The "Spotlight: Islam analysis" supplied by the AP (CA Page A6 11/21/06) entitled "Regimes wary of Shiite power", brings into question whether the author (whomever it was) has made any effort to familiarize themselves with Mideast history before coming up with the faulted belief that peace in Iraq begins with Israeli peace (surrender?) with the Palestinians.
As the AP sees it, the enemies of Israel, the US, Britain and the entire Free World will suddenly become reliable friends of the West if only Israel is left at the tender mercy of the Arabs/Muslims – and in return, peace will reign over the Sunni/Shiite sectarian violence that is a result of the US invasion of Iraq. Nothing could be further from the truth. To the contrary, the absence of Israel would actually exacerbate tensions in the Mideast by encouraging Arab military adventurism that is currently held in check by Israel's overwhelming conventional military superiority.
Shiite Islam evolved into a religious formulation with the martyrdom of Husayn in 680. At this point, the division between the Shiite and what came to be known as the Sunni was set, and thousands of years of bloody conflict between the two feuding factions of Islam ensued – during the original biblical state of Israel, well before the modern state of Israel, and well before the US invasion of Iraq. Muslims may agree that they hate Jews/Israelis, but there is more than enough evidence that they hate each other even more.
Surrendering Israel to pacify Iran and Syria may allow the US and Britain to surrender Iraq with their heads held high, but it will do nothing to stop the Muslim sectarian violence. The only tangible outcome is that the global Jihadists will view the retreat as their greatest victory, and it will only serve to encourage them to continue assaulting the ever retreating boundaries of the democratic, non-Muslim West.
No comments:
Post a Comment