From: aaldoubo@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Shaqeeqa)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: Sadam
Date: 23 Jan 93 21:45:29 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver

In article <1993Jan21.184421.29814@tfs.com> samir@tfs.com (Samir Elias) writes:
>
>Allahu Akbar.

	La ellaha elallah!

>Dear sister,
>
>To say that the "brutal dictator" is responsible for possible
>division in the (arab/muslim) world is simplifying the problem,

	Of course there is a lot more to it than this.  I was
	pointing out to the other poster that such a dictator
	is neither great nor a leader to the Arab and Islamic
	causes.  Even as this is a matter of opinion (nationalists
	obviously view Saddam as a hero), I fail to see how he has
	been such an influential and powerful leader to pan-Arabism,
	when he has reinforced iron-fisted, facist policies.  This
	socialist ideology has separated the Arab world despite its
	claim for unity and freedom, because it is a foreign
	philosophy instilled by colonists.  Furthermore, Saddam has
	tried to break the spirit of Islam in the people and has dealt
	with Muslims in the most brutal and ruthless fashion.

>I see the problem to be more than the "brutal dictator(s)" 
>who are causing the division are the ones who are blindly following
>the orders of their "western" and "financial" masters, who will
>always be in conflict with other,(possibly also),"brutal dictators"
>who do not want to follow as closly the same orders,THERE i think
>were the division starts. 

	I agree with you to a certain degree.  The sheikdoms are also
	responsible because of their service to Britain and the U.S.
	and betrayal to the Arab world whom they held influence and
	control over with their massive fortunes.  They have also
	abused their power and their arrogance and mistreated of Arabs
	and Muslims (especially apparent during and after the Gulf War)
	has made them both feared and hated in the Arab World.  As far
	as their relationship with the other Arab leaders, as with
	Saddam, they bankrolled his cause during the ten year bloody
	war with Iran, and even afterwards, offered him financial
	assistance to rebuild his country and for technological
	advancement.  The invasion of Kuwait was not because Saddam
	did not want to follow their orders.  That is superficial to
	believe that.  It was a conflict of interests (oil well and
	land dispute - just like Iran), and mainly because of Saddam's
	greediness and lust for power.

	This is still only a small part of the problem, however.
	The point of my posting was that has been due mainly to
	an internal fragmentation by the installation and maintenance
	of these dictators like Saddam, and of course, as you pointed
	out, the puppet regimes in the Gulf.  We also need to understand
	that such 'leaders' are interested only in pure power at the
	expense of their own people whom they care absolutely nothing
	for.  Just look at the situation during the Gulf War in Iraq.
	The more that we can separate ourselves from these poisoning
	ideologies and support of tyrannical rulers, the further we can
	advance towards stabiliity, unity, and freedom from their
	domination and that of the imperialistic West.
 
>I have a hypothetical question,suppose that kuwait remained as part of
>iraq,and let us assume that the "brutal dictator" lived for another
>100 years and that he "brutalized" the people of iraq,(by the only way 
>you can get "brutalized" by the "brutal dictator" is if you try
>to oppose him politically,otherwise you can live well,and mind you
>that this applies to most "non brutal dictators/not" ), for the

	Wait a minute here.  You are telling me that the social
	conditions under such governments are not suppressive in
	themselves?  Yes, if you keep your mouth shut and kowtow
	to the government, you are not thrown in prison or executed,
	but I don't honestly believe that you are living a healthy
	and productive life.  Should we just want to exist for the sake
	of living?  What kind of life is it when you are denied your
	personal rights and freedom of thought and expression? 

>remainder of his life,and that iraq was continuing at the same level
>of advancment in other non political fields,then after 100 years this
>"brutal dictator" dies from natural causes,and a new government takes
>his place who will be weak and will be overthrown by a "clean" group,
>HOW will that effect the (arab/muslim) world,do you think that at that
>time any body will dare to attack any (arab/muslim) country??

	Of course there is always that possibility, but it should
	not prevent us from seeking better conditions for our
	people.  Even if Islam is not the answer for everyone, at
	least there should be a democratic ideology and freedom
	from oppression.  The chances to be taken have been great
	and are greater, but that should not be an obstacle.  Look
	at Algeria for example.  It affected the Arab and Muslim
	world to the degree that we were woken up.
 
>Again the probelms of the kurds and others i discussed previously,they
>are more victims of their own leaders than victims of the "brutal
>dictator" who in difiance to many "other iraqis" gave the kurds more 
>previlages than what the kurds in any other country can even dream
>of having,BUT again they wanted,or probably pushd by the "west" to
>ask for,more,Until the "brutal dictator" had to give in to pressures
>from "other iraqis" to give no more.

	So you are trying to say that the 'Kurdish Problem' is
	more internal than external?  They are seeking independence.
	Does that mean Saddam Hussein is justified to victimize
	them?  To utilize poison gas and crush them because they
	fail to submit to him?  It wasn't enough that Turkey 
	oppressed them?
 
>Sister i think that many of us after living in the west for a while
>we start to want things to happen INSTANTLY,ONLY IN OUR LIFE TIME,
>because we become more and more SELFISH that we do not want to think
>long term and what possiblities are ahead.

	Brother, I AM looking towards long-term solutions instead
	of accepting the current ones.  We may have become a little
	more dislocated from the daily experiences of our people
	by living in the West, but that certainly does not mean that
	we are blind, insensitive or SELFISH!!  That is an unfair
	and insulting insinuation!

	And what is it that you suggest or propose?

>ALLAHU AKBAR WA AAOUTH BILLAH` MIN ALSHAITAN ALRAJIM.

	AMEEN!


 **       *         *       * 
 __.      *         *      * * 
(_/(_____(_)___|___(_)____|_|_|
             ** 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic