CNN Breaking: Smoke Billowing from Imam Ali Mosque!

[Cooley Hurd]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/08/19/iraq.main/index.html

CNN producer on site says area around mosque is decimated...

CNN Producer saying al-Sadr NOT in mosque???

CNN producer saying US Marines involved, however damage to mosque is restricted to two minarets (but smoke is billowing from the mosque???)

US Marines ringing the mosque...

al-Sadr aide tells CNN producer that they wanted to negotiate with Iraqi government, but shell fire from the Marines prevented it???

[kikiek]

1. That is not good news.

[sniffa]

2. can you say, "waco"

[nodictators]

29. Exactly: Waco redux coming up

They'll claim that Koresh, uh, al-Sadr and his boys set the fires.

[Barrett808]

71. There's already been a report that the mosque has been 'booby-trapped'

[NewYorkerfromMass]

105. Well Koresh DID set the fires in WACO

unless you have some evidence to the contrary.

[daa]

109. Right

and Randy Weaver shot hiw wife. And the jack-boot thugs never do anything wrong.

[RummyTheDummy]

215. Gee that's interesting

Because we all know preachers with homicidal, messianic complexes can be SOOOOOOOO rational.

I mean someone like that would never set a fire or do anything else remotely destructive, would they?

[jayfish]

222. Homicidal?

Every detail of that event from the original confrontation to it's fiery conclusion is disputed by both sides. Messianic? Most definitely. Homicidal? We will never know.


Jay

[NewYorkerfromMass]

229. I think murdering ATF agents simply presenting warrants

is a bit on the homocidal side myself.

[jayfish]

237. Like I Said, The Events Are Disputed.

The BD's calim that the BATF opened-fire first (which is their MO.). The BATF claims otherwise. :shrug:

Jay

[PeaceForever]

280. Watch the Waco documentary that came out a few years ago.

It should be at your local video store.

[JDPriestly]

267. Alamo?

[Tight_rope]

284. That's just what I was thinking....This will backfire on all American's

[Quetzal]

3. Is that a joke?

I hope so - could you report what CNN is saying? I don't have cable.

[jayfish]

4. Fvckers, Fvckers, Fvckers.

We are headed for more trouble over there then even the most pessimistic had thought, whether it's our fault or not.

Jay

[amber dog democrat]

5. but we are bringing them democracy

and maybe we had to destroy the mosque in order to save it.
This is going to further serve to put us in good standing with the Iraqi people and Shiites all over the world.

so....when does the Tet offensive start ?

[qanda]

6. Is this the beginning of a holy war?

[PsychoDad]

35. It's been a crusade from the start.

Clash of civilizations and what not... :puke:

[The Stranger]

37. Beginning? Ashcroft, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz and the Religious Right-

Neocon Axis launched this war years ago. But it is actually a continuation of a religious and ideological conflict dating back to 1094, when the Crusades (or the first Crusades) were launched.

[Frodo]

7. Was the smoke white?

Oh wait. Wrong religion.

[jayfish]

9. Pictures On CNN Website Now.

http://www.cnn.com

Jay

[htuttle]

12. Photo

[Frodo]

15. Looks like someone is burning leaves.

Is it Fall in Baghdad?

[thebigidea]

17. yeah, isn't it hilarious? Ha. Ha. Ha.

You know what would be even funnier? If we blew up one of their holiest sites and got millions of people even MORE pissed off at us.

yeah, that'd be a HOOT! Ha ha ha!

[Frodo]

40. Sorry buddy.

It doesn't matter how much I disagree with the overall policy in Iraq. I still know who the "good guys" and the "bad guys" are.

Those aren't exactly freedom fighting patriots using those mosques. The are cowardly hiding in places where they know western sensibilities will make it hard to strike back.

[thebigidea]

45. Good thing they all wear black hats, its easier to tell who to kill.

[Frodo]

55. That WOULD make it tough, wouldn't it?

But coming and going with machine guns and firing at coalition troops makes it a little easier.

[thebigidea]

58. What sickening tripe.

You should pick up a rifle and join in, show 'em how its done. Buncha wusses runnin' this war anyway... your levelheaded, no-nonsense approach is the BEST!

[0007]

108. Give me a fucking break!

That is indeed in poor taste.

[Frodo]

111. I take it you mean the cartoon? It's a liberal cartoonist ...

in a liberal paper (Winston-Salem Journal reposted from Slate.com)


He's jsut recognizing what other here will not.

[Wednesdays]

139. Hey, that's the spirit!!

No more of this namby-pamby pussyfooting around. I say we bulldoze all those so-called "holy places." Just level 'em to the ground, with everybody inside. No more holy places, no more Islam...that will show 'em.

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

:eyes:

[Frodo]

144. I'm pretty sure that isn't what the cartoonist is saying

Nor is it what I am saying.


Just that combatants can't hide in a holy place - even fight from WITHIN that holy place - and then expect sympathy when the other side fires back. They can't say (though of course they WILL say) "how could they destroy our most holy of shrines?" without someone having the right to say "what were you doing in there shooting mortars at people?" How "holy" is the shrine if you are willing to kill there?

If I were a "parishioner" there, I would be pretty ticked that people were using it as a fort.

[Wednesdays]

154. That's not acceptable!

Parishoners have no rights...no one there has rights...those goddamn Iraqis are all just a bunch of fanatics, so they don't deserve to live. They don't deserve to have their precious "holy places."

Shoot 'em all...just shoot 'em all! I don't care if they're innocent, just shoot 'em.

[Sterling]

203. Heres the thing frodo.

You have corectly pointed out that we are not in a position to be doing the kinds of things that historically have been required to force a rebelious population to submit to outside control.

We cant very well go a round crucifing people along the highway or staging mass retalitory excecutions any more than we can start bombing Holy sites without crossing the line to the kind of danger the Nazi's or Japanesse posed.

Maybe if we were not in Iraq under false and unjust reasons we would have more latidute with tactics. Even the US in WW2 did some things that would not be justified in the context of this war. We could do them because we were fighting for our survival not because we were using war as a tool of foriegn policy or market protection.

This is a lose lose situation and that it is why for very practical reasons this war was a horible idea.

When Kerry defends his tacit support for the war it reminds me that although he is better than the BFEE it will take more than what he's got to fix Iraq if it's possible at all which is highly unlikely. The time to do something was before it started. Now it's just too late.

[Frodo]

214. I'd agree with that.

People here have been puffing up the argument to great extreems. I'm just trying to argue that a mosque is NOT something safe from attack under some "rules of war and/or decent behavior" if your opponent parks a tank inside it or attacks you from it.

This particular mosque has been the military HQ of a "cleric" who deserves no sympathy for several months now. They even appear to have damaged the mosque themselves in the past in order to gain sympathy. We've appearently virtually destroyed the neighborhood around it and gone out of our way to avoid direct damage, but there is no moral reason (though certainly a PR reason) that we should do so.

[Wednesdays]

232. Gas 'em to death!

That's the answer! Then we don't have to deal with the messy issue of damaging the buildings!

[lordwhorfin]

244. Indeed!

That's what Sir Winston recommended in the 1920s in the same spot. How about that, Frodo, or are you going to run and hide now?

[ilovenicepeople]

288. SO Frodo if your country was invaded

You better not hide in a church,Wal Mart or a Hooters.

[DS1]

269. This isn't flamebait

but using churches of any kind is bullshit - rip it down, see if I give a fuck.

[Zhade]

274. WE invaded THEIR country. They can fight wherever the fuck they want!

You'd do the same thing. And don't say you wouldn't, because you'd be lying to prove yourself "better" than the people protecting their homeland from occupying invaders.

[Kilroy003]

234. Ahh, good old Ms. Coulter

The "spirit" no doubt.

I wonder if Frodo considers her to be one of the good guys?

[MISSDem]

257. Right. Like one right winger said after

September 11 "If I was in charge there wouldn't be an Afghanistan tomorrow".

[merh]

173. What pray tell is he recognizing that others here will not?

That we - the USofA - shouldn't be there and if we did not illegally invade a sovereign nation, our guys would not be the ones that are being shot at?

We are instigating and encouraging the violence - the "restoration" of the sovereignity to the Iraqi people was a farce, a puppet show, make believe.

As was our purpose in invading - "vengence for 9/11", whoops Al Qaeda had no ties to Saddam & Iraq - "WMDs" - whoops, we made a mistake, bad intelligence - out a cruel dictator and restore democracy - whoops that is us, we have killed and maimed thousands, we torture and abuse at will "because we can and they are just stupid ragheads" and democracy - yeah right, we don't have that in the US - why should we think they will have that in Iraq?

[symbolman]

286. I know the cartoonist

no one likes the guy, he's ripped off dozens of other cartoonists and is even being sued for being a ripoff..

he's not all that funny, shlocky and dorky crap all the time..

there's real talent out there, try Wiley Miller for one

[allemand]

147. It's the arrogance and stupidity exemplified in this cartoon

what makes the War on Terror and the Struggle for the Hearts and Minds of Muslim so difficult.

[Frodo]

159. So you'll be opining to Slate soon, right?

Those darn neocons at Slate jsut don't know what they're saying!

[lordwhorfin]

227. Slate's ridiculous.

Lord Saletan of the scented hanky, Snitchens, the luke-warm liberal Tim Noah. They've got a couple of OK folks, bt in general, they're a bunch of soi-distant Pecksniffs.

[Frodo]

231. See #225 and decide for yourself.

This guy is no Bush supporter.

Bandwidth concern keep me from posting it again when were' in the 200s

[lordwhorfin]

245. Non-responsive.

That's not the point: Slate, like yourself, is hawkish. I also find them shallow, Pecksniffin, ignorant of non-US history or deliberately so, and nearly as eager to be the heirs of Scoop Jackson as the jackasses at the New Republic.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

208. That's one of the most dispicable, bigoted cartoons I've seen in years.

[Frodo]

225. Here's some of his other work. Obviously a RW wackjob!

[Screaming Lord Byron]

233. What of it? So his other cartoons are more rational.

That one wasn't. It was sick.

[lordwhorfin]

247. I decided . . . to wear my thorn of crowns!

I just wish it was Heaven up here . . .

[leftchick]

47. "western sensibilities "... LOL

That was a JOKE,right? And a pretty piss poor one at that...

:eyes:

[Frodo]

50. Nope.

They don't have any problem using them as military bases. It's the west who has a problem treating them like military bases.

