Tag Archive 'Iraq'

Jul 28 2008

Sunni vs. Shi'ite: Learning the difference

Published by Rich Pav under General

Here's how I keep them straight in my head.

  • I start with Iran by remembering the phrase, "She is from Iran." Iran is Shi'ite.
  • I recall the mistake McCain made saying that Iran was training al Qaeda. That is incorrect because al Qaeda is the opposite, Sunni.
  • Osama Bin Laden is from Saudi Arabia, which makes the country Sunni.
  • Most in the world are Muslims are the same as Saudi Arabia, Sunni.
  • Iraq is between Iran and Saudi Arabia, so they're approximately half Shi'ite and half Sunni, but they're politically closer to Iran, so a slight majority of Iraqis are Shi'ite.

How does that work for you?


Tags: , ,

Supposedly similar posts:

9 responses so far

Jul 23 2008

Obama, McCain and The Surge

Published by Rich Pav under General, News

First, let me appease those who come here for news about my family and me. Last Sunday while Tony had a soccer game, I took Andy to a local 子ども会 and brought my new camera along. (Seeing as how I bought the thing, I ought to use it once in a while.) A kodomo-kai isn't exactly a festival, and it's more than a party. I guess you could call it a "childrens' fair." Yeah, that's the ticket. There were games like "scoop up as many superballs as you can from a wading pool using a little scoop made of tissue paper before it disintegrates," "ring toss to win other kids' discarded toys," and "shooting gallery to win even more discarded toys." All the kids got yakisoba and shaved ice (kaki-goori), while the parents accompanying them got bupkis, not even water. I ate Andy's yakisoba after we went home because he didn't want it. It was very salty, but I was very hungry, having not eaten all day.

Andy and friends
Previous Next Close
Andy and friends
The superball scooping game thing
Previous Next Close
The superball scooping game thing

Next, onto Obama, McCain and the surge. I'll assume you know nothing about why there's far less violence in Iraq now as compared to 2006-2007. Here are the facts, and please correct me if I get anything wrong.

  • There are two sects of Muslims, Sunni and Shi'ite (pronounced "SHE-ite" not "shitty"). Iran and the Iraq governments are Shiite, as are a slight majority of Iraqis. Al Qaeda, Saudi Arabia and 90% of all Muslims in the world are Sunni. For centuries they've been killing each other over an argument about who has the right to rule over the religion, kind of like who gets to call himself the "pope," but it's a bit more complicated than that. At this point, I expect most people to give up reading. But congratulations, you already know more than McCain. All you need to do now is get shot down over enemy territory and spend a few years being tortured as a POW and you'd be more qualified than him to run for president.
  • Bloody ethnic cleansing has taken place throughout Iraq. We're talking wholesale torture and slaughter with victims in the thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, and both sides are guilty. Towns and neighborhoods have become segregated, and the cleansing is pretty much over. Note: This is one of the reasons why there is less violence now. Towns and neighborhoods are now segregated.
  • Second, some of the Sunni groups that used to be on al Qaeda's side fighting against the coalition troops decided to switch their alliance over to the occupational forces. Why? For security reasons, and because we're paying them. Note, they're Sunni, and the Iraqi government is Shi'ite. They're not fighting the government or the coalition troops for now. We're arming, training and paying them, and in return they're keeping the peace in their neighborhoods particularly by keeping al Qaeda out, but that doesn't mean they have given up fighting forever, only for now. Right now the occupation is probably the only thing keeping them from turning on the Iraqi government, and the government is very worried about them becoming a third power in Iraq. Nobody knows what will happen when we either stop paying them and/or leave. Note: These Sunni groups decided to give up their support for al Qaeda and side with the occupation before the surge. These switches of alliance are called Awakening Movements.
  • Third and last, we have The Surge of 2007. Note: The surge happened after most of the ethnic cleansing and awakening movements had already taken place. But this is not what the Bush Administration wants to admit, and even worse, just the other day McCain got it backwards! McCain got it backwards. You really need to understand why this is such a big deal. McCain says that not only did the surge cause a decrease in violence but it actually caused the Anbar awakening! NO!! WRONG!!

So if you're still with me and haven't scurried off to YouTube to watch videos of adorable kittens or people riding bicycles and skateboards into brick walls, we'll get to Obama's take on the matter, but first you have know that Obama opposed the surge. The other day, CBS News asked Obama if he knew then what he knows now, would he have approved the surge. Here was his answer:

If we have shifted away from the central front of terrorism as a consequence of enormous and continuing investments in Iraq, then that's a poor strategic choice.

