Support NeoGAF

[OttomanScribe]

Still, this would be a great opportunity for the US government to install another dictatorship partial to the US much like they did in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Nicaragua etc. etc.

fixed it for ya

 

[Zapages]

Yeah. It doesn't look particularly hopeful in general, and people don't like that.

I was reading about the different political parties in Yemen that are the basis for the protests against Saleh...

One of the largest ones is.. wait for.. an alliance between Salafis and Socialists. I mean really?!?! What is going to happen once Saleh falls? The Socialist atheists will hold hands with the semi-Sunni hardline extreme literalists and skip off into the sunset.

Part of me worries that the region is more heading towards West Africa than it is towards South East Asia. Anyone else wish the Ottomans hadn't fell?

raises hand, but the rise of Wahabism/Nationalism caused the down fall of the Ottomans. *sad but true*

This is an interesting article how secularism could still be achieved without the abolishment of the Caliphate: http://arama.hurriyet.com.tr/arsivnews.aspx?id=-616320

 

[Rad Agast]

 

[OttomanScribe]

raises hand, but the rise of Wahabism/Nationalism caused the down fall of the Ottomans. *sad but true*

I think Nationalism more than Wahabism, the Ottomans new how to deal with the Wahhabis... heads on pikes outside Istanbul.

The Uthmani Khilafa was lost as soon as the Young Turk movement began. The Armenian genocide, the emphasis on Turks over everyone else,t he idea that 'progress' was inseparable from 'Westernness' and all that came with that spelled the doom of the region.

There is still hope for Turkey though

As to secularism, Islam doesn't need it.

Secularism is a means for governing different religious minorities in the same cultural context. It was an idea aimed for managing Europe's religious differences. The Muslim world has never had anything like the kind of sectarian conflict (despite appearances) as Europe. The Islamic system manages differences through autonomy, 'to you your religion, and to me mine'. 40% of the Ottoman armies were Christian. The Jews and the Christians lived in separate communities, in many ways self-governed. In this context, secularism is not needed to stop Muslims dictating to Christians their religious conduct, because they wouldn't do so anyway. At least in theory.

 

[Zapages]

I can't elaborate, I'm just speculating.

Even if all the revolutions are fair and just, it is unsettling to see such a troubled region in further turmoil. In an ideal world this will all get settled, the people will be happy, corruption will be curbed and progress will be made. The problem lies in the fact we don't live in anything approaching an ideal world. We don't really know what the end result of all this upheaval will be. At the moment, it's a series of internal conflicts but what if that boils over into something bigger? The constant shia / sunni references are worrisome too.

I guess what I was trying to say is that I expect a lot of people are just sitting back and watching at the moment, with very little useful commentary to add other than "ooh, this is pretty bad, isn't it".

Only the Wahabis/Salafi are really anti Shia. Most Muslims that I know including myself don't view Shia as anything other than Muslims who are not too different then Sunni Muslims.

Basically I am saying Wahabis/Salafis are just fear mongering.

 

[Zapages]

I think Nationalism more than Wahabism, the Ottomans new how to deal with the Wahhabis... heads on pikes outside Istanbul.

The Uthmani Khilafa was lost as soon as the Young Turk movement began. The Armenian genocide, the emphasis on Turks over everyone else,t he idea that 'progress' was inseparable from 'Westernness' and all that came with that spelled the doom of the region.

There is still hope for Turkey though

So true about emphasis on progress being inseparable from Westernism.

The problem that I see right now in Turkey. I have students from Turkey in my class, they still call themselves Muslims and want to learn more about Islam, but then they get confused or frustrated from what I can tell.

 

[OttomanScribe]

Only the Wahabis/Salafi are really anti Shia. Most Muslims that I know including myself don't view Shia as anything other than Muslims who are not too different then Sunni Muslims.

True indeed.

The standard Sunni position is that they are Muslims who are just misled. They aren't non-Muslims and they have all the rights of other Muslims. They are to be condemned for transgressing Allah's command to not form sects, but otherwise they are not at fault, at least not your average Joe Shia who knows no better.

The Salafi/Wahhabis run around giving takfir (declaring them non-Muslim) and stirring up stuff. Also the US uses fear of Iran as a powerful tool to keep the region scared. The conflict between Sunnah and Shia only comes around when there is resources at stake. In Baghdad the Shia and Sunnah would mix freely and intermarry. Then the Sunni were armed and called the police and the Shia were armed and called the army. Next thing you know Baghdad is a criss cross of walled and gated neighbourhoods mortar shells thrown between them.

The problem that I see right now in Turkey. I have students from Turkey in my class, they still call themselves Muslims and want to learn more about Islam, but then they get confused or frustrated from what I can tell.

Your average Turk hasn't forgotten the Ottomans. There are parts of Istanbul (Fatih district) where you see Turbans and Niqabs everywhere. There are many Islamic movements in Turkey, both political and religious (the students of Sayyid Nursi on one hand and the Naqshabandiyya on the other, more orthodox, one). However the army and its pocket elite still cling to Attaturk like their wealth depended on it. Which to some extent it does.

The majority of Turks want Islamic rule, and they don't like the way the country has gone. However the army has too much power still, and they are 'secularists' (most traditional secularists would balk at some of the things they do) and so men wearing Turbans get bashed and arrested etc.

Whenever there is an election, they elect an Islamic party. Then bang, the army's influence comes in, sometimes as a coup.

This can only last for so long. Turkey is largely stable and has a large army, there is hope there insha'Allah.

 

[BattleMonkey]

And if the revolution succeeds you think the new government will look kindly on the US naval base when they didn't do a single thing to help them out?

What is the Navy supposed to do now? Start lobbing cruise missiles at them? Their hands are tied, and they have limited capability to do anything to help unless a full scale invasion were to be ordered to fight the opposition which could be a total disaster in itself. Really none of this is going to happen. Anything the US can do is to provide pressure using political means.

 

[Pathetic Basement Virgin]

No one is paying attention, because this time the US and Co. don't want to speak against their allies too loudly. Lucky for them to have the situation in Japan.

So you're saying U.S. creates earthquake in Japan to cover for allies atrocities?!

 

[OttomanScribe]

So you're saying U.S. creates earthquake in Japan to cover for allies atrocities?!

New conspiracy time!

Damn space lizards.

 

[markot]

I think Nationalism more than Wahabism, the Ottomans new how to deal with the Wahhabis... heads on pikes outside Istanbul.

The Uthmani Khilafa was lost as soon as the Young Turk movement began. The Armenian genocide, the emphasis on Turks over everyone else,t he idea that 'progress' was inseparable from 'Westernness' and all that came with that spelled the doom of the region.

There is still hope for Turkey though

As to secularism, Islam doesn't need it.

Secularism is a means for governing different religious minorities in the same cultural context. It was an idea aimed for managing Europe's religious differences. The Muslim world has never had anything like the kind of sectarian conflict (despite appearances) as Europe. The Islamic system manages differences through autonomy, 'to you your religion, and to me mine'. 40% of the Ottoman armies were Christian. The Jews and the Christians lived in separate communities, in many ways self-governed. In this context, secularism is not needed to stop Muslims dictating to Christians their religious conduct, because they wouldn't do so anyway. At least in theory.

Wow.

History must be great with those blinkers on.

 

[NEO0MJ]

So you're saying U.S. creates earthquake in Japan to cover for allies atrocities?!

It's true! I saw it in a movie once!

 

[OttomanScribe]

Wow.

History must be great with those blinkers on.

Step into my ring friend

I'm always down for a historical discussion.

What is it that you disagree with? That the region was more stable under Ottoman rule (so much so that the Hashemite rebellion was only achieved through bribery and even then was a close run thing)?

That the Young Turk movement played a critical role in the Armenian genocide (or whatever people want to call it, ethnic cleansing at best) and in general marked the end of Ottoman influence. That is along with the war with Russians.

Or maybe that the Ottoman system was extremely successful at stopping inter-religion conflict, so much so that large amounts of Jews fled Europe to go there. So much so that some Muslims even tried to pretend to be Christians to get access to power.

Or are you going to debate the fact that Christianity has a mass of different sects, all quite historically antagonistic to each other. While Islam only really has 3 main groups, with orthodoxy generally standard throughout, and the large group making up something like 92% of the religion?

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

What is the Navy supposed to do now? Start lobbing cruise missiles at them? Their hands are tied, and they have limited capability to do anything to help unless a full scale invasion were to be ordered to fight the opposition which could be a total disaster in itself. Really none of this is going to happen. Anything the US can do is to provide pressure using political means.

They could start by protecting the peaceful protesters. Fucking insane that our Navy and our Marines are there in Bahrain, doing nothing, while peaceful protesters are getting slaughtered in the streets by US hardware. So shameful that we can just stand by and watch our allied countries commit such barbarism.

 

[Rad Agast]

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/120006.pdf

"I am deeply concerned by the situation in Bahrain. I have called the Foreign Minister to express my views directly, and to underline once again that there is no alternative to dialogue. The Government must do all it can to initiate a political process with concrete steps that answers the legitimate demands and aspirations of the Bahrainis. This is the only way forward to restore lasting stability and security.

I have repeatedly urged all sides to enter into a meaningful dialogue without delay and without preconditions.

I reiterate my call on all sides to exercise the maximum restraint. According to many reports, the use of force by security personnel has been continuous. Several people have died and there have been many injured. I regret the violence and this loss of life and, on behalf of the EU, present my condolences to the families of all the victims. The human rights and fundamental freedoms of all Bahrain’s people must be respected.

As I have stressed to Foreign Minister Al Khalifa, dialogue must replace violence now."

 

[BattleMonkey]

They could start by protecting the peaceful protesters. Fucking insane that our Navy and our Marines are there in Bahrain, doing nothing, while peaceful protesters are getting slaughtered in the streets by US hardware. So shameful that we can just stand by and watch our allied countries commit such barbarism.

If only it was that simple

 

[markot]

Step into my ring friend

I'm always down for a historical discussion.

What is it that you disagree with? That the region was more stable under Ottoman rule (so much so that the Hashemite rebellion was only achieved through bribery and even then was a close run thing)?

That the Young Turk movement played a critical role in the Armenian genocide (or whatever people want to call it, ethnic cleansing at best) and in general marked the end of Ottoman influence. That is along with the war with Russians.

Or maybe that the Ottoman system was extremely successful at stopping inter-religion conflict, so much so that large amounts of Jews fled Europe to go there. So much so that some Muslims even tried to pretend to be Christians to get access to power.

Or are you going to debate the fact that Christianity has a mass of different sects, all quite historically antagonistic to each other. While Islam only really has 3 main groups, with orthodoxy generally standard throughout, and the large group making up something like 92% of the religion?

I cant be assed to debate all this stuff on the internets anymore, it gets boring arguing with people who never change their mind (I am as guilty of that as anyone else), I also dont want to derail this thread.

 

[OttomanScribe]

I cant be assed to debate all this stuff on the internets anymore, it gets boring arguing with people who never change their mind (I am as guilty of that as anyone else), I also dont want to derail this thread.

In general I try to change my mind if I'm proven wrong. It is an integrity thing, one can't come into history as a polemicist and keep any credibility. If you change your mind I'm here.

 

[Rad Agast]

Just saw two interviews, one by an injured woman who was shot while she was standing inside her house (according to her, they shot at her from out of the house) and she said they all had blue vests on (not military uniform). They were shouting insults as they were shot her (eye injury in the video, not sure if she was shot in any other part of the body).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhYMpk2HLyQ

The second video was an interview with a medical nurse who was hit in the kidney area by the butt of a shotgun (couldn't hear clearly but I think it was military personnel). They were heading out responding to a distress call but apparently it was an ambush?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxqs7gFItns

 

[Rad Agast]

In general I try to change my mind if I'm proven wrong. It is an integrity thing, one can't come into history as a polemicist and keep any credibility. If you change your mind I'm here.

Can you take your Khalifa discussion to another thread please? I know you might be confused since Bahrain is ruled by Al Khalifa but they're not the same. The same crap popped up in the previous revolution thread(s).

 

[7aged]

Can you take your Khalifa discussion to another thread please? I know you might be confused since Bahrain is ruled by Al Khalifa but they're not the same. The same crap popped up in the previous revolution thread(s).

seconded

 

[Kaako]

Where the fuck is the media coverage!?

 

[Rad Agast]

The Telegraph, Bahrain: takeover of hospitals 'violation of international law'

Navi Pillay, the UN rights chief, said in a statement she was "deeply alarmed by the escalation of violence by security forces in Bahrain, in particular the reported takeover of hospitals and medical centres" in the country, which she called a "shocking and a blatant violation of international law."

"Governments are obliged to protect the rights to life and health of the people, but we are hearing very credible reports indicating that they are in fact obstructing access to such rights," said Miss Pillay.

She revealed that her office has received calls and emails from individuals in Bahrain, who are "terrified about the armed forces' intentions."

The funny and sad thing at the same time, last night I heard a Bahraini government official say to BBC Arabic that they have "liberated the hospital from the doctors and the people". Even the interviewer asked him to repeat the statement again since he thought he miss-spoke (and yes, he did repeat the same shit).

 

[Rad Agast]

Where the fuck is the media coverage!?

A BBC correspondent was held at Manama airport for 20 hours and then refused entry (had to head to Dubai). The same happened to an Australian reporter.

They are letting reporters in, they're just picking and choosing who they let in (to control the message I guess). The current BBC correspondent in Manama can't leave her Hotel as far as I know.

Crackdown on Bahrain opposition

BBC news, the hospital take-over situation.

 

[Slayven]

wrong thread

 

[BattleMonkey]

Where the fuck is the media coverage!?

Charlie Sheen said something, no time for the middle east

 

[Rubashov]

A BBC correspondent was held at Manama airport for 20 hours and then refused entry (had to head to Dubai). The same happened to an Australian reporter.

They are letting reporters in, they're just picking and choosing who they let in (to control the message I guess). The current BBC correspondent in Manama can't leave her Hotel as far as I know.

Crackdown on Bahrain opposition

BBC news, the hospital take-over situation.

And they expelled the CNN correspondent from the country.

 

[theignoramus]

Where the fuck is the media coverage!?

On Aljazeera english.

 

[Drkirby]

Is Bahrain only a US Ally? No one else?

 

[Kaako]

A BBC correspondent was held at Manama airport for 20 hours and then refused entry (had to head to Dubai). The same happened to an Australian reporter.

They are letting reporters in, they're just picking and choosing who they let in (to control the message I guess). The current BBC correspondent in Manama can't leave her Hotel as far as I know.

Crackdown on Bahrain opposition

BBC news, the hospital take-over situation.

I said damn, that pretty crazy.

 

[numble]

Can you take your Khalifa discussion to another thread please? I know you might be confused since Bahrain is ruled by Al Khalifa but they're not the same. The same crap popped up in the previous revolution thread(s).

.

 

[Rad Agast]

http://amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/report/evidence-bahraini-security-forces’-brutality-revealed-2011-03-16

Amnesty International today revealed evidence of the Bahraini security forces’ systematic use of excessive force in cracking down against protesters, as fresh violence left as many as eight people dead.

In a new report released today, Bloodied but Unbowed: Unwarranted State Violence against Bahraini Protesters, the organization documents how security forces used live ammunition and extreme force against protesters in February without warning and impeded and assaulted medical staff trying to help the wounded.

"It is alarming to see the Bahraini authorities now again resorting to the same tactics that they used against protesters in February but on an even more intensive scale,” said Malcolm Smart, Amnesty International’s director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“It appears that the government has decided that the way to deal with protests is through violent repression, a totally unsustainable position and one which sets an ominous example in a region where other governments are also facing popular calls for change."

"The authorities must exercise proper control over the security forces, uphold and protect the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly, including the right to peaceful protest."

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

the organization documents how security forces used live ammunition and extreme force against protesters in February without warning and impeded and assaulted medical staff trying to help the wounded.

Absolutely sickening.

 

[Rad Agast]

For my fellow GAFers who ask what's going on with the U.S.A and all this.

Kuwait Times: Bahrain crisis exposes US-Saudi rift

Time.com: Saudis' Bahrain Intervention: Who Cares What Washington Thinks?

The Time blog post is from a couple of days back but both should give you guys a good idea about the current situation.

 

[Firest0rm]

When I say the Shia only came to the region in that period I was referring to the Safavid style of 'Shi'ism', before the Safavids, Shi'ism was almost indistinguishable from Sunni Islam, with the Shafi'i especially being told that they were Shia. The Qarmatians are an exception to this, an example of Shi'ism that one would hope the Shia don't endorse on the whole.

The creation of a solidified 'Shi'ism' with the doctrine it has today, along with its sectarian aspects, is a creation of the Safavids. Prior to the Safavids, there were many people described as 'Shia' with names like Uthman and Umar. One cant talk about Shi'ism before this, in any real way, because historically to be Shia usually referred to someone with a particularly strong love of Ahlul Bayt. Jafar As-Sadiq and Imam Shafi'i were both called Shia, and Jafar As-Sadiq is claimed by Sunnis and Shia both. This is because this sectarian stuff is a recent thing, a creation of the Safavids to justify rebellion against the Uthmani Khilafa. People look back to the first fitna and use it as a way to justify their beefs.

As someone asked, how far back can we go? The issue here is that people are giving the kind of respect to borders and sects that in general the Arabs don't. There is this kind of weird attempt to create a solidified sense of a nationalism that simply doesn't work in the context of the Middle East.

In other things, one of my uni lecturers said 'the Saudis knew road to Bahrain well, as of an evening they cross the border to make for the brothels and bars of the nation'.

[sigh], I don't have the time or will to sit through this kind of discussion. But I just want to mention two quick points. 1) Jafar As-Sadiq wrote the foundations of what is Ja'afari Shi'ism today and it is not just someone with a particularly strong love of Ahlul Bayt. Safavid influence might have added a few new practices (one of which is Latmiya) but the basis of Ja'afari Shi'ism is still the same. 2) Nothing that you have said addresses the point that the Shi'ite majority was always there from a very early time. Just because their views were changed from Qaramita to Ja'afari Shi'ism and then "Safavid" Shi'ism (as you imply, even though it was Arab Shi'ites from the countries I mentioned earlier that developed Safavid state's theology) doesn't mean there was "ethnic stacking". Shi'ism in one form or another was the majority.

That said, I don't want to contribute to the derailing of this thread any further.

 

[ACESandEIGHTS]

Dammit! Why don't sovereign states hand over the reins to Shi'a malcontents so we can have 15 different Islamic "Republics" like Iran??!?!!?

The world is so unfair.

 

[Rad Agast]

According to a phone call from a doctor at Salmaniya Hospital in Manama to BBC Arabic, 30 medical personnel have been missing since the army siege of all medical facilities in Bahrain. He witnessed an arrest of a Bahraini surgeon inside the surgery room.

They've been surrounded by the army for the past 48 hours now, injured are not allowed in and any one who tries to leave the hospital is arrested. They're short on food (and medical supplies? can't remember this part).

 

[Rad Agast]

Dammit! Why don't sovereign states hand over the reins to Shi'a malcontents so we can have 15 different Islamic "Republics" like Iran??!?!!?

The world is so unfair.