[Surf Cowboy]

79. Dead on.

[hel]

181. If they were fighting other Muslims

whatever the reason, they wouldn't even think of bombing the mosque. Believe me. They might try to get inside the mosque and fight there (especially since either side would be believing the other is infidel, and their side is fighting some kind of jihad); but not BOMB it--destroy it. It's not about fighting. This is what your guys with "western sensibilities" do not get.

[Frodo]

228. Bzzz. Wrong. Never lived in a M.E. country have you?

Not only WOULD they bomb it, but they HAVE bombed it.

No, NOT "destroy" it (though some sects would show absolutely no compunction about obliterating OTHER religions' holy places as we saw in Afganistan), but then WE haven't destroyed it either, have we?

And since there are around 1500-2000 Iraqis participating in the attack... you can claim they are brainwashed by Bush, but you can't pretend they wouldn't attack the mosque since the apparently ARE.

[hel]

258. Actually, I AM living in a ME country

named Turkey, you know, the one right northwest of Iraq? Which has a 99% Muslim population? I know Islamic tradition and what Muslims consider holy. You really should check profiles.

Sometime after Mohammed, when Muslims were fighting each other, one side put pages from Koran on their weapons, so the other side couldn't touch them. And it did work. --for a while at least-- That's the kind of respect Muslims have for what they consider holy.

I did not say they wouldn't attack the mosque, especially the ones inside it; I clearly said they wouldn't bomb it. And I seriously doubt that those Iraqis are in control of the bombs.

[Frodo]

260. "for a while at least" - Thanks for making my point for me.

Looks like they (correctly) decided that a man wrapping pages from their Scriptures around a weapon was more sacrilegious than killing the man who wraps the Koran around his weapon.

Perhaps I used "bomb" more flexibly than you had intended. They have apparently "mortared" a part of the compound in an attempt to make it look like the US is attacking the holy places.

Of course, since the US isn't USING mortars while it's a ubiquitous weapon for the insurgents it makes a hard sell, but whatever.

[hel]

262. You misunderstand me.

They could always argue that they did it in the name of Allah, to fight the infidel, etc etc. You get some imam issue a fatwa for you saying it is alright (which, by the way, was how they solved the Koran-pages problem), and it's not that big a deal. You know. They kill Muslims all the time, (like bombings in Istanbul)which is the worst sin and unforgivable in Koran, but apparently Jihad trumps all.

That is not comparable to US soldiers bombing the mosque. Especially considering that even stepping into the mosque would be considered a blasphemy. And Muslims all around the world are ready to be offended by Americans, so this is a big deal.

Note that I personally did not judge anywhere that it was wrong for your troops to do so, nor is it any more wrong for Sadr's guys hiding inside the mosque doing what they did. I think this is a war, and both sides play whatever cards they have in their hands, psychological weapons included. If it was a just war for USA, I would probably be inclined to excuse them for what they do; but since this is not the case, I regret that they are doing this, since it would serve only to infuriate Muslims more and more.

I don't mean to offend you, but I think you have just a little bit prejudice against Muslims, maybe you should think about that.

[Frodo]

264. I agree with that.

Good points.

Except the "prejudice against Muslims" part - but I see where you're coming from. I used to live in Iran as a child. I only had one NON-Muslim friend in the neighborhood. And yes, I recognize (as I'm sure you do with Turkey) that Iran is not exactly the same as Iraq.

However, along with MANY muslims, I condemn these SPECIFIC muslims for their behavior. It does not fit MY faith, and it does not fit the one THEY proclaim either.

[Almost_there]

261. Gotta agree with you on that, Frodo

Seriously, if Al Sadr is using the Mosque as a military headquarters, then I think that it de facto ceases to be a Mosque and becomes a military base. The US and Iraqi military have been extrememly cautious about bombing Mosques, trying to a degree to erspect the holy sanctity of the buildings, but, its like using a hospital as a base for operations, and then declaring "well, its a hospital, you can't come in here!".

Al Sadr has rejected all sorts of pleas by the Iraqi Governing council to at least join the political process, and he has sworn to shed his last drop of blood.

Let's not forget that he is an outlaw and has been in Iraq since he ordered the killing of a rival Imam last year. Or do we just overlook that as a something "insignificant" because it is their internal problem? He isn't a nice guy! He is a radical cleric accused of killing another cleric for power! Translation: He's a nut! Anyone willing to kill (let's assume its true for argument's sake) another cleric must be INSANE.

~Almost

[Zhade]

275. Let's not forget that he's named an "outlaw" by the PUPPET GOVERNMENT.

So, we have THEIR word that he's an outlaw. Hardly an uninterested party, the Iraqi Vichy government...

[PsychoDad]

49. I know the "bad guys" too

Those would be the invaders and occupiers, the murders and starters of this illegal war..

[thebigidea]

56. But they wear the white hats and drink saspiralla!

At the end of the movie, they ride off into the sunset or something.

[jayfish]

54. I Guess You Could Say The Same Thing About Tanks...

or Bradley's or helos, huh? We really need to move away from this use of the word cowardly when describing the people that we kill. The fact is that they are there fighting and dieing for their cause. That's much braver than sitting behind a keyboard making lite of the dead and dying.

Jay

[Frodo]

60. No. You realy couldn't

"Hiding" behind a tree is not cowardly. Hiding inside a military vehicle is not cowardly. You don't need to line up like good british red coats to avoid looking cowardly.

Firing at someone while holding a child in front of you IS cowardly. You know that if the other guy shoots back and kills the kid HE will be blamed for it even though it is YOUR fault. Conducting military operations from inside a holy site is the same thing.

We have to learn to play by their rules. They consider it a holy war, so holy sites are appropriate places to conduct military activities.

[Spentastic]

61. By that logic

If it's economic imperialism that's at issue the attack on the WTC was fully justifiable.

Do you really want to go down that path?

[thebigidea]

63. and if we play be "their rules," wouldn't that make us "bad guys"?

Boy, simplistic bullshit sure gets confusing sometimes.

[Frodo]

69. I feel compeld to lower the argument to the level of my opponents.

If you feel comfortable coming up out of the gutter I'd be happy to meet you at a higher level.

[thebigidea]

75. You mean the level of making dumb jokes about attacks on the shrine?

Some higher level, sir. You started off in the gutter, and you're still in it...

So, answer the question: would fighting using "their rules" make us "bad guys" according to your demented logic?

Or can we fight dirty and still wear the white hat?

[Frodo]

83. I made jokes about the PHOTO.

It was being spun as "decimating" the mosque and the two minarets had crumbled.

The shrine has been damaged several times going back to (at least) May. All I was saying was that all I saw was smoke. Nothing to spin wild tales about. We still have little to no idea what is happening.

Yes, fighting by "their rules" in this instance (that is specifically - shooting at people from the Vatican and then ducking back in for sanctuary) would make us the bad guys. RECOGNIZING that these ARE the rules THEY are playing by (and thus going IN to the Vatican to take them OUT) would NOT.

Shooting back at those who shot at you is not "fighting dirty". Launching attacks from within a holy site IS.

[Dhalgren]

119. If I break into your home start killing your family and

stealing your belongings and you shoot at me, you are justified in that action. If I shoot back at you and kill you, that is not self defense; it is murder. The Iraqis are woefully out gunned by the US agressors and so must adopt tactics that will level the playing field as much as possible. The Marines in Najaf have developed a great deal of respect for the bravery of the Mehdi Army. Armchair warriors' opinions don't stack up.

[Frodo]

124. That's a completely different argument.

One I'm sympathetic to, but doesn't sell too well politically.

If you want to argue the whole Iraq conflict, that's another thing entirely. But it's too easy to spin that you would "like to have left Saddam in power" etc.

Our candidates aren't making that claim, neither am I.

President Kerry will do the same thing if US troops or allys are being attacked by forces that hide in a Mosque.

[Dhalgren]

130. It isn't a different argument, at all.

We have invaded their country, stolen their property, killed their citizens, and won't leave. When they fight back, as they have every right to do, as well as the obligation to do, we say they are attacking us! Well, no shit! You and other jingoists can spin this into a "bad them/good us" senerio all you want, but if the shoe were on the other foot, we would fight the invader from churches, from sewers, from school houses, or from anywhere else we thought would be advantageous to us. This rasict denigration of Iraqis is simply sickening.

[Frodo]

132. we would fight the invader from churches, from sewers, from school houses

True...

But we wouldn't go crying to mama "they shot at a CHURCH!!!" when we were INSIDE the church shooting at THEM. I'm not saying they can't fight there. I'm saying they can't act surprised if we fire back.

And since very few people (even just within the party) agree that we are "invading their country" while they are merely fighting back, it makes it a "whole different argument".

If you convince me that we are invading marauders with no moral reason to be in the country - I will agree that people can fight back any way they want. But then their moral argument will be "invaders", not "destroyers of temples" if they fight from within a holy site.

As for "This rasict denigration of Iraqis is simply sickening", you can spin that all you want. You're simply ignroing the vast majority of Iraqis who (while wishing the US OUT) are also fighting the insurgents.

[DrWeird]

153. Well, I was against the nazis invading Poland.

But if the people are uprising in Warsaw then you've got to do whatever it takes to put it down. We all know who the good guys and bad guys were. It's not like those poles and jews were freedom fighters and patriots or anything.

:eyes:


"If you convince me that we are invading marauders with no moral reason to be in the country."

We're in Iraq for a moral reason? What moral reason would that be? Finding WMDs? Fighting terrorism? Ending rape rooms? Saving Iraqis from a tyrant? Blowing up dirty muslims?

[Frodo]

156. I'll go with Door #4 Alex

Saddam & Sons was good enough for me.

But then again, I've lived close to there so I got a pretty good idea what people felt about him and have a different impression that those who see "opposing party takes action - must be wrong". Like the foolish mistake of opposing troop reductions in Germany years after the cold war ended. Heck, they've been there since WWII!

We can reduce troops in Janpan now too if you ask me.

[DrWeird]

160. You realized we've replaced one tyrant with another right?

Allawi just shot six detainees execution style sans trial.

Plus now he's killing his own people in Najaf.

So that kind of throws the over throwing of a tyrant argument out the window, doesn't it?

[Frodo]

165. Shh. HE'S killing his own people in Naif?

But AL-Sadr's forces... THEY aren't killing THEIR own people are they?

You realize that for every American casualty reported there have been a number of reports of "bombing at a police station kills 12"? It just doesn't make much news since it's all Iraqis getting killed.

And no, I haven't followed reports about the guy we picked. It wouldn't be their first time we set up the wrong guy in power (I thing we were responsible for Saddam in the first place and bear at least SOME responsibility for Bin Laden as well). I smell CIA fingerprints - they can't do anything right. If I remember correctly, the other guy we picked was a crook too.

