[atari 2600]

Op-Ed Contributor
Can You Tell a Sunni From a Shiite?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/opinion/17stein.html?ei=5090&en=c5709a9fc1e31b3f&ex=131873 7600&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all

By JEFF STEIN
Published: October 17, 2006
Washington

 

Alex Nabaum

FOR the past several months, I’ve been wrapping up lengthy interviews with Washington counterterrorism officials with a fundamental question: “Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?”
A “gotcha” question? Perhaps. But if knowing your enemy is the most basic rule of war, I don’t think it’s out of bounds. And as I quickly explain to my subjects, I’m not looking for theological explanations, just the basics: Who’s on what side today, and what does each want?
After all, wouldn’t British counterterrorism officials responsible for Northern Ireland know the difference between Catholics and Protestants? In a remotely similar but far more lethal vein, the 1,400-year Sunni-Shiite rivalry is playing out in the streets of Baghdad, raising the specter of a breakup of Iraq into antagonistic states, one backed by Shiite Iran and the other by Saudi Arabia and other Sunni states.
A complete collapse in Iraq could provide a haven for Al Qaeda operatives within striking distance of Israel, even Europe. And the nature of the threat from Iran, a potential nuclear power with protégés in the Gulf states, northern Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, is entirely different from that of Al Qaeda. It seems silly to have to argue that officials responsible for counterterrorism should be able to recognize opportunities for pitting these rivals against each other.
But so far, most American officials I’ve interviewed don’t have a clue. That includes not just intelligence and law enforcement officials, but also members of Congress who have important roles overseeing our spy agencies. How can they do their jobs without knowing the basics?
My curiosity about our policymakers’ grasp of Islam’s two major branches was piqued in 2005, when Jon Stewart and other TV comedians made hash out of depositions, taken in a whistleblower case, in which top F.B.I. officials drew blanks when asked basic questions about Islam. One of the bemused officials was Gary Bald, then the bureau’s counterterrorism chief. Such expertise, Mr. Bald maintained, wasn’t as important as being a good manager.
A few months later, I asked the F.B.I.’s spokesman, John Miller, about Mr. Bald’s comments. “A leader needs to drive the organization forward,” Mr. Miller told me. “If he is the executive in a counterterrorism operation in the post-9/11 world, he does not need to memorize the collected statements of Osama bin Laden, or be able to read Urdu to be effective. ... Playing ‘Islamic Trivial Pursuit’ was a cheap shot for the lawyers and a cheaper shot for the journalist. It’s just a gimmick.”
Of course, I hadn’t asked about reading Urdu or Mr. bin Laden’s writings.
A few weeks ago, I took the F.B.I.’s temperature again. At the end of a long interview, I asked Willie Hulon, chief of the bureau’s new national security branch, whether he thought that it was important for a man in his position to know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites. “Yes, sure, it’s right to know the difference,” he said. “It’s important to know who your targets are.”
That was a big advance over 2005. So next I asked him if he could tell me the difference. He was flummoxed. “The basics goes back to their beliefs and who they were following,” he said. “And the conflicts between the Sunnis and the Shia and the difference between who they were following.”
O.K., I asked, trying to help, what about today? Which one is Iran — Sunni or Shiite? He thought for a second. “Iran and Hezbollah,” I prompted. “Which are they?”
He took a stab: “Sunni.”
Wrong.
Al Qaeda? “Sunni.”
Right.
AND to his credit, Mr. Hulon, a distinguished agent who is up nights worrying about Al Qaeda while we safely sleep, did at least know that the vicious struggle between Islam’s Abel and Cain was driving Iraq into civil war. But then we pay him to know things like that, the same as some members of Congress.
Take Representative Terry Everett, a seven-term Alabama Republican who is vice chairman of the House intelligence subcommittee on technical and tactical intelligence.
“Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?” I asked him a few weeks ago.
Mr. Everett responded with a low chuckle. He thought for a moment: “One’s in one location, another’s in another location. No, to be honest with you, I don’t know. I thought it was differences in their religion, different families or something.”
To his credit, he asked me to explain the differences. I told him briefly about the schism that developed after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, and how Iraq and Iran are majority Shiite nations while the rest of the Muslim world is mostly Sunni. “Now that you’ve explained it to me,” he replied, “what occurs to me is that it makes what we’re doing over there extremely difficult, not only in Iraq but that whole area.”
Representative Jo Ann Davis, a Virginia Republican who heads a House intelligence subcommittee charged with overseeing the C.I.A.’s performance in recruiting Islamic spies and analyzing information, was similarly dumbfounded when I asked her if she knew the difference between Sunnis and Shiites.
“Do I?” she asked me. A look of concentration came over her face. “You know, I should.” She took a stab at it: “It’s a difference in their fundamental religious beliefs. The Sunni are more radical than the Shia. Or vice versa. But I think it’s the Sunnis who’re more radical than the Shia.”
Did she know which branch Al Qaeda’s leaders follow?
“Al Qaeda is the one that’s most radical, so I think they’re Sunni,” she replied. “I may be wrong, but I think that’s right.”
Did she think that it was important, I asked, for members of Congress charged with oversight of the intelligence agencies, to know the answer to such questions, so they can cut through officials’ puffery when they came up to the Hill?
“Oh, I think it’s very important,” said Ms. Davis, “because Al Qaeda’s whole reason for being is based on their beliefs. And you’ve got to understand, and to know your enemy.”
It’s not all so grimly humorous. Some agency officials and members of Congress have easily handled my “gotcha” question. But as I keep asking it around Capitol Hill and the agencies, I get more and more blank stares. Too many officials in charge of the war on terrorism just don’t care to learn much, if anything, about the enemy we’re fighting. And that’s enough to keep anybody up at night.

Jeff Stein is the national security editor at Congressional Quarterly.

[atari 2600]

Pat Tillman, The Real Story: "During several weeks of memorials and commemorations that followed Tillman's death, commanders at his 75th Ranger Regiment and their superiors hid the truth about friendly fire from Tillman's brother Kevin, who had fought with Pat in the same platoon, but was not involved in the firing incident and did not know the cause of his brother's death. Commanders also withheld the facts from Tillman's widow, his parents, national politicians and the public, according to records and interviews with sources involved in the case.

After being ambushed, Ranger Tillman and an Afghan fighter left their Humvee & went into some cover on the side of a steep hill to assume a position to return enemy fire, but U.S. troops thought they were the ones firing on them.
Tillman gave the international sign for cease-fire, and then repeatedly yelled, "I'm Pat fucking Tillman!!!" as he was mangled into several pieces from heavy machine gun blasts from members of his own Ranger platoon.
---
Pat Tillman's memorial ceremony was going as planned: John McCain spoke, American flags waved, the Army and the NFL stood together, all mourning their lost colleague. It was going as planned until Pat's brother spoke: "Pat isn't with God,'' he said. "He's fucking dead. He wasn't religious. So thank you for your thoughts, but he's fuckiing dead.''

[ni'k]

i held a shite i did up to the sun and was able to tell the difference, unlike those fuckaros politicains. also i yu can tell the difference by taste.

[Tokolosh]

Interesting read atari.

Your first post in proof of how confusing combat situations can be for soldiers in these and other dirty wars. Intelligence hasn't even bothered to take time, dealing with the dilemma of distinguishing the difference of these two islamic groups. It's important to know who the enemy is, if they want to win the war against so-called terrorism. I'm sure that it's very difficult to spot the differences between the enemy and the civilian, which makes it almost impossible for the troops. It's frustrating and can lead to confusing situations where they land up shooting innocent bystanders or members of their own batallions, regiments etc.
Intelligence can surely help prevent this from happening to a certain degree if they did more cultural research, but the enemy is somehow always one step ahead, and has found a way of dealing with it by blending in. Their tactics will make it a very difficult mission for the troops and a sad lose for their loved ones, who have them come back home in bodybags.
I'm sure that the soldiers in the red zone have more knowledge about the enemy than anyone else, because they've gained experience and can pinpoint the enemy's characteristics more accurately, but it's gonna be tough for them nevertheless.
I personally think its an impossible mission.

Your second post is a good example of miscommunication and it's totally unaccepable.

[atari 2600]

CNN is reporting that some Muslim website made the claim that seven NFL stadiums were going to be attacked with a "dirty bomb" this Sunday.

First, CNN allows wacko John Mark Karr a forum on Larry King Live, and now they report rumors...completely unacceptable.

[jon boy]

but if it happens then they get the exclusive and try to gain some credability.

[!@#$%!]

man that is fucking completely unacceptable but also completely predictable and consistent with the way the u.s. conducts its asinine ignorant misguided and counterproductive foreign policy. too many dunces without sufficient education can have powerful effects, as the current administration illustrates.

[Пятхъдесят Шест]

They just had a segment on CNN about this.

[Tokolosh]

Violence in Iraq Kills 10 U.S. Troops

By Ellen Knickmeyer and Debbi Wilgoren
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 18, 2006


BAGHDAD, Oct. 18 -- Ten U.S. troops were killed in Iraq on Tuesday, one of the bloodiest days of the war for American forces outside of major combat operations. With nearly two full weeks to go until the end of October, the month is proving to be devastatingly lethal for both U.S. forces and Iraq's military and civilian populations.

At least 68 U.S. troops were killed in the first 2 1/2 weeks of October, according to independent databases and wire service counts; last month, 75 American military personnel were killed.

At the same time, at least 767 Iraqis were killed in war-related violence and sectarian fighting during the first 17 days of this month, according to the Associated Press -- an average of 45 deaths per day, compared to an average daily death toll of about 27 over the last 18 months.

