What the extremists are saying
CENTCOM has a webpage where they post translations of what the Islamic extremists are saying. They've recently posted a statement by Zarqawi's al'Qaeda organization in Iraq, taking credit for the attack last week and promising more. Most of it's fairly typical, but I found this part telling:
Infidels, Jews, and Crusaders are the usual targets of the terrorists, but the fact that al'Qaeda specifically mention the Shi'ites, and in such a derogatory manner, indicates that they're still pursuing the strategy they've been attempting to implement for at least the past year. They know they have no support among the Kurds, and while there are Shi'ite extremists, they don't play too well with the Sunnis. So rather than trying to win support among those groups, they're targeting them. They're hoping that they can increase tensions between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites to the point of starting a civil war. I'm not sure whether they still believe that will work, but they may be able to keep the animosity running at a high enough level that building a successful democracy is impossible.
Whether or not a civil war happens, the failure to create a democracy will most likely result in three independent nations rather than one. Al'Qaeda will have succeeded in creating the impression of a failed attempt at nation-building by the US, but whether the Sunni nation will be friendly to them is an open question. They'd still have to duke it out with the Ba'athist secularists, and the results will be bloody. The thing to remember is that this is not the result that most of the Sunnis want. There's a reason they fought so hard against federalism in the Iraqi constitution. They know that if Iraq's three ethnic groups go their separate ways, they'll be the weak one, without most of the oil wealth their cousins possess. The Shi'ites and the Kurds wouldn't be sorry to see this happen, so the only two groups with a vested interest in a united Iraq are the Sunnis and the US. At this point the Sunnis want it both ways, turning a blind eye to the terrorists among them while certain that the US, whom they still hate, will prevent the worst case scenario from happening. I think maybe it's time for the US to start saying that splitting Iraq into three nations wouldn't be such a bad thing. If the Sunnis start to realize that they're the ones who will lose the most should al'Qaeda succeed, they might just turn against the terrorists.
(Thanks to SPC Claude Flowers for the heads up!)
Approach us, O paradise. O brigade of martyrdom-seeker: Celebrate and sing the praise of God, for tomorrow you will meet the beloved ones, Muhammad and his companions. You have never accepted injustice, O lions of monotheism. This is your day. Go after the heads of the infidels, the Jews, the Crusaders, and the descendants of Ibn al-Alqami [derogatory term for Shia named after Ibn-al-Alqami, a Shia minister who was accused of betraying the last Abbasid caliph Al-Musta'ism during Hulugu's attack on Baghdad in 1258]. Do not show any mercy toward them.
Infidels, Jews, and Crusaders are the usual targets of the terrorists, but the fact that al'Qaeda specifically mention the Shi'ites, and in such a derogatory manner, indicates that they're still pursuing the strategy they've been attempting to implement for at least the past year. They know they have no support among the Kurds, and while there are Shi'ite extremists, they don't play too well with the Sunnis. So rather than trying to win support among those groups, they're targeting them. They're hoping that they can increase tensions between the Sunnis and the Shi'ites to the point of starting a civil war. I'm not sure whether they still believe that will work, but they may be able to keep the animosity running at a high enough level that building a successful democracy is impossible.
Whether or not a civil war happens, the failure to create a democracy will most likely result in three independent nations rather than one. Al'Qaeda will have succeeded in creating the impression of a failed attempt at nation-building by the US, but whether the Sunni nation will be friendly to them is an open question. They'd still have to duke it out with the Ba'athist secularists, and the results will be bloody. The thing to remember is that this is not the result that most of the Sunnis want. There's a reason they fought so hard against federalism in the Iraqi constitution. They know that if Iraq's three ethnic groups go their separate ways, they'll be the weak one, without most of the oil wealth their cousins possess. The Shi'ites and the Kurds wouldn't be sorry to see this happen, so the only two groups with a vested interest in a united Iraq are the Sunnis and the US. At this point the Sunnis want it both ways, turning a blind eye to the terrorists among them while certain that the US, whom they still hate, will prevent the worst case scenario from happening. I think maybe it's time for the US to start saying that splitting Iraq into three nations wouldn't be such a bad thing. If the Sunnis start to realize that they're the ones who will lose the most should al'Qaeda succeed, they might just turn against the terrorists.
(Thanks to SPC Claude Flowers for the heads up!)