So far, the only side in this conflict who have been pushing the sectarian angle is the Bahraini government and it's supporters. Some of the protesters leading figures arrested recently are Sunni so please stop with this BS and try to look at the big picture more objectively.

Hell, if you go through the history of the political situation in Bahrain you'd notice one common theme and that's the government's love to stick to the sectarian issue and inciting divide between it's own people. Bahrain is not the only one playing this game, pretty much all the other countries in the region have pulled the same type of propaganda at one time or another (and still do so today to some extent).

 

[shinobi602]

Found this on another forum, supposedly from Bahrain:

Hello everyone,

I came here to ask all the members of this forum to help us. You have no idea how bad it is out here, those pictures really don't describe how cruel and horrible the government. I came here to ask you all to help us, show your love and support, wherever you are, we need you to spread the word among all your friends to show the whole world the true picture of the ruling family.

We have made this link, and we're covering live 24/7 everything that's happening in Bahrain, in English, so everyone can read, filled with pictures and videos.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/-The-Bahraini-Revolution-/147454665314585

So please join and send it to all your friends. People from Kuwait, Iraq, Lebanon and Oman went out and protested against what's happening in Bahrain. Some people in New Zealand are doing the same thing soon, and in Califorina.

So again please publish the page to all your friends and help us with your prayers.

 

[Pristine_Condition]

For my fellow GAFers who ask what's going on with the U.S.A and all this.

Kuwait Times: Bahrain crisis exposes US-Saudi rift

Time.com: Saudis' Bahrain Intervention: Who Cares What Washington Thinks?

The Time blog post is from a couple of days back but both should give you guys a good idea about the current situation.

Well, the advantage of being the American President is you always come into any relationship with that perception of strength as the leader of a major world power on your side. This naturally works to your advantage as long as you aren't silly enough to squander it away in a moment of thoughtless prot.....

...oh. Shit.

 

[Zenith]

Dammit! Why don't sovereign states hand over the reins to Shi'a malcontents so we can have 15 different Islamic "Republics" like Iran??!?!!?

The world is so unfair.

If I didn't know any better I'd say you were glad the government was slaughtering protesters.

 

[BlueTsunami]

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTI4NTY1Njcy

Senator John Kerry, the Democrat who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the United States was still on the same page as its Saudi allies. "I understand what they are doing. I think they are pushing for a dialogue. They're looking for reform. It is not an occupation," he told Reuters. - Reuters

Yikes.

 

[shinobi602]

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTI4NTY1Njcy



Yikes.

I hope people won't be naive anymore and stop thinking "Oh! We should do something to help them in their fight for democracy!"

The sides were drawn long ago, and you're seeing in fruition before your eyes. They don't give two shits about "democracy".

 

[shinobi602]

Shit the Youtube comments on some of these videos are truly disgusting...

Sheia's = the devil in its nastiest form 

 

[Purkake4]

Democracy isn't a magical cure that will make every country stable and peaceful. See: Iraq.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

It's all about a collective/stragetic alliance in those Middle Eastern countries, like Saudi Arabia. As long as the U.S. gets its oil and Saudi Arabia pretends to crack down on terrorists, then everyone will continue to live in their delusional world.

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

Democracy isn't a magical cure that will make every country stable and peaceful. See: Iraq.

I don't see how killing peaceful protesters with foreign troops is going to do anything to add to that peace and stability.

 

[Purkake4]

I don't see how killing peaceful protesters with foreign troops is going to do anything to add to that peace and stability.

I was replying to shinobi602.

 

[theignoramus]

http://www.kuwaittimes.net/read_news.php?newsid=MTI4NTY1Njcy



Yikes.

damn, Kerry just penned an op-ed expressing his support for a Libyan NFZ because he found it intolerable that Gadaffi should continue to be able to slaughter his own people. Looks like he couldnt find it in himself to offer similar words of condemnation to the government of Bahrain.

 

[Dyno]

Again, U.S. support hinges directly upon how much oil the regime is delivering. Talk of and support of democracy dies when faced with that reality.