[jayfish]

177. Two Different Groups Of Combatants. (Reply To #165)

Al-Sadr and the Sunni/Foreign insurgents.

Jay

[DrWeird]

178. That's the same argument Saddam used...

when he gassed the kurds. He was just putting down a rebellion. The US was on his side then too.

[Frodo]

67. ??? That makes no sense.

There's no connection between the logic.

If al-Sadr were sending computer vriuses out of that mosque there would be no justification for use of military force on the facility.

He isn't. He's basing a military force and launching military attacks from that mosque. To NOT attack it allows him to operate at will. Today, for instance, there was a mortar attack from within the mosque on the local police station. That's Iraqis attacking Iraqis. And NOTHING can be done about it? Why? Because a mosque is a "get out of jail free card"???

[thebigidea]

73. from within the mosque? According to whom?

[Frodo]

81. Surprised? I thought you might be.

People here are acting like this isn't a military group. That it's just some guys who get together to pray (and it's normal to bring your automatic weapons to prayer of course).

It's been widely reported. A quick Google brought this:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10427556%255E601,00.html

"the rebels fired mortar rounds from the courtyard of the Imam Ali mosque, one of the holiest Shi'ite sites. "

[thebigidea]

82. Widely reported, but somehow not by CNN or Al-Jazeera.

They say "elsewhere in the city" - and your link doesn't work for me. Is it about today's mortaring or not?

[Frodo]

87. Link works fine here. It's from 8/13.

[thebigidea]

91. Yeah, but not from today. Here's today:

Mortars hit Najaf police station
From correspondents in Najaf, Iraq
August 19, 2004
THREE mortar bombs hit a police station in the holy Iraqi city of Najaf today, causing many casualties, police said.

They said the mortars hit the station in close succession.

The station is not near the city's holy sites where a radical Shiite Muslim cleric and his militia are holed up and engaged in a two-week battle with US forces

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,10502641%255E1702,00.html

THE STATION IS NOT NEAR THE CITY'S HOLY SITES.

Nice try, but it seems your statement "Today, for instance, there was a mortar attack from within the mosque on the local police station." is not exactly true.

Seeing as you are willing to resort to outright lies to reinforce your sickening argument, I think its best if I just walk away and leave you to your cowboy movie.

[Frodo]

95. Oh please.

That wouldn't exactly be an "outright lie" would it. It didn't say they weren't fired from the mosque and I documented that it WAS the standard M.O. of the guys who did it. AND since they've been holed up and surrounded in the mosque for the last several days, I'm not sure where you think they DID launch the attack from.

But at worst it would be an "error of presumption", not an "outright lie".

So you think that launching an attack four or five days ago, but not actually today (which I do not accept except for purposes of argument) means the mosque is back to "protected" status? You can only shoot back within two hours of being attacked?

[thebigidea]

96. No, I think you told a lie without a single fact to back it up.

So where else is it "widely reported"?

Or did you make up that part too?

Ah, never mind. You'll have some excuse for that as well. Enjoy the thread.

[fertilizeonarbusto]

76. questions:

Exactly WHY are these people fighting from inside the Mosque? Why have they adopted these tactics? Who are they fighting? How did their enemies get there? Just curious. You go invading countries illegally and unsavory people will use illegal tactics on you. That's war: uncontrollable, immoral and just plain wrong. So don't start any.

[wabeewoman]

136. hmmmmm

kinda like the colonists didn't line up in rows like the British did during our war for independence. Funny how we don't spin that as a negative and cowardly thing. When one side doesn't fight 'fair' by having superior firepower, size or whatever, the other side either perishes or fights any way they can hence the saying, all is fair in love and war....

[LosinIt]

226. I was thinking exactly the same thing

Funny how things are when we are on the other side.

[Spentastic]

84. Oh yes there is

Your initial statement inferred that the label adopted by a protagonist in a conflict determines the ground on which such a war should be fought. In this particular case you indicate that the presence of “Holy warriors” makes Mosques legitimate military targets. Similarly, if OBL believes that the U.S in engaged in economic warfare than then the WTC would be a high value strategic target would it not?. The presence of armed forces is moot in both cases. All you have done is effectively declared that anyone can be killed anywhere at anytime if the U.S decides that they are an enemy. Be careful what you wish for.

Of course in this particular case the people who actually live in a country and believe in the sacred nature of their shrines are being attacked by a foreign army. Although I have little time for religious ideologues I would be particularly careful about destroying shrines important to people you claim to be freeing. Once again there is a btter way to be going about this but the U.S in their infinite wisdom are going to create more trouble than they solve by their actions.

[Frodo]

93. Ahh. I see.

First, my statements didn't "infer" anything of the sort. They didn't even "imply" it. I was saying that by THEIR rules it was an appropriate military target. We have no such rules about our financial centers. The presence (or lack) is not only NOT "moot". It is THE CRUX of the point. The presence of military targets intentionally basing themselves in a facility MAKES it a military target.

If the Army takes over a school and parks a bunch of tanks in the auditorium, it's no longer a "school" to be protected from attack as if it had a red cross on it. It's a tank park.


These are long-standing well-established rules of warfare. You can't hijack a half dozen red cross ambulances and load them with marines to launch an attack - and then expect that nobody will fire on those trucks because they bear a red cross/crescent.


I agree that the action is fraught with public perception peril. But not ethical "wrongness"

[Spentastic]

97. More sophistry

"We have to learn to play by their rules. They consider it a holy war, so holy sites are appropriate places to conduct military activities. "

Er? So as well as your other talents, you're also able to determine what a Shia militia man believes to be a legitimate military target? It could obviously be argued that the fact they are in the shrine at least indicates that they know in fact that THIS shrine is not in fact anything of the sort. As another poster has pointed out the U.S are now in a lose / lose scenario. It would appear that they got there by following thought processes similar to your own.

[SOS]

118. Chess tactics...

Your statement: "by THEIR rules it was an appropriate military target".
You are correct. Al-Sadr's goal is to lure the US into destroying the mosque.
Al-Sadr must believe that an assault on the mosque will signal the beginning, not the end, of nationwide Shia resistance. How will Shiites react if the mosque is blown to pieces? That remains to be seen. The situation could possibly cool down. More likely it will explode all over southern Iraq.

"Chess tactics are powerful actions used to implement strategy. For instance, moving a piece would not be considered a tactic. Moving a piece so that it places an opponent's king in check and forces him to make an undesirable move is a tactic. Chess tactics are usually implemented in the short term and focus on gaining latent strength or influence level advantage."

[SOS]

150. Another concern

What effect will the destruction of the mosque have on the Badr Brigade? Has Al-Sadr set up a situation where the Badr Brigade will no longer remain inactive?

From a report 3/2003:

"Al-Hakim controls a militia called the Badr Brigade, which has about 10,000 fighters, many of them Iraqi army deserters who are trained and armed by Iran's Revolutionary Guards. The militia has been conducting a guerrilla war against the Iraqi regime for 20 years.
The Badr Brigade has several secret bases in the Iranian province of Khuzestan, which borders Iraq. It is believed to have several thousand fighters there, and they are prepared to move quickly into Iraq."

[Frodo]

162. Let's not blow it out of proportion, ok?

The "destruction of the mosque"???

Goodness!

The report was that there was some "damage" to a couple minarets and a clock caught fire in one of them! Oh the horror!

The roof of the mosque was damaged several months ago during similar fighting. People are spinning this WAY out of proportion based on the reports we've seen so far.

[SOS]

174. Okay

You are right. So far only huge clouds of black smoke from the area and reports of minor damage. I should have said "potential destruction".
This offensive is only a few hours old, so we'll see how it plays out.
It's also possible that Al-Sadr will himself cause more severe damage and spread the word that the US did it. I just think that the US may be walking into a situation which MIGHT cause a huge rebellion across the south. We'll see soon enough.

Another aspect not considered here so far is that the US is privatizing all Iraqi assets to foreign investors. This has to be completed by the January election. Crushing the insurgency is very important to create a "safe" atmosphere for the sell off (see Naomi Klein in this months Harpers). If this is a motivator for this action in Najaf, the US may be working on a set of impossible assumptions.

[jayfish]

176. I Guess "Blown Out Of Proportion" Is In The Eye Of The Beholder.

Kinda like that, mortar firing from the courtyard, story you told. A single mortar? ..."Oh the horror".

Jay

[Frodo]

183. A "single mortar" that killed several people.

So that one was fired last week instead of today? You really going to put a lot of stock in THAT?

Or shall I call you on your "blatant lie" since nothing inticated the number of mortars used?

I say "oh the horror" to clock being set on fire and you say it for a dozen or so people killed? Hey, what the he11, they were just Iraqis. Who cares right? If they're fighting against the "freedom fighters" they're just Bushbots anyway.

[jayfish]

190. Does The Severity Of Each Incident Really Matter To The Iraqi's On...

the ground? How do you know how many Iraqis were/weren't killed when the minarets were damaged? Also I know this thread is unwieldy, but I never called you a "blatant liar". You are thinking of another poster. I think we are having a good dialog here, lets not drag it into the mud.

Jay

[Frodo]

197. Ok. Sorry.

I missed that.

But I'll stick with the comparison of clock to Iraqis. :-)

[jayfish]

64. Was Saddam Cowardly When...

he crushed the Shia with tanks and helicopters? Choose wisely.

Jay

[Frodo]

72. ?? Cowardly? Yes and no.

How's that for "careful"?


Avoiding a charge of being cowardly does not mean lowering your military prowess to the level of your opponent. You don't need to walk out naked with sticks and stones and send 2/3 of your forces home to make it "fair". Combat does not require "fairness".

However. Saddam's actions WERE cowardly completely apart from using overwhelming force.

[jayfish]

88. I Guess We Thought Otherwise. Remember...

the no-fly zones? They were instituted to stop Saddam from using attack aircraft against the Shia and Kurds. Why did we feel the need to level the playing field then but not now?

Jay

[Frodo]

99. What does that have to do with cowardice or the lack thereof?

We were on one side of that conflict and he was on the other.

It's perfectly possible for his (or our) actions to be "wrong" or even "evil" without being "cowardly". We didn't put up no-fly zones to "even the odds". We didn't have an interest in making sure each side had a "fighting chance".

We simply wanted to impact the conflict without putting our own troops at risk (you could make a cowardice claim THERE) or violating the UNs mandates.