Sectarian clashes in the towns north of Baghdad caused dozens of Iraqi deaths over the weekend, though the situation has begun to calm.

The American service members slain on Tuesday included four soldiers killed by a single bomb in Baghdad and another soldier killed by small-arms fire in the Iraqi capital, the U.S. military said.

North of Baghdad, a soldier was killed when the vehicle he was riding in was struck by a roadside bomb , the military said.

Three soldiers died in the northern province of Diyala and one Marine was killed in the western province of Anbar. The U.S. military gave no details of those deaths, saying only that they came in "enemy action.''

The names of the dead were withheld pending notification of their next of kin.

More than 2,700 American troops and Defense Department employees have died since the war began 3 1/2 years ago.

U.S. military officials have said the surge in violence since this summer could be attributed partly to the increased exposure of American forces as they patrol Baghdad to try to quell reprisal killings between Shiites and Sunnis. The number of troops in the capital has been doubled since June to help in that effort.

Iraqi leaders have said that the increase in attacks on U.S. forces could also stem from calls made by some religious leaders to step up anti-American violence during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

[jon boy]

and still some say that the war was a good thing and not a total dissaster.

[atari 2600]

Originally Posted by jon boy

but if it happens then they get the exclusive and try to gain some credability.

CNN was notified by the Dept. of Homeland Security about the potential threat, but in that announcement, Homeland Security denoted that the threat was "not credible."

whatever

[ricechex]

Always in the mood for a pile on Bush/GOP par-tay! CAn u believe the corruption and abuse of power these days? It's totally mindblowing. brazen fucking bastards too. they deserve this mess. IRAQ will not go away, b/c like Murtha said, it was a flawed policy from the start. it was a hopeless judgment, an underestimated view of human will and determination by the enemy, and of human beings in general. and logically, it makes no sense to attack a country if you're not finding the WMD. duh.

just venting..

[atari 2600]

Well, if we would have just went in there and established more basic services like electricity for the population instead of actually decreasing their services, then I can see how it might've worked in conjunction with a rapid withdrawal.

But, we didn't do any of that, namely because our government isn't actually interested in helping the people of Iraq achieve liberty and freedom like we were repeatedly told and are still being told.

Now, Iraq has a Shiite government just like I wrote would happen and tensions have flared up again in the age-old feud between the Sunni and Shiite tribes over the resources because we went there and shook things up (also just like I foretold, although any idiot should be able to see that's what would happen.)

Just like I said from the beginning, this conflict is gonna last 7-10 years and basically share many similarities to Vietnam (which we apparently didn't care to learn anything from), only it's in the desert.

[Tokolosh]

Let's face it, they're only in it for the OIL.

[ricechex]

Originally Posted by atari 2600

Well, if we would have just went in there and established more basic services like electricity for the population instead of actually decreasing their services, then I can see how it might've worked in conjunction with a rapid withdrawal.

But, we didn't do any of that, namely because our government isn't actually interested in helpng the people of Iraq achieve liberty like we were repeatedly told and are still being told.

Oh yeah, electricity is at the lowest level since the war started i read on THink Progress today. Iraq was about money as much as anything else. All these deals with Haliburton etc. u probably know, but there's 9 BILLION!unaccounted for. They had military and political models like this that these assholes were aware of and used. It just won't work in the end. i just wish some of these right wingers i argue with over the simple facts like no WMD or ties to 9/11 would get there asses out to Iraq. seriously.

[atari 2600]

Yeah, isn't that just wonderful? And isn't it just swell that opium & morphine production in Afghanistan is gangbusters right now? As you may be familiar, before the war, around 20% of the world's poppies were grown there; now, the country supplies around 93% of the world.
---
You know, North Korea really strategically fucked-up by walking out on the U.N. sanctions hearings against them recently. We got lucky that they made such a bonehead move. I'll explain with some more predictions.
It's my gut feeling that despite all the scandals (let's not forget all the treason too!) and all of the indications to the contrary, that the Republicans will still retain their majority in the upcoming elections. This will cause U.S. relations with the rest of the world to grow even frostier. Most likely, the next President in 2008 will also be a Republican. North Korea could have garnered more leniency from China and Japan i nthe near future if their representative(s) would have behaved with more civilized decorum, because it won't be too long now before the rest of the world gets that much more pissed off at America.

[atari 2600]

 

[atari 2600]

Rolling Stone recently had a cover story on Bush denoting him as "the worst President ever." Now that the congressional races are nigh, they've chronicled some dirt on the representatives that represent anything but our interests.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12055360/cover_story_time_to_go_inside_the_worst_congress_e ver

(it's 8 pages)

>> See our picks for the 10 Worst Congressmen and read what people are saying in our politics blog.