Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Terry Jeffrey :: Townhall.com Columnist
Sunni-Shiite dominoes?
by Terry Jeffrey
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
What was the biggest suprise of Election Day?



History will surely examine with a cold eye whether the Bush administration looked carefully enough at the potential consequences before it went to war in Iraq.

But if decisions are made unwisely in the days ahead, it may also examine another question: Did the United States look carefully enough before leaving the war in Iraq?

Abdul Aziz al Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), visited President Bush at the White House this week. The visit was likely part of the follow-up to a memo that National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley sent to President Bush in late November that suggested Bush push Hakim to throw his party's support behind Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to help Maliki build a new political base independent from Shiite warlord Moqtada al Sadr.

That we must hope for Hakim to play this role is emblematic of the dilemma we face -- and makes a review of some recent history timely.

There was a day when a certain leader vowed that Iraq's "evil Baathist leaders" would be consigned "to the dustbin of history."

It was not 2003, but 1980. The leader was Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini. He believed that Iraqi Shiite clergymen, who had been his colleagues when he lived in exile in Najaf, Iraq, were primed to spark an Islamic revolution against Saddam Hussein.

These Iraqi clergymen were not Khomeini's seedlings. They were parallel branches rising from the same root and trunk of Shiite revolutionary thinking that had produced Khomeini himself. Two Iraqi Shiite clans prominent in this movement were the Sadrs and the Hakims.

In "The Islamic Movement of Iraqi Shi'as," published in 1992, professor Joyce Wiley of the University of South Carolina outlined the role these families played in the rise of Iraqi Islamism.

In the late 1950s, about the time Iraq's military overthrew the nation's Sunni monarchy, a young Shiite clergyman named Muhammad Baqir al Sadr began a movement called Hizb al-Dawa al-Islamiya (Party of the Call to Islam). It was designed to provide a religiously based Islamic political alternative to secular Arab nationalism and atheistic communism.

Ayatollah Muhsin al-Hakim, then Iraq's pre-eminent Shiite cleric, supported Sadr's movement, as did many of Hakim's multitudinous sons. When al-Hakim died in 1970, Sadr became an ayatollah and inherited much of Hakim's religious following.

After Iran declared an Islamic Republic under Khomeini in 1979, Saddam put Sadr under house arrest in Iraq. "From his confinement," writes Wiley, "Ayatollah al-Sadr issued a fatwa declaring that believing Muslims were obliged to struggle against the Ba'th Party." Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Terence P. Jeffrey is the editor-in-chief of CNSNews

Be the first to read Terence Jeffrey's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

©Creators Syndicate
Gdollar
Divide and conquer was Napoleon.

How about this??
Let's retreat to the only place that's worth anything over there...the oil fields. Secure the oil fields with our military. Establish a kill zone around any oil infrastructure and let the Sunnis and Shi'a have at it. When it's all over, we go in and mop up the winner's army and establish a democracy with whatever's left.

I realize we could mop up both groups in short order, but it's messy, and Americans don't have the stomach for messy. There's zero tolerance for civilian casualties. So let the Sunnis and Shi'a kill each other. They've proven that they have the stomach for it.

And if Iran or Syria want to lob missiles into the oil fields, we can just take out their most prized cities, like Tehran or Damascus. Hopefully our bombs will catch a bunch of mullahs. Then we'll secure their oil fields.

As far as oil profits, we can use them to pay for the war and to protect the oil fields. Maybe we can put a percentage in the bank for the Iraqis that are left when it's all over. If we give any of it to them now, they'll just use it for weapons against us, and that would help Iran or Syria.


Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.