[jayfish]

128. You Must Be Involved In Too Many Arguments.

I'm not saying anyone is a coward. I'm trying to show you that the word is loaded and we need to stop using it. I tried to give you examples of how this cuts both ways. You can't seem to make the connection.

Jay

[Zhade]

281. FYI: The post-Gulf War No-Fly Zones were NOT UN-sanctioned.

So, we were in fact violating the UN mandate bilaterally (with the UK's assistance).

What's next - are you going to claim "Saddam threw out the inspectors in 1998"?

[SidDithers]

129. Combat does not require "fairness"....

and this is why the Mahdi army may be using the Shrine as a base for operations.

In essence, they're saying to the Americans "We're here. Feel free to attack the Shrine, but be prepared for the consequences of your actions. Kill us and we'll be martyrs. Destroy the Shrine, and you'll inflame the passions of our followers."

The Shrine is not "off limits" because it's a holy site, it's off limits because the consequences of destroying it far outweigh the supposed benefits of removing al Sadr.

Sid

[aneerkoinos]

66. So the good guys

are the ones that take over the best hospital in Najaf, establish their military HQ there and deny civilians access to the hospital?

[okieinpain]

65. you know I might have agreed with you last week, but nightline

did a bit on the new and improved iraqi pm. and man he sure sounded like a new flavor of saddam to me. what if sadr is afraid that the shiites are being setup by the AMERICANS, to be under a dictator again, like we did with saddam.

[Jacobin]

70. Yeah, those foreign forces of al Sadr need to be rooted out

so that america can impose its will on Iraq. It's the white man's burden, right?

:eyes:

[Union Thug]

85. They are facing down an overwhelming force.

Confronting the US Military (and its proxy Iraqi army) is hardly cowardly. Strategically, the mosque is a superb choice for an under-powered, under-manned guerrilla army given the cultural and social significance of the building. Because of this, the US is in a lose/lose situation. It has nothing to do with cowardice and everything to do with strategy.

[MadHound]

101. Damn friend, now you are starting to sound like the British

When they were describing the fighting tactics of our founding fathers about 228 years ago, you know, those damnable colonials who would shoot from behind rocks, trees, bushes, and oh yeah, holed up inside churches. Damnable cowardly insurgents, all of them, shame that they won, eh?

[reprobate]

107. The problem, Frodo, is that there ARE no good guys in this fight.

Its strictly invaders and fanatics. That's a no win situation.

[PsychoDad]

252. Fanatics?

I wouldn't call people willing to fight for their country and way of life against an invading force bent on installing a puppet regime "fanatics".

Once upon a time they would have been called patriots.

[reprobate]

290. PD, if you describe each side from the point of view of the other side,

you have the US as invaders and the militants as fanatics. With this kind of semantic confusion there can be no compromise, so its my opinion that there can be no common ground for agreement.

I agree with you that from the point of view of the iraqis they are fighting a foriegn invader trying to take their homeland. I tend to even see them that way.

From the point of view of the occupying forces, at least their command and control structure, they went there to "liberate" the iraqis. Yes, we know that this was not the purpose of the administration, but the administration is not fighting on the ground. (Isn't it strange how the repugs never seem to be involved in the physical danger of war?)

Oops, I feel a rant coming on.

I believe that the best thing that could happen in iraq, at least the best thing for the future of the US, is for us to get our ass kicked (figuratively) and be forced out of iraq. For far too long our economy and our society has been based on war. When you consider our history pursueing war, the last one that we conducted successfully was WWII. Every one since then was a mess. Korea we were faught to a standstill and had to negotiate a truce that left things very much as they were before the fighting started. In viet nam of course we hauled ass as fast as we could, leaving out allies to be slaughtered in mass. In all the other small actions, panama, granada, etc. we were not much more than glorified swat teams.

Its my hope that if we were forced out of iraq ignomineously, perhaps the opinion of the masses would finally come to realize that we cannot play the bully to the rest of the worl any longer, and turn inward to make things right for the people of America first. Perhaps they will realize that our workers too could start with four week vacations, full national health plans, and educations that compare favorably with the rest of the industrialized world.

But then I'm always the pollyanna.

[daa]

112. You think $hrub is the "good guy"? nt

[Frodo]

126. Nope.

But I recognize that Saddam was the bad guy. Regardless of who WE had as a "leader".

[Karenina]

155. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN

The preceding post lays bare why America is FUBAR. :SIGH:

[Frodo]

168. Yep. You're more right that you think.

It's the political Pavlovian response that defends someone like Saddam because he's opposed by our political opponents... THAT IS going to screw us up.

The "enemy of my enemy" theory doesn't really make sense. It sure as heck won't get you elected. Which is what we're supposed to be all about here.

[Karenina]

253. Grape was it?

Or Tutti-frutti?

[daa]

246. The world is full of bad guys

Starting wars with all of them is as stupid as starting the war in Iraq. Even the military is suing Bush for drafting them illegally.

[Surface Map]

114. It has to be done

If Iraq is to have a chance at democracy the government will have to put an end to these radical militias. They will need U.S. help for a while. Make an example out of these maniacs.

[Aidoneus]

125. If Iraq is to have a chance at democracy, they must embrace the occupation

Are you listening to yourself? These absuridies are obscene, though not nearly so as the crimes committed to back them up.

[Surface Map]

131. nice try

at twisting my words. I said they must rid the country of the militias who are attempting to disrupt the efforts of the Iraqi govt. "embrace the Occupation"? speaking of absurd. We are in the process of attempting to give 25 million people an oppurtunity at freedom/democracy and you appear to want to side with Sadr. HMMMMM.

[jayfish]

134. The Iraqi Government? Elected By Whom?

And don't come in here with that tired old "you are siding with our enemy" BS. :eyes:

Jay

[Surface Map]

152. sorry

but when you call the U.S. "occupiers" it seems to be anti U.S. to me. I know you are not or I would assume you're not anti U.S. but the Iraqis have a chance at a better life out from under the thumb of Sadaam. A stable gov't that WILL BE elected by the Iraqi people will at least give them a shot at some of the freedoms and oppurtunities we enjoy in the U.S. To have a stable gov't the "freedom fighters", "terrorists", or whatever you want to call them will have to be eliminated.

Don't forget the U.S. (despite whatever your view may be) has a history of offering people a chance at democracy, i.e. Japan, Germany and Afghanistan is on it's way just to name a few.

[jayfish]

157. Don't You Get It?

There will never be a stable government elected by the Iraqi people. It is a pipe dream. Oh, and so is a stable government elected by the Afghan people. You need to blow the smoke away from the mirrors.

Jay

[Surface Map]

161. Weren't

the same things said about Germany and many others?

Why can't these countries succeed. Naysayers have never accomplished anything.

[Mari333]

163. Get your kid over to Iraq right now..enlist your kid

Nothing more sickening then armchair warriors...nothing more disgusting..nothing..

[Surface Map]

175. Honestly

I hope my kids never have to fight in a war. I wish nobody had to. But the reality is the U.S. didn't become the greatest country in history by sitting on our hands. We have had to fight before and unfortunately we will have to again.

As for your comment "Nothing more sickening then armchair warriors...nothing more disgusting..nothing" I will have to disagree I feel there is nothing more sickening than someone who is so narrow minded and negative that they want to scream "the sky is falling" on damn near everything. I'll repeat nothing has ever been accomplished by the "it can't be done" crowd.

I don't really like everything George Bush has done and I guess I'm the only one in the world who agrees with the Iraq war but probably won't vote for Bush. Your hatred for Bush has put you in position of thinking he can do nothing right.

I believe and certainly hope that in 10 years you will be proven wrong like so many negative thinkers before you.

[Ripley]

185. You really display the same rudeness and arrogance...

that most Republicans do. Why do you think you can barge into this forum and criticize the mother of a soldier in Iraq whose family has suffered enormously?

You have some nerve calling her narrow minded and negative when her son was guarding Abu Graib when the mortars were flying. You have some fucking nerve to say she claims the sky is falling when you have been here, what a whole 10 minutes? And you really have some fucking balls to claim your stupid Bushism propaganda line about the "it can't be done" crowd....How stupid do you think we are?

[Name removed]

202. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mari333]

195. I have a kid over there, dont even start with me dont even start

and yes its an abstract issue to you because you DONT have a kid over there under mortar fire..I do..so dont even start with me buddy...you can sit in your safe little home and not worry if YOUR kid is under fire...you are tombstoned as soon as someone deletes you..you are not worth it.

[jayfish]

172. Maybe...

but the establishment of Democracy in Germany and Japan were byproducts (perhaps lucky ones) of a defensive war. They were not the stated objectives of a war of aggression. Naysayers have accomplished plenty. If they were listened to this time around we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Jay

[Puglover]

201. Yeah

they also have a history of funding 3rd parties to do their dirty work. Ever heard of Nicaragua or Indonesia? And how exactly has the US "offered" Germany or Japan a "chance" at democracy. Take your fucking right wing talking points and spew them to someone who is stupid enough to buy them.

Like Franken says....you seem to love the US like a 3 year old loves his mommy, Mommy can do no wrong and anyone who says something bad about Mommy is bad, I love the US like an adult loves, I want our country to be the best it can be but when it fucks up I reserve the right to call it.

[janx]

213. My country invaded and occupied another country.

The occupation is a fact.

[Aidoneus]

138. What do you think this so-called "Iraqi govt" is...

...if not a direct appendage of the occupyers?

There is no suspicious "HMMMMM" about that last part, I make no secret of that fact, though I personally would dispute the firm clarity of the statement itself as I am still undecided on certain particulars (and me being better situated to speak on the matter, that should be taken into consideration).

Who is this "we"? The occupation army blasting away at anything that moves is the one that dishes out freedom too? What DON'T they give? :eyes: How did the koolaid taste when it was going down?

[Career Prole]

167. You perhaps didn't notice but yesterday there was news that al-Sadr

had agreed to have his forces leave the shrine.
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has accepted a peace plan drafted by the Iraqi National Conference, which would include laying down arms and withdrawing his militia from a holy shrine in the city of Najaf, a delegate told the conference Wednesday. There was no immediate confirmation from al-Sadr's office.

<snip>

On Tuesday, an eight-person delegation from the conference traveled to Najaf to present a peace proposal to al-Sadr. It demanded the cleric's militia disarm, leave the Imam Ali Shrine where it has taken refuge, and transform itself into a political party in exchange for amnesty.

<snip>

On Wednesday evening, however, Safiya al-Suhail, an independent Shiite delegate at the conference, said she had received a letter from al-Sadr's Baghdad office saying he accepted the proposal.
"Muqtada al-Sadr has agreed on the conditions set by the National Conference," she said reading the letter to the conference.
"We call on the Iraqi government and the National Conference to participate in implementing what is proposed by Muqtada al-Sadr, otherwise everybody will bear the responsibility," the letter said.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&e=1&u=/ap/20040818/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_najaf


I cast a leery eye at that last sentence yesterday because al-Sadr was asking for something in return, specifically that the U.S. pull its troops out of Najaf, which would be somewhat of a "Fallujah solution", and we all know the right-wing blowhards considered Fallujah a slap in the face.

Then it was widely reported that al-Sadr had rejected the interim government's proposals and decided to fight it out.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=10&u=/ap/20040818/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_iraq

What was not noticed by the U.S. media (but was noticed by aljazeera)
was that in the first story al-Sadr was dealing with the Iraqi National Conference, a representative body, and the deal al-Sadr rejected was with the puppet interim government who were demanding unconditional surrender.

Iraqi government officials have dismissed as "trickery" calls from al-Sadr for a negotiated settlement, saying their patience has been exhausted.

But al-Sadr aides say the Shia leader has already accepted a peace deal brokered by a delegation sent by the Iraqi National Conference earlier in the week, saying that the interim government of Prime Minister Iyyad Allawi was blocking the accord.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C12B2E-F362-48D1-A39A-98A34B03946E.htm


There was a chance yesterday that this situation could have been resolved peacefully had the U.S. handpicked puppets listened to the National Conference, but that chance appears to have been thrown away by Bremer's boy Allawi.

[Surface Map]

184. It is interesting

that some feel we should take Sadr at his word. He has lied before when the noose got tight and he can see the writing on the wall now and he wants to win public opinion by acting like he wants to negotiate. He needs to be eliminated for good because every time he has time to regroup and fortify his position Americans and Iraqis will die.

Why should we believe him and not the Iraqi gov't or our military leaders?

[NickB79]

188. Self-deleted

Deleted: Replied to wrong post

[Surface Map]

193. The same way

the 19 terrorists who participated in 911 did. There is always going to be dissenters and disagreements within a population but it should be worked out politically not through terrorist activities.

[Aidoneus]

216. You should heed your own advice

You admit above to supporting the "terrorist activities" against Iraq, so which it? Nobody but you can do the sort?

[Surface Map]

223. No response deserved

[Aidoneus]

238. Yet I get one anyway...(well, sort of)

My lucky day! Could I entice you into addressing the matter anyway?

[Surface Map]

249. Yea, here you go

Comparing the war in Iraq to terrorist activities is the exact type rhetoric that will cause us to lose in November. Your fanatical opinions will push many people to the Bush side. When you say stupid stuff like that it will be percieved in an almost anti U.S. way. It is unbelievable what I'm seeing here. We all want the same thing and some of you have gone off the deep end so far that you will do more harm than good with your war bashing. Most people don't believe the U.S. are terrorist and don't want to hear that crap.

This is exactly what we are being accused of by the other side. Geez.

[buycitgo]

273. ''There is always going to be dissenters and disagreements '''

Mr. pResident!

welcome to DU

your logic are as impeccable as your grammar

enjoy your brief stay

can you link up from the Chickenfarm?

[Career Prole]

196. What lies? He's always been consistent in his approach, unlike us.

He wants the U.S. out of Iraq, which on its face is not an unreasonable request since we had no business there to begin with.
He said he wouldn't negotiate with the U.S. or the puppet government and he's been consistent in that as well.
This 8-person delegation from the National Conference which is a representative group of Iraqis who are an instrumental part of forming a democracy in Iraq managed to talk him down to just the demand that the U.S. troops withdraw from Najaf.
This delegation went there at no small risk to themselves to try to bring a peaceful end to this and the idiot Allawi screwed up any chance of that.
If you want to talk lies and liars our side of this entire
conflict has been riddled with deception since day one.

[Mari333]

166. YOU go over, enlist right now..Go on....enlist

enlist right now. right now. You send your kid over right now.
Right now. Put your money where your mouth is. right now.
Otherwise you are another armchair warrior behind a computer, a chickenhawk like the rest of them.
http://www.bringthemhomenow.com

[Mari333]

169. Someone please delete this person from the forum n/t

[Surface Map]

189. Why

do you want me censored? I believe we are all on the same side here. It is just that we disagree on the Iraq war. I believe it was the right thing to do. Is it perfect? Hell no! Should we have worked harder at getting International support? Hell yes!

I do believe this that if we keep hanging our hat on this issue we will not win the Nov election and we (democrats) will be proven to be on the wrong side of history.

[jayfish]

194. How About For Using Hannity-Speak In A Non-Sarcastic...

manner? "proven to be on the wrong side of history"

Jay

[tlcandie]

207. Exactly WHY was it the right thing to do?

WMD?
Saddam?
terrorists?
oil?

Pray tell, expound on why YOU think it was the right thing to do!

[Surface Map]

221. Well

I hate to say this because It seems most here are hell bent on bashing the war and I think by doing so we will push some of the moderates in the party and many of the undecided to the Bush side but after 911 we have to take preemptive action and Sadaam and terrorists would have, if they hadn't already, joined ranks against a common enemy.

Go ahead bash the crap out of me but if you think about it what are we accomplishing by continually bashing the war? We aren't going to change the Bushies minds we will only push more people to the other side by beating this Horse. Let's put focus on the lack of International support and the economy. Things that we have a chance at putting a posive spin on with our plans. Positive things.

[tlcandie]

235. I'm not into flame wars or bashing.. just hashing it out ...

You stated...

"after 911 we have to take preemptive action and Sadaam and terrorists would have, if they hadn't already, joined ranks against a common enemy."

I'm not sure exactly what you are eluding to that Saddam and terrorists (his?) would have, if they hadn't already, joined ranks against a common enemy? Could you expound on this a bit more...it's not real clear.


You stated...

"We aren't going to change the Bushies minds we will only push more people to the other side by beating this Horse."

Is this what happened in Vietnam when we withdrew by beating what was perceived as a 'Horse'?

I'm all into positive things, but there isn't anything about war that is positive, IMHumbleO.

[Surface Map]

250. Again

I agree I hate war but somtimes it is the only option. Time will tell if it was the right thing to do but at this point in time I believe it was.

The positive thing is this, Iraqis have a chance now at something they never would have under sadaam and that is opputunity.

As far as sadaam and terrorist go, my point was that if we were going to wait until we found a cancelled check from sadaam to Osama or wait until we got a picture of them together at the local Water Park we would be waiting a while. They had common interest and a need for each other and the preemptive actions we took were right. Damn, just because we don't agree on the war can we agree on how to fight a campaign. We will lose in Nov. if we keep this up.

[kimchi]

276. I call bullshit.

Anyone Democrat who would vote for Bush merely in support of the Iraq war is a traitor or an idiot. The war was wrong, and half of the US thinks so, so we ain't in the minority anymore. The numbers keep going up as moderate people count the bodies and the dwindling allies.

Focusing on other areas doesn't make the war right; and Kerry isn't focusing on the war; only the people here on a private message board. So your argument is completely baseless.

[Mari333]

209. ENLIST.... put your money where your mouth is. n/t

[Aidoneus]

210. I most certainly don't want you 'censored' from here

I always hate it when the visitors disappear before I have a chance to kick them around, especially when I have fresh meat sitting out for them to go after.

At any rate, we're not on the same side here. Speaking for myself, anyway.

[Surface Map]

218. I disagree

I know we're on the same side but not on the Iraq war. Unlike you and I'll admit, most democrats, I believe we will help beat ourselves if we keep bashing the war and siding with the enemy positions(Sadr). We aren't going to change the way the Bushies vote with this rhetoric but I believe we will push some of the fence riders, undecided to the Bush side if we keep beating this horse. I may be wrong but I firmly believe this because I will continue to say we are taking the wrong side on this. We need to shift focus to the lack of International support on the war and the economy if we are going to win.

[lordwhorfin]

236. Well, not to appeal to authority or anything . . .

. . . but I trust the opinions of those who have at close hand studied Shi'a Islam and its history in Iraq in a wider context than I do your assetions about alliances between Hussein and Al'Qiddah. Right now, we are on the brink of bringing in SCIRI and perhaps Iran (but do you support war with Iran? That's a question I'd like an answer to). Trust me, if we bring in SCIRI and Sistani against us, we have lost Iraq unless we are willing to adopt the dictums of Mr. Kurtz and 'exterminate all the brutes.'

Who is Sadr and why is he supported? Can you answer this? If you think it's immaterial, then your analysis is both dangerous and foolish.

Your comparisons to Germany and Japan are war-flogger talking-points, and have been thoroughly rebutted elsewhere. Don't bring up Odessa or Werewolves or I will mock you.

[coalition_unwilling]

143. Tell me again, who exactly are the "good guys"???

The U.S. Air Force uses B-52 bombers to bomb civilian areas from altitudes of > 5,000 ft. That sounds pretty darned cowardly to me.

[hlthe2b]

182. This isn't even the issue, IMO. .....

Regardless of whether these are truly the bad guys, the issue should be NOT PLAYING into the enemy's hands....

We are letting them win by losing... no matter what we do here. Not good versus bad, but smart strategy versus very stupid, with long-ranging consequences. As long as those making decisions hold the Iraqis and Arabs in such disregard, have such ignorance and disregard for the cultural issues, and even blatant disdain for Muslims in general, we are going to keep making things worse and worse (for years/decades to come).

[arlib]

241. What would be really funny....

...is if Frodo ever took a Democratic position. That would be a real laff riot.

[htuttle]

36. Looks like the next couple of decades are burning to me

I better go top off my gas tank.

Maybe look into a wood stove for this winter, too.

[LizW]

146. I can't believe we're going to destroy the mosque

It's so beautiful. This war is insane.

[Wednesdays]

200. But, don'tcha know

It is JUST a little mosque, and it's only a LITTLE bit damaged. And hell, those goddamn Iraqis had it coming, anyway. This is a crusade, ya know, and we need to stamp out that culture.

"It is a wonderful thing to see our nation at war, in its fully disciplined state... You will understand that we shall now give a reply, night for night, and with increasing force.

And if the British Air Force drops two, three or four thousand kilos of bombs, then we will now drop 150,000, 180,000, 230,000, 300,000 or 400,000 kilos, or more, in one night. If they declare that they will attack our cities on a large scale, we will erase theirs! We will put a stop to the game of these night-pirates, as God is our witness..."

--Adolph Hitler, September 4, 1940.

