayed it as an insignificant sect of Islam that we should not be alarmed about-----Ambassador Gold and I have a different opinion and I would like to believe that you curious enough to want to learn about it. I will however leave it up to the participants to decide . Just say :
1. Carry on....or
2. Go different thread
I would like to add some support for placing information about Wahhabism on this thread. Many people seem to agree that the war against terrorism now being waged in Iraq will determine the overall outcome of the struggle against suicidal terrorism there this subject is highly relevant to this thread.
If I place this topic under "Religion" some participants may not see it and I strongly believe it is vitally important to those who post here.