Huh? But Senator Obama, don't you give any credit to the surge for the decrease in violence in Iraq?

No, no of course I have. There is no doubt that the extraordinary work of our U.S. forces has contributed to a lessening of the violence, just as making sure that the Sadr militia stood down or the fact that the Sunni tribes decided to flip and work with us instead of with al-Qaeda — something that we hadn't anticipated happening. All those things have contributed to a reduction in violence.

So on one hand you have McCain who doesn't understand what's going on in Iraq, and on the other hand Obama who understands that the surge is only one factor in the decrease in violence. As for me, I know which of the two I'd rather have as president.

P.S.In order to keep things simple, I didn't mention that the Mahdi Army, a Shi'ite militia possibly supported by Iran, is currently under a very tenuous cease fire agreement which is set to expire, and hopefully be renewed, in August 2008. When it's all put together, it becomes evident that violence in Iraq could flair up again if either the Mahdi Army or the participants in the Awakening Movements decide they're no longer satisfied with the way things are, or if any of the segregated towns or neighborhoods decide to expand their territory.

Tags: , , , , ,

Supposedly similar posts:

17 responses so far

Dec 18 2007

Alive In Baghdad Correspondent Killed

Published by Rich Pav under News

I guess I feel an affinity for the people who put out the Alive in Baghdad vlog because they go through the same steps I do–filming, editing, subtitling, uploading–only they're a lot better at it, and they have to dodge bullets and bombs, and deal with the loss of loved ones far too often. Whenever I watch their vlog, I imagine what it would be like if it were me behind the camera. That's what I think about sometimes when I'm commuting between work and home. In another part of the world right now, there are hundreds of thousands of everyday people living in hell, thanks to our moron of a president.

Ali Shafeya Al-Moussawi, a special correspondent for the Alive In Bagdad video podcast, was killed on December 14th, 2007, two days shy of his 23rd birthday. Read the full story here , and donating a few dollars to his family won't end all the suffering in Iraq, but it might help out one grieving mother a little. For her, I'll brew myself the next few cups of coffee and send her what I save by not visiting Starbucks.


Tags: ,

Supposedly similar posts:

4 responses so far

Aug 30 2007

Bush's plans for conquering the Middle East

Published by Rich Pav under General

What the hell has happened to the country I left 18 years ago? Who are these batshit insane people, and why are they hellbent on starting WWIII? I'm starting to think the left-wing conspiracy wackos who babble about the illuminati and their plans for world domination might be the ones most tuned into reality.

I hate to say it, but how's this any different than Hitler wanting to conquer Europe or Japan invading Asia? And think about this: how can these plans not include a military draft?

I wonder if this will make the mainstream news. As reported in the Huffington Post, General Wesley Clark recently had this utterly shocking conversation with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now. I know some of you don't like me talking politics, but my jaw hit the floor when I read this.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, let’s talk about Iran. You have a whole website devoted to stopping war.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Www.stopiranwar.com.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you see a replay in what happened in the lead-up to the war with Iraq — the allegations of the weapons of mass destruction, the media leaping onto the bandwagon?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.

I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

AMY GOODMAN: I’m sorry. What did you say his name was?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m not going to give you his name.

Tags: , , ,

Supposedly similar posts:

7 responses so far

Jul 18 2007

Supporting our Troops /sarcasm

Published by Rich Pav under News

Something I heard on the ABC News Nightline podcast while commuting to work this morning really, really pissed me off.

Over the past six years, some 22,500 soldiers have been discharged on grounds of “personality disorder” — a condition that can be alleged to have existed prior to their tour of duty — thus absolving the Pentagon of its obligation to provide their medical care and pay their benefits.

A six-month investigation by reporter Joshua Kors for the April 9th “The Nation” magazine learned of “multiple cases” in which “soldiers wounded in Iraq are suspiciously diagnosed as having a personality disorder, then prevented from collecting benefits.”

Veterans are told that they can either be diagnosed with PTSD and wait 6-9 months for a medical discharge or be diagnosed with a "personality disorder" and get discharged immediately. It's only after they sign the papers that they're told they're not only ineligible for veteran's benefits for life, but also they owe the government thousands of dollars because they have to pay back their enlistment bonus. Get the full story here.

You know what I'd like to see? Michael Moore start his own news network. There's so much going on that deserves more attention than Paris Hilton, David Beckham and Posh Spice.

Tags: , ,

Supposedly similar posts:

6 responses so far

Next »