[tlcandie]

212. Ya, maybe if they JUST destroyed the lantern that Lady Liberty

is holding that would be okay, right? Just as long as she herself wasn't totally annihilated?

Or maybe JUST the church bell of a church or heck maybe even JUST the cross? If all else remained it would be fine right? No one would be angry or anything right?

What if at Christmas time it was the manger scene that was blown to pieces, but the church was left standing...would that be okay?

What if they blew up the Vietnam War Memorial, would that be okay?

We've already destroyed/looted irreplaceable ANCIENT artifacts within the actual birth of civilization. Just do like some others are known to do, get a HUGE bulldozer and just clear it to the ground, the whole damned ME then we can say, "Mission Accomplished"!

[Dover]

205. Raw footage online from Reuters......need an interpreter!

http://tinyurl.com/64eww

[Cooley Hurd]

11. They've elected a Pope?

;)

[Dhalgren]

24. No, we are killing people who are trying

to defend their homeland. And we are destroying the most holy site in Shi'ia Islam. We are creating millions of blood enemies and committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. Quite a laugh, huh?

[Cooley Hurd]

27. No, it's not...

...I was responding to frodo's post. :eyes:

[Surface Map]

123. are

Foriegn fighters now considered Iraqis? Please, you can do better than that. They are terrorist who are attempting to disrupt the efforts of real Iraqis to create a stable government.

[kysrsoze]

141. No, you're absolutely wrong. They're not terrorists

These are people who believe that they are fighting occupiers who intend to take over their land, install a puppet government and rape their country of its resources. The "Iraqi government" was not elected by the Iraqi people, and only the Sunnis are represented by that "government." The Shia and Kurds really have no say right now. Official Iraqi deaths are up around 12K. These people are ticked off.

The worst part is that this is exactly the sort of thing which was predicted to happen by a number of Middle East foreign policy experts. Of course, BushCo ignored all of it.

[jayfish]

145. Real Iraqis?

You mean all of the monied elite who fled their country 30 years ago and now are back to seize power? Those real Iraqis?

Jay

[wtmusic]

149. "Terrorists" and "Foreign fighters" -- two admin soundbites

in the same post. You don't actually *believe* that crap, do you?

Two other questions:

1) What's a "real Iraqi"?

2) Where do you get your news?

[Surface Map]

158. Actually

Yes I believe terrorists(al queda) (al zawarhi-or whatever his name is) and foreign fighters are in Iraq.

I believe a real Iraqi is someone alot like people everywhere. They want a chance to live in peace, have an opputunity to make things better for themselves and their families. If Deomcrasy works and I believe it will they will have some of those oppurtunities that were "out of reach" with the mudering Sadaam and his sons in power.


I try to form my own opinions and not let the liberal or conservative news tell me how to think.

[wtmusic]

164. Fair enough

all I ask is that you accept the fact that these fighters are 'real Iraqis' too. They're not maniacs, they're not zealots, they're not insane (contrary to the manner they are portrayed in virtually all American media). Their religion and customs probably different than yours. They want a chance to live in peace and make things better for themselves and their families.

We are not fighting al Qaeda in Najaf.

The al-Mehdi army is fighting because a foreign government has illegally invaded their country and they have the right to defend it, and the right to determine their own country's destiny, whatever form that takes.

[Surface Map]

170. I do

certainly accept the fact that some of the fighters are real Iraqis. I also believe that they are an extreme minority who is being led down the garden path by some politically hungry borderline maniacs. I also believe that much of their support is coming from outside Iraq. Just my opinion.

[NickB79]

198. One question

Who clothes, feeds, hides, rearms, and provides shelter to all these tens of thousands of foreigners? Who gives them medical attention? Who gives them logistics info on US troop movements in the area? Who does not provide tips to the police and US troops that there are foreign fighters are certain safehouses? Oh yeah, thats right, it's the "exteme minority" of native Iraqis. Pure bull. The Iraqis, by providing aid to any fighters, both foreign and domestic, who fire against the US forces, are just as complicit in the deaths of US soldiers as those actually pulling the trigger.

[Surface Map]

206. I agree

I also believe it is a small minority.

[NickB79]

220. A "small minority" can do all that for tens of thousands of foreigners?

In general, it takes several people doing resupply, providing food, providing shelter, and providing logistics data for each actual fighter/soldier in combat. Well then, I guess if you mean "small minority" compared to the entire population of Iraq, then yes, "only" a few hundred thousand to a million Iraqis could be considered a small minority when compared to 25 million Iraqis total.

Wooohooo, we're "only" fighting a million Iraqis!!! Begin the celebrations!

[lordwhorfin]

242. Well, given that

CentCom has consistantly revised the numbers of resisters upward as active in combat from 5,000 to more than 20,000, I think you're not only 'forming your own opinions' with no regard for facts, but also completely blinkered by your desire to believe that we've done the Iraqis some kind of service in initiating the invasion in the manner we did, and conducting the aftermath in the fashion we did. Both were disasterous, and indeed, are all that matter now.

As a thought experiment, let me ask you this: if the Allawi government goes after the PPK as it has Sadr and demands an end to the Kurdish militias in the north, as it has to Sadr's militia, what should the US do?

[8-6-PDB]

204. Sounds like you

just described America during the War for Independence...

[Surface Map]

230. Exactly

the type rhetoric that will cause us to lose in November if we keep it up. Comparing what is and is percieved by most as terrorist activities to the American Revolution. We don't have to convince each other how to vote but if we keep spewing BS like this we only help the other side.

I swear and hell maybe I'm wrong, but most Americans don't want to hear this crap. Why do we feel we must take this adamant hard line stance which will appear to many to be anti U.S.?

[Mari333]

243. Enlist . Put your money where your mouth is . n/t

[kimchi]

278. Most Americans don't post here.

And Kerry has no intentions of pulling out on a whim. And the TV doesn't let even moderate democrats have a say, much less the "leftists" such as myself.

So who, exactly, is "hearing" all this crap? No one seems to be complaining except you.

[NickB79]

179. We are fighting the SHIITE militia of Al-Sadr

Which has been reported in virtually EVERY newspaper as being composed of LOCAL IRAQIS. There have been speculations about the attacks in Baghdad being carried out by foreign fighters, but virtually no one has reported foreign fighters in the Mahdi army ranks. There are plenty of reports of Iraqi police defecting to the Mahdi side as well. Why would the police be defecting to an army of foreigners?

Second question, it was estimated by the military a couple months ago that there are probably 50,000 resistance fighters in Iraq right now. If they are all foreigners, where are they hiding? Who is supplying them with reloads, food, shelter, etc? If NOTHING else, the local Iraqis, even if not actively bombing US forces, are providing aid to the fighters who are.

These are local Iraqis, whose families have lived in Iraq for generations, fighting back against US forces.

[lordwhorfin]

239. Moktada Sad'r

isn't a 'real Iraqi'? Then how did most of his older male relatives end up being murdered by Saddam?

[TankLV]

272. You mean the "vichy Iraqis" - the stooges of the american invading force?

Those Iraqis?

[Ghetto_Boy]

26. Habemus Papam.. sorry

[democracy eh]

8. a couple of days ago CNN briefly reported

that "foreign fighters" has rigged the mosque with explosives to destroy it if attacked.

so when it is leveled, you know who will be blamed

[htuttle]

13. Do you mean blamed here in the US...

Or in Iraq, where it matters?

Doesn't really matter what people in the US think. Iraqis (and Shia everywhere) are going to blame us, no matter what kind of story the Bush administration tells them.

[0007]

115. .....and CNN is the mouth piece for the White House, go figure.

Bring the troops home and stop this fucking nonsense.

Put rummy and cheney and junior is prison for war crimes.

[Malva Zebrina]

10. It is

:cry: Oh the humanity

[RivetJoint]

19. INhumanity

[ElsewheresDaughter]

14. this is NOT good...this mosque is Islams HOLIEST site...bush is a fuck-up

of rare distinction

[RivetJoint]

20. It's not Islam's HOLIEST site

It's ONE of SHIA Islam's holiest sites...

But it IS going to be a HUGE problem.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

21. i stand corrected

[Aidoneus]

52. Not exactly

It is revered on many levels, from Quranic traditions regarding the prophet Abraham, and also as the site of Haz.Imam `Ali(pbuh)'s burial and the university founded upon him that exists to this day. As far as the "pecking order" goes, Madinah and Makkah, and perhaps al-Quds, would be more celebrated among the believers.

The burial sites of the Ahlulbayt and the remainder of the Ithna`ashari Imams are all revered locations to the Shia, Iraq containing the majority of them in the cities of Najaf, Karbala`, Kazimiyah in the north of Baghdad, and Samarra` still farther north. Others are buried in Madinah beside the Prophet(pbuhahf), and Mashhad in Iran.

[deutsey]

16. They can't be that stupid, can they?

Sigh...I guess I already know the answer to that one... :evilfrown:

[Kinkistyle]

18. Yay, Al Qaeda just gained a few more members!

at this pace, I am thinking they must be running out of application forms.

[leftchick]

22. a few THOUSAND more...

Shiia Uprising up next!

[PsychoDad]

43. 15% of the worldwide muslim population

Are Shia and consider the Iman Ali Masjid a holy site. That woukd be roughly 300,000,000 muslims?

[Aidoneus]

53. al-Qa'idah wouldn't care much about this

While it is yet another crusader desecration of Muslims' holy sites, they themselves act in a comperable fashion towards the Shia.

The Jaysh al-Mahdi however, will indeed be the one gaining those thousands more members.

[Kinkistyle]

104. When I say "Al-Qaeda" I mean anti-american terror organization.

I realize that Bin Laden and his ilk are Sunni, its just that everything terror nowadays has been labeled "Al-Kaydah" that its almost become a generality. Sorry.

[Aidoneus]

122. that is still a flawed statement

as if only an "anti-american terror organization" would resist these atrocities?

[Kinkistyle]

135. Well since we're in a "War on Terror"

I wanted to point out that we're failing on that one miserably as well. But of course this is an atrocity from many different viewpoints.

[Aidoneus]

142. that is a fair point,

though I would still urge caution at the terminology; there is too much of a looseness that certain phrases are applied with.

[Dhalgren]

23. It's not "two pillars" that has been damaged,

it's two minarets! This is very, very bad on so many levels. The death toll on both sides is going to go way up. This was all so unnecessary...so stupid...tragic.

[Cooley Hurd]

25. I've corrected it - the CNN producer used the word "columns"

The minarets are the slender structures in this pic...

[shadu]

28. Thank you for the clarification

Bush's most recent atrocity leaves me speechless.

[leftchick]

32. CNN Reporter:... damage is "minimal"...

Maybe to the US and their puppets... This is fucking sickening..

:puke:

[thebigidea]

34. MSNBC drone says: "the backlash will be manageable"

then they go into light morning show chitchat.

Boy, its a good thing we have ace reporters like CNN's Bill Hemmer at times like this.

[htuttle]

39. Sure

They've been managing everything so well so far, what could possibly go wrong?

If it weren't for Bill Hemmer, I wouldn't know what I was supposed to think about stuff like this. Thanks Bill!

[thebigidea]

41. Well, at least we get to hear the latest about Scott Peterson.

[Philostopher]

48. That's about par for the course, for Hemmer.

He used to be a remote reporter on one of the local newscasts in Cincinnati. His head is empty -- when he did weather reporting, you could hear the wind whistle when it passed his earholes. For that guy, 'analysis' consists of repeating the memo from the morning until he's sure he believes it, and then repeating it until he's sure everybody else believes it.

[michigandem2]

74. manageable???

how do they know? we are in for a world of hurt, IMO...this is just horrible, whether we had anything to do with this or not...its trouble...TROUBLE!

[htuttle]

89. I'm sure the backlash won't be any worse than...

...Oklahoma City or 9/11. Well, probably not too much worse.

[PsychoDad]

265. Maybe on a multiple ...

As bush unites more factions against us, the numbers of recruits increase, thus increasing the possible number of attempts to strike at the american enemy on his own soil.

The oppressed realize that a majority of the american public are either for the crusade, or are apathetic toward the murder, torture, and suffering of brown peoples half a world away, and that the only way to lessen american resolve is to increase the numbers of american dead and wounded to where most americans feel the loss, or to strike at the invaders in their homeland.

I suspect they will do both at every oppertunity, now and possibly for generations to come.

[kimchi]

279. Yes, manageable--kinda like a "cakewalk" doncha know?

Talking heads talking out of their asses, as usual.

[0007]

120. How about Nic Robertson giving 'ya the straight poop from the war zone?

[Aidoneus]

30. Ya Ali..

these vicious crimes go on. The Marines can cease these acts, or should get what is coming to them.

I trust that the misguided talk of "truces" with the aggressors will fall aside, their true nature having been clearly displayed.

[The Magistrate]

31. Hell Of A Thing To Wake Up To

Words fail me....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[bemildred]

121. Good morning Sir.

You could see it coming. People with no clear way
out of a mess will revert to form when cornered. The
alternative was to continue to be outplayed by al Sadr,
and they still have not abandoned their fundamental faith
in the efficacy of force.

I have to go for a walk, and I must say I am happy not to
have to watch this debacle.

[LeftHander]

33. Spreading Freedom and Peace....

Talked about this two years ago.

Thanks George.

[DU GrovelBot]

38. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2004 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[leftchick]

42. Al-J: US ENGAGED in Fierce fighting around mosque....

Breaking news no link yet. The Iraqis know who is doing the attacking.....This is so fucked

[spinbaby]

46. link to the Aljazeera story

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C12B2E-F362-48D1-A39A-98A34B03946E.htm

[Junkdrawer]

44. 64 thousand dollar question: Will Iranian Shia (and Iran?)...

now join the battle?

[dweller]

59. good question

would they consider something like that?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x761851


dp

[Junkdrawer]

62. The mullahs of Iran stay in power by appealing to the Anti-Western and

Anti-Israeli passions of their subjects.

When Olso was moving forward, so was the moderation of Iran, and that was not a coincidence. I've always blamed them and Likud as the principal enemies of the Oslo peace process.

How far they will play this is anybody's guess. Dangerous as hell.

[muriel_volestrangler]

51. It's a clock on fire in one of the minarets

"Two of the mosque's minarets have been damaged in recent fighting, and al-Sadr loyalists said a clock in one of the towers caught fire, Sadeq reported."

Should the thread title still be 'smoke billowing'? It sounds more dramatic than the CNN story is (the title they're using is 'Sounds of fighting outside Najaf mosque'). You're within the hour to edit.

[Texasgal]

57. Great..... :(

As the death toll rises.......

[skip fox]

68. No matter which way this would have turned out (either al-Sadr delaying

and gaining in reputation, or the US and Iraqi provisional gov. capturing/killing him), it was going to be bad.

We will remember how our country came to such a pass where we risked the stability of an entire region, our national fortune (lives and money) and credibility, and the future of our international relations for the chimera of WMDs and an al-Quaeda collaboration which did not exist.

Then we made al-Sadr the most popular Shi'ite cleric by claiming we were going to "teach him a lesson" (three separate times over the last 8 months!) and backing down, and now we are in a crisis of potentially horrific proportions.

And history will remember as well.

[Maddy McCall]

77. As an historian, I could not agree more.

Very eloquently, you said everything I wanted to say. This day will be remembered as a defining day in this horrific "war."

[DaveFL99]

78. Granted we shouldn't be in Iraq

but get a grip.

[Barrett808]

86. We have consistenly heard that this is the one thing that would unify Shia

against the US.

It is a very big deal.

[DaveFL99]

92. Nope

If they were that holy they wouldn't be hiding in there shooting out.

Let's cut the drama folks. We have plenty of real issues to deal with

[Kinkistyle]

106. Whats a "real" issue?

Gay marriage?

[DaveFL99]

113. The probability that bush will win

[Kinkistyle]

140. Article.

WP: How U.S. Fares in Iraq May Sway Swing Voters

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A11645-2004Aug18?language=printer

[Wednesdays]

148. That Kool-Aid tastes pretty good, huh?

LOL, I originally wrote it as "Kook-Aid." Come to think of it, same difference.

[alittlelark]

248. 'the probalility that B*sh will win?'

.........what are you smokin'? Maybe you should share:smoke:

Every poll I've seen has Kerry comin' up Roses

[DaveFL99]

259. At this point every poll had Dukakis winning too.

But go ahead. Bury your head in the sand. It can stay there for another 75 days.

[NickB79]

186. It doesn't matter how holy "they" are

What matters is how holy THE SHRINE is. It wouldn't matter WHO was hiding in the shrine; if we damage it, it is a BIG deal to the 300 MILLION Shia who consider it the gravesite of their most sacred saint.

[Barrett808]

191. Au contraire -- see Juan Cole's analysis

Readers sometimes complain to me that Muslims seem to have lots of holy cities and lots of mosques, so is Najaf really all that special? O.K., here are the holy cities in order of holiness: Mecca, Medinah, Jerusalem, Najaf, Karbala. Najaf and Karbala are especially holy to Shiites. There are other holy sites and cities, of course, but they are mostly sacred because of association with later saints. The five I just mentioned are sacred because of their direct association with the Prophet Muhammad, his son-in-law and vicar, Ali, and his grandson, Husain.

The Shrine of Ali is a tomb, and although it has a mosque attached to it, it is not just a mosque. It is a Shrine. Like the shrine of the Prophet Muhammad in Medinah or the shrine of Imam Husain in Karbala, it is a sacred resting place of holy remains. A lot of mosques could be damaged with impunity. These shrines cannot.

The ignoramus Marines in Najaf clearly don't know all this, and since they don't know it they don't have any business making military policy there. They have endangered all Americans profoundly by potentially spurring a whole new wave of Shiite terrorism against us, recalling the bad old days of the early to mid-1980s (when some of our present allies in Iraq, like al-Da`wa and SCIRI were attacking US targets like the embassy in Kuwait or helping take Americans captive in Beirut).

http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#109281411743058076

---

Thousands of Shiites are streaming toward Najaf in hopes of forming a human shield around Muqtada al-Sadr, according to al-Hayat. Many have already gathered at the gates to the old city in Najaf and around the shrine of Imam Ali.

In the meantime, the Allawi government says it intends to send an Iraqi military force into the shrine of Ali after Muqtada al-Sadr and his militiamen, according to al-Sharq al-Awsat. Allawi should be careful. A colleague of mine was reminded of a similarity between the current situation and the Indian government raid on the Sikh Golden Temple in 1984. That invasion of holy space arguably led to the assassination of Indira Gandhi and prolonged civil instability in the Punjab.

http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#109255211607047697

[Junkdrawer]

100. Nothing to see here, move along...

WE MEAN IT! YOU JOURNALISTS: MOVE ALONG OR YOU'RE DEAD!!!

[Union Thug]

80. This is why they were forcing journalists out...

...of Najaf, even with threats of death. We can't have the slaughter broadcast around the globe now can we? I'm glad there were those that said F* off!

[murray hill farm]

94. CNN out of England

Saying that the area around the mosque has been leveled..destroyed..families and children in the residential areas around the mosque.

[Union Thug]

102. Now THAT'S Compassionate Conservatism! /eom

[Halliburton]

90. New 527 group formed...

It's called "Terror Groups for Bush!" Notorious terror groups Al Qaeda and Hezbollah are members of this group.

[allemand]

98. Now this is funny

On Al-Arabiya they had a split screen with Alawi first saying "There is no fighting in Najaf" and then "fighting is only between Iraqi army and the militia". At the same time they had a live shot from Najaf where you could see the helicopters flying...

[Junkdrawer]

103. So, does this attack signal the next Domestic Terror Attack...

you know, the one they've promised for the August/September time frame?

:shrug:

[Shadder]

110. CNN International Breaking News

Iraq PM issues final call for Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's forces to disarm, leave the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf. Details soon.

[tlcandie]

133. So they are playing by another ME country's MO?

Just like they did Arrafat...leveled everything around him and surrounded him? If he's accidentally killed in the process, well too bad?

[Name removed]

116. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Shadder]

117. see ya

Thanks for visiting, have a nice life in Freeperville.

[allemand]

127. This was what caused the smoke

A building explodes as the first bomb drops during a U.S. aerial assault on insurgent targets in Najaf, Iraq, Thursday, Aug. 19, 2004. High-altitude jet fighters dropped four bombs in the area. (AP Photo/Jim MacMillan)

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040819_876.html

I think that building is directly in front of the shrine.

[nolabels]

180. Bush the destroyer

Shiva is an ancient god, as old as civilization itself or perhaps older. He was first realized the day man accepted the cosmic truth: to create, one must first destroy. Shiva is a god of paradoxes: he is the promiscuous god who is also the celibate yogi practicing austerities in the Himalayas.

