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

Sunni is a religion of Islam. Shiite is a religion of Islam. And Kurdish isn't.

Why don't they, instead, have a 1st amendment like the US has?
Then, also, the Christians wouldn't be left out.

Then, also consider Lebnon, where those in National leadership are of mixed faiths.

2007-06-14 02:58:00 · 8 answers · asked by t_a_m_i_l 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

8 answers

you see heres the thing, Islamic people hate americans and hate christians and jews. Most anyway. If they had the call saying, " go" then they go. it's simple as that.

2007-06-14 03:03:12 · answer #1 · answered by wintertimeisfun 2 · 1 1

Yes.

The US does not want the Shite area absorbed or controlled by Iran.

Turkey refuses to allow a Kurdish state because of the Kurds in southern Turkey who are looking to create a separate state out of part of Turkey.

Other than that there is the same India/Pakistan Northern/Southern Ireland Balkans type problem in that wherever you draw the lines you will have Kurds in the Shiite state, Shiites in the Sunni state and Sunnis in the Kurdish state. They immediately become targets for any militants, and then the other states start interfering with each other and you are back where you started.


The solution is to not invade a sovereign country that has not attacked you, does not have any WMDs and is not harboring terrorists. (But does have a vicious dictator - just like many other countries)

However it is a bit late for that. Bush has created a legacy that will last for dozens of years.

How do you pass a freedom of religion act when the majority do not want it? Even if you pass it, how do you enforce it?


The Lebanese are busy started to kill each other again, backed by the Syrians and the Jordanians with the pot getting stirred up by the Israelis.

2007-06-14 10:16:01 · answer #2 · answered by Simon T 7 · 0 0

Depends on what you mean by "problem". Most countries (including the USA) are divided in some way, whether it's religious, political, economic, etc. How well the different factions interact determines if their differences are a problem or an acceptable circumstance.

Although eliminating these differences might seem logical because it might produce a more "harmonious" environment, human beings typically finds ways to disagree. Allowing established differences is often better than creating new ones.

2007-06-14 10:12:04 · answer #3 · answered by BC 6 · 1 0

there will be major bickering of where the borders would be, since they all are forms of islam, they mostlikely will all want areas that are particularly holy, like big mosks, and religious shrines.

p.s. this is where that whole civil war thng started, with the golden dome being blown up, remember?

2007-06-14 10:01:44 · answer #4 · answered by mrzwink 7 · 0 0

Mainly because they are all Muslim. Which means that who ever has the most guns is correct. The only way Muslims can get along is if they all belong to the same sect-and, no one wants to be in charge.

2007-06-14 10:04:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The 'problem' is that we have no right to just divide up a country like that.

2007-06-14 10:06:46 · answer #6 · answered by Sun: supporting gay rights 7 · 1 1

they hate each other
May need to be divided

2007-06-14 12:59:49 · answer #7 · answered by robert p 7 · 0 0

You go tell them!

2007-06-14 10:02:04 · answer #8 · answered by Bokito 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers