Shia and Sunni: Religious or Political Divergence

Discussion in 'Science & History' started by Irishone21, May 12, 2007.

  1. Irishone21

    Irishone21 Registered Member

    I can't decide whether Shia and Sunni are a result of a religious or political divergence. Maybe, it's a little bit of both. To add to the problem, Americans are always compelled to apply their perfected democracy elsewhere, as it, in the mind of Americans, contains no flaw, and must be the one and only government worldwide. Nevertheless, when talking about the problem at hand, Sunni and Shia sectarianism, rather than viewing their situation as a religious divergence, like I usually do, in a protestant versus catholic frame of mind, I will view their situation in a federalists versus republican mentality.

    First let’s cover the basics. Considering Shia has taken control of the government, Sunni is compelled to use violence against the opposing side, for in their country, violence is more effective then persuasion. This is because of their lack of liberty and democracy.

    All we are doing is adding fuel to the fire. Our presence is decreasing their chances at liberty, thus increasing the violence. The less liberty a country has, the more violence, vice versa.

    Since the Sunni's represent the minority, despite being the majority in terms of percentage, they are fighting for power.

    Let’s apply the Shias to the republicans, and the Sunnis to the federalist. We will place the Shias as the Republicans, for they are in power, plus they followed the hereditary path of religious importance, and republicans followed the enlightened path of policital importance. In addition, federalists were in power before republicans, as Sunnis were in power before Shias.

    If their country were free from excessive imperialism, and military force, then the Sunni's (the federalist) would be dictating their strength of number, in order to minimize the power of the Shia (the republicans). In addition, Sunni's (the federalist) would be attacking the beliefs of the Shia (the republicans) in order to arouse competition between the two. Within the debate, the Sunnis would be defending their arguments vehemently as means of persuasion. However, without democracy, this debate would result in war.

    If they had a democracy, this situation would be far more progressive. It would be different because those in power, and those acting as minority, would consider the way of the system as fair game, as it was a result of vote. The Sunnis would not be disheartened, for they would not be completely out of power. The Sunnis would act on their empowerment in their establishment outside of the majority, at their less influential, but still essential spot. The Sunnis would be expressing their arguments in order to solicit a reform in which seeks to convince the Shia's to change their policy, or political platform. This may initially lead to violence, but once time goes on, they will realize the importance of political figures, thus, without acknowledging it, they will become a perfect emulation of the American democracy.

    Unfortunately, their country is not free nor does it have an actual democracy. Therefore, the situation is quite different. Considering it is rooted at religion, which is more rigid then politics, virulent anger and hatred is provoked by radicals, thus creating Holy War, with no end in sight. In addition to the problem, their situation involves family feuds, therefore, vengeance as oppose to justice, is viewed as a necessity. It is as if Saddam Hussein were a Democrat, and Bush were a Republican, and they both lived in the same country. Since the Sunnis' are the minority and they believe that their religion is right, they contend against the Shia, believing they are better, regardless of political power. Since they both differ in religious belief, it is impossible for one to gain the support of the other. Therefore, rather then convince the other side, a hopeless and to say the least arduous task, they fight one another. Rather then thrive to obtain a democracy, where the Sunni's may have better luck at the next/first election, they attack one another. The first thing that comes to their heads is violence and warfare. If Sunni lacks any position of power, he fights the government. Shia on the other hand, defends her crown.

    If it was America, one side would be trying to win over the other through principle or they would be seeking ways, through political strategy, to rise to power. These strategies may include assassination of association, or just defending ones basis of argument. American competition involves both offensive and defensive strategies in which do not resort to violence, but may be mentally straining to both sides. Through these strategies, the minority may assume power and become the majority. We act this way, without acting violently, because, we are more experienced with freedom and democracy.

    Don't view Iraq as hopeless though. If in fact we negotiate properly, acting as middle man to both Sunni and Shia, we may be able to attain peace in Iraq. By using political explanation in addition to infiltration of the Koran (emphasizing the belief in one God, acknowledging Muhammad as a prophet) then maybe, the conflict can be resolved. After all, communication is the key resolution.

    One may argue, that if religion is the most important thing in your life, you will not compromise your beliefs. This is true, however, with optimism it can be overcome. If we go in with the attitude that they will not compromise, chances are they will not compromise. We must approach peace talks, holding true to our hearts, the belief that their is one God, and Mohammad is the prophet. This is no job for an unbeliever. In addition to the main creed, we must adopt segments of the Koran which stress Love, not war. In doing this, both sides will come to the realization that war is unnecessary, thus together, we will move towards peace. These people are humans and they do have hearts. Within each heart, is the envision of "better days". Therefore, if we can befriend both sides, this strategy, may very well, work out better than expected. Reason alone will not deter their hostility. Rather, in this mission, faith, and the power of Love, is our only hope.
     

  2. Has anyone ever told you that you make really long posts?

    I bolded a contradiction in your post. Please explain.

    Here is how I see the Sunnis and the Shiites... Sunnis were in power for decades in Iraq and think they should return to that position. Sunnis are a small minority of the Iraqi population similar to the afro American population of America.

    Imagine being liberated from afro American domination for decades...

    The problem with the Shiites and the Sunnis aren't so much internal but moreso external... While Sunnis are a small minority the Sunni tribe(s) run Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and are significant within the ME in power. On the other hand the Shiites are the overwhelming majority population wise... Iran is Persian but Shiite moreso than any other neighboring nation.

    In the past Kuwait was invaded by their Sunni brother and Saudi Arabia, also Sunni led allowed America on its sacred land to fight the bad brother minority. Now we have a small problem with Iran and Iraq having a Shiite majority in government control... Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, Sunni nations do not like the idea of Shiite leadership that may compound Iran's Persion Shiite power so the neighborhood demands the Sunni minority in Iraq be at least equal to the Shiite majority so Iran isn't made stronger.

    Terrorists desire to be on the side of the winner of a battle they started between the Sunnis and Shiites in order to instal their view of government along with some reward for their effort in the form of a oil income funded war center to fight the infidel America and Israel... The terrorists that attacked America were Sunni but the terror that could destroy Israel and control the ME oil supply may be either Persion in the face of Iran or Sunni in the face of terrorists backing of the Sunnis with a little help from the neighborhood.

    There is absolutely no parallel to American political parties present or past. The only possible resolution that will result in peace for the ME is a democratic government where Sunni's rights are protected equally to the pleasure to the neighborhood. We leave the Persions and the oil rich Sunnis of the neighborhood will intervein... if we stay they will do the same... the only hope is fair democratic representation of all three major tribes in Iraq in an open government that represents each sect equally while joining together to expel the terrorist that cause them to continue to fight.
    edited to add:
    Then again, some think that the Sunnis want all or nothing and if this is in fact their position they must be brutally corrected while not upsetting the neighbors.
     
  3. Factinista

    Factinista New Member

    The Sunni-Shia split is a political dispute framed in a religious context. The same as the Catholic-Protestant split of the 1500's. The individual circumstances of these two situations are different, but the underlying form is the same, it is a battle over who has political control. At the time both of these religions split religious control equaled political control.
     
  4. pikatore

    pikatore Registered Member

    It's a bit of both.
     
  5. Irishone21

    Irishone21 Registered Member

    To my knowledge there are more Sunni's than there are Shias... The percentages seem to change though.
     
  6. ChrisLDuncan

    ChrisLDuncan Guest

    I suggest that you read the book No God but God by Reza Azlan, it's a pretty good book on the subject of Islam
     
  7. ermcool

    ermcool Registered Member

    If were gonna have theocracy I'll support it, as long as you accept the fact that I'm devinely inspired, and am rightful head of state.
     
  8. rozzlapeed

    rozzlapeed Guest

    The majority of Muslims worldwide are Sunni, but in specific countries like Iraq and Iran, the majority is Shia.

    The driving force behind the sectarian violence in Iraq is a dispute over who controls the second-largest oil reserve in the world.

    EDIT: Come to think of it, that's probably the driving force behind all the violence in Iraq, including the non-sectarian varieties.
     
  9. Irishone21

    Irishone21 Registered Member

    Its all about the riches you say... I think it depends on the person, however that is largely the problem in Iraq, oil. But it is all rooted at power...

    Ermcool your hilarious. Leadership is what this country lacks, are you williing to believe in the powers that be...
     
  10. Mr. Mustafa

    Mr. Mustafa Terrorist

    It's politics in the name of Islam. I don't really know how to explain it without making a mile-long post, but trust me, it's stupid...
     

Share This Page