Sitting in deep meditation on a tiger skin, Shiva is seen here with most attributes associated with him. Prominently seen around his upper body are snakes, slithering down his body, reflecting his absolute renunciation, his refusal to react or respond to any threat or temptation. Like a typical sanyasi, Shiva carries a kamandalu, a water pot, for his rituals and ablutions; and a rosary to assist his concentration. While meditating, Shiva sits cross - legged, resting his arm on the yoga-danda. A crescent moon adorns his hair, out of which flows a steady stream of Ganga. Strings of rudraksha beads hang on his neck and wrists.

Next to the meditating figure stands his trishula and damaru. The three prongs of the trident are said to represent the trinity of Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshvara. The drum is emblematic of the pristine rhythm of cosmic creation and dissolution. Together with all these attributes calmly sits Shiva, with a smile on his lips.

This description by Renu Rana.
(snip)
http://www.exoticindiaart.com/product/ZQ87


(snip)
The legend of the mystical significance of Shiv Khodi dates back to the times of Demon Bhasmasur. Bhasmasur invoked the blessings of Lord Shiva by meditating for many centuries. Lord Shiva was pleased with his devotion and granted him a wish of his choice. Bhasmasur, true to his demonly lineage, prayed to be granted a wish by which he would be able to burn anybody to ashes by just placing his hands over the enemy's head.

Armed with the invincible powers of Bhasma (burning to death), he met Naaradji who asked him for the reason of his happiness and Bhasmasur narrated the whole incident to Him. After listening to Bhasmasur, Naaradji advised him to try this wish on Lord Shiva in order to marry Parvati in case the wish showed the results. Bhasmasur sought to destroy Lord Shiva Himself in order to marry His beautiful wife, goddess Parvati. In order to save Himself from His own granted wish of destruction, Lord Shiva went in hiding at Shiv Khodi, at the hills of Himalayas called "Pir Punchal" range and requested Lord Vishnu to intervene.

Lord Vishnu, on realizing the gravity of the matter, disguised Himself as a beautiful damsel and engaged Bhasmasur on his way to destroy Lord Shiva. The damsel argued that goddess Parvati would not marry anybody who is not a good dancer like Lord Shiva Himself. Bhasmasur, taken in by the logic sought to learn dancing from the damsel. As part of a clever dance posture, Bhasmasur placed his hands over his own head and was immediately burnt to ashes.

http://www.shivkhodi.com/legend.htm

[paulk]

224. no,no,no

Shiva's destruction is part of the process of creation; Bush destroys to create more destruction.


Don't besmirch Shiva with Bush - it's really insensitive.

[sofa king]

251. Bushiva

I hope you don't find this offensive, nolabels. I just couldn't resist.

[nolabels]

263. Holy Smirkomaina Batman, Its come to life

He is just warmin the stuff up for this guy !

http://users2.ev1.net/~robertl25/ps/Photoshop2.htm

[Jack Rabbit]

137. How many major errors are the Bushies committing at this moment?

It is Dr. Allawi who is demanding that those in Moqtaba al-Sadr's militia lay down their arms. It is US Marines surrounding the Mosque in an effort to enforce that demand.

Do the Bushies think that a Shiite Prime Minister will be able to take the blame for the destruction of the most sacred structure to Shi'as? Do they think that will shield them for the blame?

The problem is that Moqtaba and his followers believe Dr. Allawi is an American puppet. He and rest of the interim government were installed by the Bushies and are responsible for carrying out their will. Their authortity is backed not by Iraqis, but by American troops. Moqtaba may be a demagogue, but at least he is an Iraqi demagogue and the armed me who follow his direction are Iraqis.

This will be blamed on Americans collectively, including those of us who from the beginning thought this war was a mistake.

In the beginning, the Bushies told the American people that Shiites, who were oppressed and murdered by Saddam, will welcome US troops as liberators. We who protested Bush's plans knew the difference between liberation and colonial piracy and assumed that the Iraqi people would have even less trouble determining the difference.

It looks like the Left was right once again.

[Bo]

151. SHAKE and BAKE......

[catmandu57]

171. We are going to reap a whirlwind from this

this thread has brought out some sick points of view, this is so wrong, and our actions today will have consequences that we'll pay for a long time.

[Junkdrawer]

187. Reporters have been allowed into the mosque - Attack may be off for now...

There's no way the US would have let reporters into the mosque if an attack were truly imminent. In fact, my guess is that they were let in to defuse the rumors that I'm sure are now circulating in the ME.

Now, if the reporters are forced to leave....

[Junkdrawer]

255. Well, it looks now like the reporters left...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/08/19/otsc.sadeq/

:scared:

[Cooley Hurd]

256. CNN reporting more explosions in Najaf...

...they showed a night shot of the Imam Ali mosque. The lights were on, but you could see tracer fire in the foreground. :(

[SoCalDem]

192. "...We don't go 'round attacking cemeteries...".. But they just DID

and then there is the "protection" encirclement...:puke:

This is so damned UGLY...and such a recruiting tool.. Hundreds of thousands of young Islamic men are signing up to fight us...as we type..:(

[Dover]

199. Story from Aljazeera -

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C12B2E-F362-48D1-A39A-98A34B03946E.htm

[tlcandie]

219. Here's the missing piece of the puzzle from your link at Aljazeera, Dover.

<snipped>
But al-Sadr aides say the Shia leader has already accepted a peace deal brokered by a delegation sent by the Iraqi National Conference earlier in the week, saying that the interim government of Prime Minister Iyyad Allawi was blocking the accord.
<snip>

[Wednesdays]

211. Just on CNN...

Witness shows video of people in the mosque demonstrating...looks like hundreds of angry people, mostly men, but some women and children. The main building looks undamaged (I don't know how old that video is). She was asked by the anchorperson if there was fighting, and she replied the city is "completely destroyed." They're showing video of the destruction of the city...empty streets, lots of buildings in rubble.

On edit...the demonstration...hundreds shouting, raising their hands in support of the defense...they appear unarmed. Video shows armed Iraqis outside in the city. Showed video of american soldiers in the streets, mostly standing around waiting for orders.

She says the violence was "constant." Heard 3 big explosions.

[Dover]

217. Also Raw Footage Online from Reuters:

Raw footage online from Reuters......need an interpreter!


http://tinyurl.com/64eww

[skip fox]

240. Need two (2) threads to keep up! AND . . .

it would be more useful if someone with access to the news would keep us up to date.

(As far as the arguments go . . . well, no matter how we feel this will be or should be resolved, most of us agree that we've been brought to this juncture through a massive failure of leadership.

[llmart]

254. Bush has been and continues to be.......

a MISERABLE FAILURE at everything he touches.

[skip fox]

266. al-Sadr backing off again???

http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/08/18/55465.html

Is this the latest?

[Aidoneus]

268. as I answered in the other thread..(part copy/paste, with additions)

That was a little ways back in terms of the order of events here, and not the most recent statement. Sayyid Muqtada as-Sadr(HA) had yesterday tenatively agreed to some sort of truce arrangement as proposed by a "peace delegation" and with their own requirements added. It was predicated on there being an actual cessation of hostilities on the part of the aggressors, but it was progress none the less. The occupyers responded by bombing the fuck out of everything.

Sadr(HA) should talk to a native of this continent (if he can find one, that is) before agreeing to any deals with the Americans. I should expect that the Jaysh al-Mahdi have realized the error of their way in imagining that their dealings with the invader and their puppets could ever be in good faith, and remain steadfast in their defense against them.

[Career Prole]

271. Yeah...it shook out about like this...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=761740&mesg_id=762440

He's willing to deal with the National Conference but he has not and will not deal with either the U.S. or the bushite interim government.
The peace delegation yesterday from the National Conference had made some headway but then Allawi caught wind of it and blew the negotiations out of the water. :shrug:

[demoman123]

270. Click here for an update.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x763170

[scarface2004]

277. kill them all!!!!!!!!!!!

let god sort them out! bush sneered.

[Chomskyite]

282. One of the lokel-yokel Right-wing radio guys in Baton Rouge

. . . by the name of Ed Buggs was calling for the mosque to be destroyed and the 3,000 insurgents inside to be slaughtered. I called him and said on air that there are many ways to get the 3,000 to surrender or to subdue them without killing them all, i.e. concussion grenades, high-frequency noise, etc. Then we'd leave the mosque standing and win the PR war.

He cut me off and then repeated his calls for the destruction and killings, then took more calls from white males with not a lot of grammatical mastery calling for blood.

So I guess you could say the writing was on the wall today.

[Aidoneus]

283. when I think of fools like this, I consider the fight brewing here

Why should they surrender, anyway? They're right, the occupyers are wrong, and there's a name for people like Mr Buggs: it rhymes with ... you know, nothing actually rhymes with 'fascist'. Interesting.. At any rate, speaking with filth and garbage like him is a waste of your time. It's for people like him that baseball bats, earplugs, and muzzles (to consider the full range of options) were invented.

[Emillereid]

285. I have just read many of the responses to this thread and

I am amazed at how many try to justify the US behavior.l The fact of the matter is that we are in Iraq illegally;that we launched an unprovoKed war of aggession against the Iraqis and are carrying on an illegal, morally bankrupt occupation. Whether or not the US marines are directly responsible for setting fire to the Mosque is beside the point -- our presence is the reason for the fighting and subsequent damage. Do we blame the Russians for burning their own crops,etc in an effort to keep them from the Germans??? The Iraqis have a right to hole up in their own mosques in they want to -- the mosque and the country are theirs -- WE ARE THE TRESPASSERS!!

[chiffon]

287. i second that emotion (no time to sing) n/t

[jmcgowanjm]

289. Historia Bush

America has no way to face its real problems
and is doomed to lurch around lashing out against phony
ones. These are very dangerous games and could backfire,
but they will not accomplish anything. In truth, the political
class, intent upon its class war, has lost its way and the
United States wastes its substance in atrocious adventures
its freaky incompetent leaders hatch in darkness. I suspect
the end will come swiftly in a permanent oil shock that will
awe us with the havoc it wrecks.

Theoretically, a dramatic and remarkable turnabout is
still possible, but it would take the most amazing
political transformation ever seen. Barring that, there is not
much hope except to minimize damage from the crash of
the falling behemoth. The rest of the world is already looking
on at the death throes and hoping to stay out of the way.
Enjoying those entertainments for the people provided from
the upper levels of the hierarchy, the American electorate
waits for the end.

http://www.swans.com/library/art10/mdolin03.html

The USArmy should be collapsing back to Kuwait immediately.

The CVS JFK should be pulled from 100mile wide
Persian Gulf now.

Fighting rages across Iraq as we speak.