Comment by Juan C. — November 15, 2007 @ 12:48 pm

I’m not sure of the origins of Wahabbism, but that is how most Muslims I know regard it – a lunatic, fanatic fringe akin to followers of Pat Robertson or Fred Phelps.

Granted, most Muslims I know are left-leaning secular academic types who go to the mosque twice a year and can drink me under the table, but I think it’s reflective of the prevailing view.

Comment by tokin librul — November 15, 2007 @ 1:03 pm

I’m not a Morman, but have read the Book of Morman and known many as my friends. That’s quite a stretch, my friend. The comparison is much more like conventional Christianity and the extreme Christian Right. Both pick and choose the most violent and repressive scriptures from their Holy Books to justify their own violence and judgement of others.

Then there was this, from today’s Washington Post:

CAMP LIBERTY, Iraq — Senior military commanders here now portray the intransigence of Iraq’s Shiite-dominated government as the key threat facing the U.S. effort in Iraq, rather than al-Qaeda terrorists, Sunni insurgents or Iranian-backed militias.

In more than a dozen interviews, U.S. military officials expressed growing concern over the Iraqi government’s failure to capitalize on sharp declines in attacks against U.S. troops and Iraqi civilians. A window of opportunity has opened for the government to reach out to its former foes, said Army Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the commander of day-to-day U.S. military operations in Iraq, but “it’s unclear how long that window is going to be open.”

The lack of political progress calls into question the core rationale behind the troop buildup President Bush announced in January, which was premised on the notion that improved security would create space for Iraqis to arrive at new power-sharing arrangements. And what if there is no such breakthrough by next summer? “If that doesn’t happen,” Odierno said, “we’re going to have to review our strategy.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/14/AR2007111402524.html?wpisrc=newsletter

I’m so confused. :o(

Comment by Roger_Roger — November 15, 2007 @ 11:44 am

This is the chance you take, trolling the progressive boards, RR. Sooner or later, the reality starts to sink in.

Defining “fixing” Iraq is the hard part. Like defining “winning”. Doubtful we can every “win” by our historical definition. We can only decide the magnitude of our losses. Same with fixing…the cost to repair will only grow over time.

But this was never about “winning”….it was always about grabbing the $100 TT oil reserves that below to Big Oil. Until we, as Americans, realize the underlying motivation for this war, we will never understand why we aren’t planning on leaving anytime soon.

(R)eligion (O)f (P)eace. ROP.

Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — November 15, 2007 @ 12:14 pm

OK Mr. Persident, still making up cute little names, what a child.

Toaster, you probably much more about Islam than I do.

A Muslim professor told me that Wahabbism is due to a person name Wahab (?) who knew nothing about Islam and changed the traditional (1000 years) schools of Islam. Muslims call Wahabbism with contempt and as a mockery to followers of this current (Al-Qaeda) because it is like Christians following Phelps.

Thank you for that reference.

Comment by Rovian Stormtrooper Commander — November 15, 2007 @ 12:14 pm

Ahhhh, okay. Well, that makes sense. That definitely seems to be the Evangelical Christian philosophy in other areas, so why not the war they started in Iraq?

The million of Iraqis have died for suicide bombings? Huh?

Ah, a LGF TLA?

Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 15, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
eventually they trip over their own lies. can’t be helped, with so many to choose from.

Yes, and with regards to Faluja, let’s remember this golden oldie: “We had to destroy the village to save it.”