English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Guys I need your thoughts about this matter. Im conducting a survey 4 school on whos to blame. One of my classmates said "Its America's fault for distrupting the balance." I hate to say it but i think he's right. So what do you think?

2007-02-24 00:12:13 · 16 answers · asked by doc_drew1989 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

16 answers

Huh, are you kidding me????

Mohammads cousin Shi'at Ali left him, with his Army, when Mohammad married the 9 year old Aisha and nominated her father Abu Bak'r as the first Caliph. Ever since, the Sunni have been persecuting the Shia [followers of Shi'at Ali]! Ultimately, the Sias fought back!

What about the Ahmediyyas??? ? The Sunnis persecuted and killed many of them before they fought back!?

And the Sufis, the Marmelukes, the Druze and so on and so forth till even the recent Baha'is!?!?

It's always been the Sunni persecuting the other Muslims, for over a millenia and forcing them to fight back!?!?

Just how is USA in the picture, at all????

The Sunni were killing Shias and Kurds much before the Americans even went there!?!? Saddam Husein proudly said that he'd killed 146 Shi'a !?!?

So, why s it our fault, now????

Sheesh!?!?

Simon Templar

2007-02-24 00:17:47 · answer #1 · answered by In Memory of Simon Templar 5 · 2 1

Well your classmate is right and wrong depending on how one looks at it. The Sunni's are a minority in Iraq but under Saddam they held most of the power.

Did the US disrupt the balance? Of course, we did. But most people would look at that as a good thing. Because the "balance" was tilted quite a bit to the Sunni's. Baghdad was almost totally controlled by Sunni's under Saddam.

Anytime that power is taken out of the hands of a group, of course, that group will do whatever to get it back. Which is what is happening in Iraq today. The Sunni's believe that by continuing to cause major trouble they will get the US and the Allies to leave and then try to resume their power and control over the Shiite's. And also over the Kurd's. Leaving Iraq now would not be very smart on our part because in 2 or 3 years they would be right back where they were under Saddam. And as with all struggles like this, one, could say religion is the cause but that is a minor point really. Like all wars and struggles it is about power and control.

And the Arab tribes have been fighting each other for centuries all over the middle east. And, again, it is not so much religion, although religion is used as a tool to rally others, it is about power and control.

2007-02-24 00:26:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

When Muhammad died, there were four men, Caliph Abu Bakr,
Caliph Omar, Caliph Othman, Caliph Ali.

The battle between the Sunni and Shia began with the selection of the first prophet.

I can't post it all here, but there is a link 'Islam For Today' that explains it very well.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/shia.htm

http://www.princeton.edu/~batke/itl/denise/right.htm

After the time of Muhammad's death in 632, Islam had become a dominant power in the Arabian peninsula.
Muhammad's successors (the four caliphs) were appointed by the Muslim community to carry out the leadership and rule of Islam throughout the Arabian Peninsula and other parts of the world.
The Four caliphs were more political figures than spiritual leaders.

Those who say Summi/Shia battles did not exist before we unseat Saddam Hussein, don't know the history of the Sunni/Shia branches of Islam and the deaths of the Shias at the hands of the Sunnis.

Read, read, read, and read some more. Do some real research and not just listen to what you are told by those who have not read anything.

Simon has done some study into this issue.

grace2u

2007-02-24 00:47:36 · answer #3 · answered by Theophilus 6 · 0 0

I'm not sure, I'd like to say America in Iraq has obviously made things quite difficult for the Iraqi people and caused some problems but,
There has always been religious conflict over the sunni and shiite. Since prophet Mohammed died, he said the next "leader" that you should follow after me is Iman Ali. I think that was his name. Anyway. The sunni came and chopped off his head and said no we don't want him as our next leader and the sunni appointed their own. The story went something like that....You'd have to read about the Ashoora holiday.....
This is how sunni and shiite came to be. I live in a Muslim country with Sunni and Shiite and they are not fond of each other i have to say.

2007-02-24 00:34:29 · answer #4 · answered by January00 3 · 0 0

It goes back to the time that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) passed away. It has nothing to do with non-Muslims. There is a book written by a Shiite philosopher, Dr.Ali Shariati, on this subject called Fatima is Fatima if you want any references. Chapter 13 of the book talks about what happened that started this entire division. Here is a link to that chapter... http://www.al-islam.org/fatimaisfatima/16.htm
Fatima (salam alaiha) is the Prophet's daughter and Imam Ali (alaih salam) was his husband.
I hope the link helps.

EDIT:
The Prophet chose Imam Ali to be his successor but after he passed away while Imam Ali was burying him, others went against his wishes and selected Abu Bakr.
Again that chapter of the book gives more insight.

2007-02-24 03:21:49 · answer #5 · answered by Samantha 6 · 0 0

Before Muhammed died, he raised the arm of his Father-IN-Law, Ali, and told the people " Allah has chosen Ali to be my successor"

When Muhammed died, his close friend and General Abu Bakr forcibly took over control of the church, in effect usurping Allah's will. Over time, Muhammed's descendants were murdered and Bakr's followers became the majority in Islam. They are the SUNNI sect.

The Shia sect is comprised of those who still follow that the leadership in the church should be in the direct descendency from Muhammed.

They have been fighting, murdering and torturing each other for 1400 years. Americans have NOTHING to do with it at all

2007-02-24 00:26:39 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The Sunni and Shiite warfare was around before America stepped in, it just wasnt as publicized so it makes it seems like we are to blame. Peace has not been a strong point in that region, they fight for many reasons. Good luck on your survey.

2007-02-24 00:17:14 · answer #7 · answered by dcforensics51 2 · 1 1

u.s. in effortless words aggravated issues. This Sunni and Shiite conflict has been waging for hundreds of years. you would pick to %. up the present Time mag subject. It has some thing in this count number you'll locate very sensible in the route of your survey. yet to placed issues bluntly: Bush sunk us proper interior the approach yet another unextractable holy warfare.

2016-12-04 21:22:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

America's fault. Come on. It was a peaceful country until that freaking ape-bush comes and distrupts the peace. He's gonna burn his butt his hell along with all who support him.

2007-02-24 02:06:43 · answer #9 · answered by Fatez 2 · 0 0

I think you cannot blame anyone bit the Muslims themselves. They have divided themselves into 2 camps on this issue, have been divided since the murder of Ali, the fact that it may seem more visible now, does not dispute that this has been going on for 1400 years.

2007-02-24 00:17:14 · answer #10 · answered by great gig in the sky 7 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers