WOW:Syria militants attack Hezbollah positions in Lebanon: FSA

[K-Xeroid]

Not as easy as you defined, differences amongst Iraqi Ayatolahs viz Sistani, Hassouni and Bourjourdi are open for public consumption and supporters of all the sides have killed each other. The differences of Imamat led to splitting up in to Zaidi, Ismaili & Ithna Ashari and further disintegrations with in. The many offshoots, Alewi, Nusayri, Beqthashi and Ahle haq even Bahai are for the same reason.

According to Pew research, global Shiets are between 9 to 13 % of overall Muslim population of the world. The small block of Shiet Muslim population is deeply divided since it is a small minority amongst huge Muslim population the differences do not come to surface because of its micro categorization by social and religious scholars.

The concept of Fatwas in Sunnite is extremely different from Shiets; it is only the advice of scholar on given issue keeping in mind the circumstances furthermore it is not binding for all. This provides the cushions for large and versatile Sunnite population from Saudi Arabia to Siberia and from Brunei to Bosnia as a coherent unit.

Sunnites are majorly in four School of thoughts and all of them are equally respected by all. Modern day Sunnite scholars use there references to decide the complex issues.

WoW ! Hey do you research lot on middle eastern subjects , Your all post was right on Bulls eye. All info is nicely collected , Do search on well known muslim tribes and different ruling periods , it is more interesting and explains alot about middle eastern problems.

 

[airmarshal]

I have always maintained that FSA is a terror group supported by enemies of Muslims. But whats most unfortunate is that to settle petty scores with Syria, influential Muslim countries are in league with the enemies of Muslims.

Of course, its not a coincidence that enemies of Israel are being attacked by FSA. FSA is funded and supported by friends of Israel. Is Syria falls, a potential enemy is eliminated in the neighborhood and then there is no stopping Isreal from massacring Palestinians and annexing lands illegally.

I wonder why Muslims are such idiots. They fight their enemy's war and die and call it jihad. No wonder Muslim nation are where they are! Humiliated and lacking any respect or dignity around the world.

 

[explorer9]

All regional countries are affected by the Sunni-Shiate conflict, countries are undermining each others rather than cooperating. Iran has to understand that it's not welcomed in the region which is mainly Arab world, and it has to mind it's own business. It's true that Iran has messed up coexistence of Sunni and Shia but it will be the biggest loser. Shia Arabs will get to the point when they will realize that they have been being used to fulfill Iranian agenda. Inshallah Sunnah and Shia will get along someday after this Iranian regime is gone.

What I understand after analyzing the rise of Emam Khomeini and the establishment of clerical regime by him in Iran has impacted the Shiet -Suiinte relationship with in Iran and greater Middle East, in three phases.

In the first phase, most of Sunnite within Iran and the greater Middle East supported the Khomeini led revolution and expected him to lead the Muslim world that has always been in search of charismatic leadership.

In the second phase, when Khomeini started to implement his policies and duly punished every voice of dissent who opposed the implementation of his brand of governing model. The minority Sunnites with in Iran were the most brutally suppressed, along with Bahai and anti Khomeini Shiet clerics (Ayatollah Shariatmandari, Ayatolah Ali Al Muntazri, Aytollah Shirazi to name a few) Sunnis mosques and Islamic schools were shut down, Sunnite name registration of babies were prohibited.

In the third phase Sunnite Muslim outside Iran started recognizing the anti Sunnite discriminatory policies of the clerical regime established by Khomeini; later Ayatollah Khamenei carried forward the same anti Sunnite policies initiated by Emam Khomeini and going on unabated till date.

Suffice to say that the policies of clerical regime in Iran have negatively impacted the Sunnite-Shiet relationship. The rise of anti Shiet sentiments in the Arab world in general and Muslim world in particular is the culmination of the policies of the Iranian regime.

 

[Feyen]

What I understand after analyzing the rise of Emam Khomeini and the establishment of clerical regime by him in Iran has impacted the Shiet -Suiinte relationship with in Iran and greater Middle East, in three phases.

In the first phase, most of Sunnite within Iran and the greater Middle East supported the Khomeini led revolution and expected him to lead the Muslim world that has always been in search of charismatic leadership.

you dont know what you are talking about. better stick it with your own country. sunnis directly attacked iran, united behind saddam, and arabs all over the M-E signed voluntarily to fight with iraq against iran. shitty analyze.

 

[anonymus]

WoW ! Hey do you research lot on middle eastern subjects , Your all post was right on Bulls eye. All info is nicely collected , Do search on well known muslim tribes and different ruling periods , it is more interesting and explains alot about middle eastern problems.

I would second that.

Even for well informed among Indians,there is hardly any knowledge about micro tribal differences among shia's and sunnis residing in middle east.Even i thought the differences that would be in their society (as there are difference in any society) would be based on Ashraf,Ajlaf and Arzal caste system as is followed in Subcontinent.

Did you worked in foreign services in Iran?

