From: buffalo@wam.umd.edu (Duncan D. Sterling)
Subject: Let's stay within the facts (was RE: UNION BETWEEN IRAQ AND SYRIA))
Summary: Random, baseless, and false accusations get old fast 
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:50:30 GMT

In article <16118.9208141006@thor.cf.ac.uk> scemg@thor.cf.ac.uk ("M.G") writes:
>From: basu@remus.rutgers.edu (sid-darth vader)
>Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
>Subject: If Saddam were smart and patriotic
>Message-ID: <Aug.13.16.52.18.1992.16843@remus.rutgers.edu>
>Date: 13 Aug 92 20:52:18 GMT
>Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
>Lines: 22
>
>----------------------------------------------------------
>Are you serious?
>the Baath Party both in Iraq and Syria is the main cause of killing thousands
>of innocent people. Most of the people from Iraq and Syria are 
>a ware that this Party is created by the French and supported
>by the British to cause as much as harm and destruction to these two
>Countries and to Middle East in the name of ARABISIM, and also to
>stop the Islamic movements, 

It sounds like you are throwing alot of rumors around.. Where are the facts and
sources to back up your claims?  Are you discounting the legitimacy of the
ideas of Pan-Arabism/Arab Nationalism, and if so, on what FACTUAL basis?


>as you
>know very well that Mechele Aflag (the founder of the Party) is half
>jewish half christian and it is known that most of the christian in the
>Middle East DO NOT CARE LESS about the Country they live in. The majority
>of the christian in Iraq and Syria consider France is their mother Country
>and the Moslems had enough RUBBISH of ARABISIM and NATTIONALISIM.

Once again, it sounds as if you are "blowing smoke".  For example, why on
earth would Syrian or Iraqi christians have any reason to be less patriotic
than their countrymen?  Also, on what FACTUAL basis can you condemn
Pan-Arabism/Arab Nationalism?  Gamel Nasser didn't see Pan-Arabism as 
"rubbish", and HE was not a stupid man.


>The best way (and the only way) for the union is THE ISLAMIC UNION 
>(Atrue Islamic Union) not only between Iraq and Syria but all the 
>Moslem Countries in the region and then WE WILL BE STRONG AND POWERFULL.
>
>M.G
>Cardiff, Wales, U.K.

If "a true Islamic Union" is the "only way for Islamic countries to become
powerful", then how about explaining this in detail--will all Shiites have to
convert to Sunni, or visa versa?  Who will run this "union"? Clerics? What
ability does the clergy have to run a government?  It seems that Mr. M.G. is
not what he seems, based on the direction of his statements. Could it be
that Mr. M.G., in all his baseless extremism is an IRANIAN in IRAQI 
clothing?......(no insult intended to any reasonable persons from either
country) ;) ;) ;)



-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duncan Sterling          buffalo@wam.umd.edu   GT750L, KH500A8, CA175K3
University of Maryland    "Yeeehaaa!" - Slim Pickens in "Dr. Strangelove"   
College Park, Md.         "2 strokes are quicker than 4" - anonymous 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.arabic:3350 soc.culture.turkish:9108 soc.culture.iranian:7265 soc.culture.afghanistan:863 soc.culture.french:5930 soc.culture.african:4243 soc.culture.pakistan:13900 misc.invest:10761 sci.econ:6926