Patronization doesn't become you. I see that I was not clear enough. The sector of Iraqis who are/were hard-core Muslims, most likely to be veered towards Islamic militantism are the Shiites. The Shiites were oppressed by Sadaam, who was contemptuous of the religion and very invested in the secular, as opposed to the religious. The Sunni Iraqis who are far less religiously conservative (legalistic, bordering on or meeting the extreme -- i.e. Islamisists, militant Islamics, Muslim radicals, whatever term you choose), have been relatively content with Hussein's rule, as it did not require profoundly religiously rigid laws. They were those who escaped his wrath. The Shiites were those he oppressed, tortured, killed (along, of course, with the Kurds). The Sunnis are angry and afraid because this latest development threatens their (relatively secular) freedom. The Sunni women don't want to have to wear Burkas every time they leave their homes. They don't want to have to be escorted by a male whenever they leave their homes. They want to be able to drive. Simple human rights.... Suggesting, then, that Sadaam was an icon of "militant Islam" is hard to believe. If that were posted to any Shiite, they would clean their ears and ask you to say it again. If this still makes no sense, I'll try again, Julie Krueger ========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Max Boot Date: 1/2/2007 12:48:04 A.M. Central Standard Time From: _lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx) To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on: Your first clause doesn’t match your second. It makes no sense. Did you know that? ____________________________________ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 10:04 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Max Boot I'm trying to figure out in what bizarre sense Hussein was an icon of militant Islam, considering that he was a secularist who oppressed the religiously conservative Shi'ites. Julie Krueger ========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Max Boot Date: 1/1/2007 6:52:21 P.M. Central Standard Time From: _lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx) To: _lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on: Simon: You have made a series of assertions on a subject I’m not particularly interested in. You imply that intelligence would comprise my accepting your assertions unchecked. Blind acceptance of unsupported assertions is not well known as a sign of intelligence. 1. For example, did the courts decree that the Shia militia carry out the execution? Were there alternatives? Who should have done it? Who cares? 1. Was his death filmed like some of the deaths Saddam filmed? Again, who cares? 1. Was the judicial system under Iraq’s control? If so, who cares whether it meets your standards of impartiality? 1. You say Saddam was verbally taunted and insulted – was that worse than you are verbally taunting and insulting me or better? 1. It took place during the Muslim Hajj and the Sunni Eid, you say? Did it also take place at the end of a legitimate trial? 1. And you note that the US military was responsible for the guarding of the living Saddam. Was that before he was turned over to the Iraqi Judicial system for trial? I fail to see why this should interest anyone. The US military has guarded virtually everything in Iraq at one time or another. 1. You say the whole event can only incite further hatred between the Shia and Sunni? You imply that we shouldn’t allow the Iraqis to execute one of the worst criminals in their history because it might make someone mad? Is that what you are saying? Shall we make this a principle: Execute no one if it will make someone mad. In response to this possibility I did a Google search to find out who was being incited thus far. So far it’s a few relatives and some people from his home town. When is the rest of the incitement supposed to take place. 7.a. But you probably mean a lot of someone’s. You probably quantify the holding up of an execution. If a certain number will be made angry by the execution of someone, then the execution shall not take place – even if it means we renege on our telling the Iraqis they have control over their own courts, government, etc and are trying to turn everything else over to them as quickly as possible? 7.b. Tell you what went perfectly? Has someone established a standard for perfection in Iraq? 7.c. However, I will say this. In the war against Militant Islam, the Bush & Blair administrations has done surprisingly well. On the one hand we have the destruction of the World Trade Center. We have also Osama’s speeches indicating that he believed the US too timid, too afraid of the loss of life to mount an effective counter to his Islamist ideals. Osama joined others in declaring war against the West, ala Sayyid Qutb. Others joined in taunting and insulting the US and Britain. 7.d. The US agreed that we were at war and eliminated Afghanistan as a Militant Islamic threat 7.e. Influenced Pakistan to quit supporting Militant Islam and support us instead 7.f. Influenced Libya in to abandoning its nuclear weapon program 7.g. Removed one of the Icons of Militant Islam, Saddam Hussein by defeating his army and arresting him 7.h. Saddam when turned over to Iraqis was executed. 8. The U.S. and its allies have a good deal to be proud of. The gauntlet was thrown by militant Islam and was picked up and responded to. We have done much better than Militant Islam has done. They operated out of prejudice and ignorance. They had a low opinion of our abilities and will have learned (if they can somehow avoid reading Leftist analyses of these matters) that things are not going well for them. And what shall we do now? Shall we listen to the Leftist Chicken Littles who cry and tell us we must surrender for we have been defeated when all the rest of the world including our enemies can see that we have not? Or shall we somehow learn who it is we’re fighting, and how we must combat them? Oh some of us know, but too many don’t – or as in the case of the Leftists, won’t. Lawrence ____________________________________ From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Simon Ward Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 3:38 PM To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Max Boot Let's try it really slowly Lawrence, your attempt at unintelligence is just too convincing. 1. It's not the fact of Saddam's death that's at issue, but the manner of it. 2. It was carried out by the Shia militia. 3. His death was filmed in a similar manner to some of the Islamist executions. 4. It took place with no attempt at judicial impartiality. 5. He was verbally taunted and insulted. 5. It took place during the Muslim Hajj. 6. It took place on the Sunni Eid (Thanks Judith). 7. The US military (responsible for guarding the once living Saddam) must have given him over to his executors just as they subseqently received his body from them. 8. The whole event can only incite further hatred between the Shia and Sunni. Now tell me it went perfectly.