 

[Malik Alashter]

Hizbullah prevented Israel from achieving it's goals but FRA wiped out most of Bashar army which operated before the revolution:

4700 MBT
7000 APCs
3500 Artillery
800 MRLs
700 fighter jets/bombers
huge numbers of Ballistic missiles
4000 anti are guns
1000 anti air missile systems

You decide...

but the syrian army have never used all of its fire power against the terrorists wat so called fsa.

 

[anonymus]

but the syrian army have never used all of its fire power against the terrorists wat so called fsa.

Because possessing firepower does not guarantees it's employment.Third of all hardware in any decent Armed forces is in repairs and their are logistic problem of bringing large amount of firepower to concentrate on one point ( Unless the country is good in Integrated warfare).

Also assad has to defend a lot of targets so his assets too would be dispersed.


@BLACKEAGLE i initially mixed up posts and did not saw that it was you who have quoted the figure but the comment is valid as to where did you get these 4700 MBT figures.Even India fielding three tank armies has only 4017 tanks out of which 550 are painted rust.


The figure that you have quoted would make syria third larges army in the world 4700 tanks,3000 artillery and 700 planes??????????? seriously????

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

but the syrian army have never used all of its fire power against the terrorists wat so called fsa.

Actually, he used all his force until he turned to Scud missiles, you get on Youtube thousands of destroyed and seized equipment, those are only the ones that were filmed, so I would like you to picture how many of those were destroyed but not filmed. You my friend know that most Syrian territories are under FSA control except for few small areas and military bases which are being cleaned one by one.

 

[Malik Alashter]

When confronted with truth they resort to insults and racial slurs, Reported.

Truth, you call your absolute leis as as truth!!!! no wonder a nation build all about mere lies.

 

[Alshawi1234]

It is amazing how hypocritical some people can get. Would you like to reminded about how the Kuwaitis welcomed the allied forces? And how the Saudi force retreated from confrontation with Saddam's army until mama America came to save them. Yet somehow Saddam still managed to become a hero simply because he was anti Shia, just like his predecessors in history. I mean if Yazid who destroyed the Kaaba, killed over 1000 Sahabis and massacred the prophets family somehow managed to become a good guy, there is no doubt that Saddam is a "good" person according to these "historians". They totally disregard the 300,000+ killed and 3 million + forced into exile simply because Saddam was a "Sunni"(he was actually more secular, but still a criminal) and he was anti Iran. Seriously if you have beef with Iran go solve it yourselves, don't expect Iraqis to fight your war again for you like Saddam did.

Hassani has mentioned Sunnis being a majority 100 times now if I include his articles on SSC. So if Sunnis are 1.3 billion why are they so fearful that the Shias who have deviant an weak religion to "expand", after all no Sunnis would convert from the "real" Islam to shiaism.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

It is amazing how hypocritical some people can get. Would you like to reminded about how the Kuwaitis welcomed the allied forces? And how the Saudi force retreated from confrontation with Saddam's army until mama America came to save them. Yet somehow Saddam still managed to become a hero simply because he was anti Shia, just like his predecessors in history. I mean if Yazid who destroyed the Kaaba, killed over 1000 Sahabis and massacred the prophets family somehow managed to become a good guy, there is no doubt that Saddam is a "good" person according to these "historians". They totally disregard the 300,000+ killed and 3 million + forced into exile simply because Saddam was a "Sunni"(he was actually more secular, but still a criminal) and he was anti Iran. Seriously if you have beef with Iran go solve it yourselves, don't expect Iraqis to fight your war again for you like Saddam did.

Hassani has mentioned Sunnis being a majority 100 times now if I include his articles on SSC. So if Sunnis are 1.3 billion why are they so fearful that the Shias who have deviant an weak religion to "expand", after all no Sunnis would convert from the "real" Islam to shiaism.

You are lying here, no Muslims says that Yazid is a good guy, we don't take our religion from Moayiyah or Yazid but only from Quraan and Sahih Sunnah, BUT, we avoid talking about that incident to avoid fitnah among Muslims and partition them even more, so we say let Allah deal with them, I mean, what would we gain from recalling it other than more cursing and hatred?. Isn't it bad enough that Muslims got divided 1400 years ago to fuel it more today?

Plz let's just avoid making things up, and plz let us stop it here with this correction.

 

[Alshawi1234]

You are lying here, no Muslims says that Yazid is a good guy, we don't take our religion from Moayiyah or Yazid but only from Quraan and Sahih Sunnah, BUT, we avoid talking about that incident to avoid fitnah among Muslims and partition them even more, so we say let Allah deal with them, I mean, what would we gain from recalling it other than more cursing and hatred?. Isn't it bad enough that Muslims got divided 1400 years ago to fuel it more today?


Plz let's just avoid making things up, and plz let us stop it here with this correction.

Uhm, so we ignore history because exposing the truth may cause fitna? I am not making anything up, you're lack of knowledge of Islamic history does not mean I am lying. All these events are mentioned in both Sunni and Shia historic books. *Yazids army shot the Kaaba with the capulet during the siege of Mecca, when they entered Meddina they killed thousands, raped the women and looted the city.*

ALL our differences is because of that cursed history, there is no reason we should hide it, our misinformity about the events is what is causing fitna. How do you expect me as a Shia to respect the "Sahaba" who fought and killed not only the prophets family, but also each other.

I know Wikipedia isn't the best source, but it is always a good place to start.*
Battle of al-Harrah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you as a Muslim don't know these events, then I can't really blame you for hating Shias because they "insult the Sahaba" now of course these events I mentioned are minor compared to all the other events. *But of course the idea of "let's not dig into history" is implanted because Sunni scholars don't want people to be shocked when they find out the true history rather than the polished "happily ever after" stories the shieks preach in the mosques.*

Why do you think Egypt is extremely skeptical about Shiism? The truth is tens of thousand are converting, *Even shiek yusuf alqardawis own son converted, The son of abdulbasit abdulsamad also converted. *10,000 Egyptians in Kuwait converted (according to shiek zaghbi, the salafi shiek)*
I'm not here to make a religious debate, but you called me a lair, I can't accept that.
Anyways may Allah guide us all and end this fitna. Nobody is happy to see the middle east in the state it is in. *

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Uhm, so we ignore history because exposing the truth may cause fitna? I am not making anything up, you're lack of knowledge of Islamic history does not mean I am lying. All these events are mentioned in both Sunni and Shia historic books. *Yazids army shot the Kaaba with the capulet during the siege of Mecca, when they entered Meddina they killed thousands, raped the women and looted the city.*

ALL our differences is because of that cursed history, there is no reason we should hide it, our misinformity about the events is what is causing fitna. How do you expect me as a Shia to respect the "Sahaba" who fought and killed not only the prophets family, but also each other.

I know Wikipedia isn't the best source, but it is always a good place to start.*
Battle of al-Harrah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you as a Muslim don't know these events, then I can't really blame you for hating Shias because they "insult the Sahaba" now of course these events I mentioned are minor compared to all the other events. *But of course the idea of "let's not dig into history" is implanted because Sunni scholars don't want people to be shocked when they find out the true history rather than the polished "happily ever after" stories the shieks preach in the mosques.*

Why do you think Egypt is extremely skeptical about Shiism? The truth is tens of thousand are converting, *Even shiek yusuf alqardawis own son converted, The son of abdulbasit abdulsamad also converted. *10,000 Egyptians in Kuwait converted (according to shiek zaghbi, the salafi shiek)*
I'm not here to make a religious debate, but you called me a lair, I can't accept that.
Anyways may Allah guide us all and end this fitna. Nobody is happy to see the middle east in the state it is in. *

Look, I told you to stop it for a reason, I read the stories and I watched most Shia-Sunni interviews, therefore, what you said here is baseless. I read about them to know the truth and I think I know it, but I didn't read it to babble about it like you are doing here. I know hoe this debate is going to end, so let's just leave it.

 

[King Solomon]

I don't think Yazid should be singularly blamed for sectarianism in Islam. If you look objectively, Yazid was a brilliant statesman. It is in his time that the empire was united under a "caliphate", with an organised bureaucracy and army like the Byzantine and Persians. Almost all the Caliphs and/or Amir-ul-Mumeenens after the death of Prophet Muhammad were aggressive warmongers anyway, Yazid was no different. Also, don't forget that Muawiya ibn Abu Sufiyan and Yazid were very successful and founded the largest Islamic empire in history - Umayyad empire.

Whatever your belief is, it is not wise to be divided on what happened 1000 years ago

 

[K-Xeroid]

I would second that.

Even for well informed among Indians,there is hardly any knowledge about micro tribal differences among shia's and sunnis residing in middle east.Even i thought the differences that would be in their society (as there are difference in any society) would be based on Ashraf,Ajlaf and Arzal caste system as is followed in Subcontinent.

Did you worked in foreign services in Iran?

I've never visited Iran , But Pakistan itself is more closer to Iran that we share many of our multi cultural traditions , In Pakistan, sub-continental issues are being always preferred on middle eastern issues in historical books thats why an average citizen cannot actually understand these issues beyond the geo-political or sectarian subjects . Ashraf , Ajlaf caste system are no doubt are regional traditions and have nothing to do with Islam, Its a completely sub-continental subject . Islam completely denies the supremacy of any human being on others .
As far as tribal system are concerned then , different muslim tribes are sub-divided in further sub-tribes . Shias were once was known as Group or followers of Ali R.A , but then afterward some harsh inter tribal conflicts over caliphate system have created differences among muslims , It consist of various chapters and incidents and cannot be concluded in just one post . But today shia-ism itself is also divided due to tribal system , as their Imam are being chosen on the blood linkage with Fatmid tribe . Hence the same practice is not followed among sunnis , but they do follow tribal linkage system with a different theology .