E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Zac Baillie / AFP - Getty Images
A Syrian rebel covers a fellow fighter carrying the body of his brother, killed during a battle in the Saif al-Dawla district of Syria's northern city of Aleppo, amid heavy street fighting between opposition and government forces on August 29, 2012.
ISTANBUL — I called an old friend the other day, dialing the number somewhat sheepishly. He’s a senior adviser to the Iraq government and I knew what to expect when he answered.
First, he reprimanded me for not calling enough and hardly visiting. I’ve been away too long. You can’t do that, not to your friends. What’s so difficult about calling? he asked.
I apologized, asked about his children, his health, if he’s having success in quitting smoking, and offered the only excuse I could think of: "I’ve been busy with the Arab Spring."
"The Arab Spring?" he said. "What’s that? There’s no Arab Spring anymore. That’s over. It is now a big struggle for power."
He may have been acting like an insistent grandmother, but he was right. The Arab Spring is over. The days of the protesters with laptops and BlackBerrys in Tahrir Square are long gone.
Instead, a much bigger struggle is underway, one that goes back centuries that is both a regional battle for dominance and an epic tug of war between Sunnis and Shiites for control of the Middle East and the Prophet Muhammad's legacy.
The front line is now in Syria, where the United Nations says more than 20,000 people have been killed since pro-democracy protests started in March 2011.
But it goes back, at least in very modern history, at least to Iraq — and America shares a large part of the responsibility for reopening this Pandora’s Box.
Roots in Iraq
A major factor in the rise of the present struggle came when American troops invaded Iraq in 2003, thus pitting Sunnis against their rival Shiites, who many Sunnis think are effectively infidels who turned against Islamic leaders about 1,400 years ago and have been on the wrong side of Allah’s path since then.
For decades, Saddam and his Sunni minority had imposed their will on Iraq, carrying on a 14-century tradition of Sunnis controlling Mesopotamia despite a Shiite majority. Not surprisingly, in most Sunni regions there has little appetite for free U.S.-sponsored elections. They knew they would end up being ruled by their enemies.
And that’s what happened. Essentially, the lasting legacy of America’s involvement in Iraq is an Iranian-allied Shiite government that also happens to be one of the most corrupt on the planet. (Iran is the biggest and most powerful Shiite-majority nation.)
Reuters
Iran's religious breakdown by Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Iran is 89 percent Shiite Muslim and approximately 10 percent Sunni. But the rest of the region is predominately Sunni Muslim. There are more than 1 billion Sunnis worldwide, making up 87-90 percent of the global Muslim population. Click on the map to see a larger version.
The Shiites were, of course, delighted. I remember the moment U.S. troops left their last base in southern Iraq in December 2011. The Iraqis changed its name as the Americans rolled out the gate. It had been called Camp Adder; the Iraqis renamed it 'the Imam Ali base,' after the patriarch of Shiite Islam.
The Shiites — in both Iraq and Iran — won, and won big.
President George W. Bush, in his now-rare public appearances and interviews, still refuses to acknowledge he did anything to help Iran. But it doesn’t really matter what he thinks. The 200 million people in the Middle East understand that there is a new reality — and that’s what they are battling about now.
Iraqi Sunnis are still seething — and sometimes fighting — in their stronghold cities of Ramadi and Fallujah. They can’t accept what they consider the tragedy that has befallen their community and don’t understand even now why Washington sent troops across the Atlantic and Indian oceans to help Iran expand a buffer zone beyond its borders.
Enter al-Qaida, a radical Sunni group
Back in the Iraq war days, al-Qaida, a radical Sunni group, saw an opportunity to expand. Al-Qaida militants flowed to Iraq to help fellow Sunnis fight Iran, Shiites and the Americans who were propping them up. But al-Qaida got more than it bargained for. The U.S. troops were tougher than al-Qaida expected. American forces learned guerilla tactics in Iraq. They built bigger, stronger vehicles to defeat car bombs and IEDs. U.S. troops, much to al-Qaida surprise and dismay, moved at night, dropped men from helicopters like spiders and blasted militant safe houses into kindling.
Al-Qaida made another mistake too. It misbehaved in Iraq and abused its hosts, fellow Sunni tribesmen. Al-Qaida forgot it was a guest and abandoned its manners. Al-Qaida killed Sunni tribesmen because they weren’t fundamentalist enough. The wild-eyed militants flogged Sunnis in Ramadi and Fallujah for minor infractions like taking off their pants to swim in the Euphrates. It was hardly the behavior of someone who’s claiming to help.
The Americans eventually used al-Qaida’s misbehavior against the group, forming a militia of Sunnis who were fed up with the fanatics, often referred to as the "Sons of Iraq." Al-Qaida lost in Iraq and the Shiite government won. Iran won, too.
After the Shiites came to power in Baghdad, Iran suddenly had access to Iraq’s holy Shiite cities of Najaf and Karbala. Iran increased tourism and business ties with its new Shiite-controlled neighbor. The majority of passengers now arriving and departing from Baghdad International Airport are from Iran.
Photo Blog: Portraits from the front line: Syrian rebels pose in Aleppo
Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah
Of course, it isn’t tourism that is on the minds of concerned observers of the Middle East. Rather, it is another Shiite government — just to the northwest of Iraq —the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad.
In fact, the Assad family isn’t actually Shiite, but Alawite, a secretive Shiite-linked offshoot that makes up just about 13 percent of the population. There’s also a sizable Christian community. Iran has effectively adopted the Alawites into the family by forging a long-standing alliance with Assad and — before him — his father, Hafez, who ruled Syria from 1971-1990.
Reuters
A breakdown of religious groups in Syria. Approximately 70 percent of Syria's population is Sunni Muslim. About 3 percent are Shiite, but another 12.8 percent are Alawite, a Shiite offshoot that President Bashar al-Assad follows. Click on the map to see a larger version.
And, moving further west from Syria, there’s Lebanon. Lebanon is a mixed basket if there ever was one. It’s Sunni in the north, Christian in the middle and Shiite in the south, with each making up about a third of the population. As any Lebanese person will tell you, it’s a volatile mix that has produced a lively culture, fantastic food, attractive people — and recurring cycles of civil war.
Topping the heap in Lebanon are the Shiites, emboldened by their powerful and skilled militia, Hezbollah. Hezbollah is heavily armed and has thousands of rockets pointed at Israel. The weapons mostly come from Iran through Syria or from Syria itself. In addition, Hezbollah runs a powerful social network. It can collapse the Lebanese government when it chooses.
France sends aid, cash to rebel-held Syrian cities, source says
So, there we have it. The previously isolated Shiite regime in Iran is emboldened by the emergence of a Shiite-dominated government in Iraq. In reaction, the Sunni world becomes concerned about the upstart Shiite powers, complete with their considerable oil resources and weaponry.
The region, already a tinderbox, becomes primed for a power struggle.
At the same time, there is the matter of religious pride and a sense of being in the right. In the Muslim world, the Sunnis are the big players. There are more than 1 billion Sunnis worldwide — making up 87-90 percent of the world’s total Muslim population, according to the Pew Research Center. By comparison, Shiites are a relatively small group, there are just about 150-200 million Shiites in the world, with about 75 percent living in just four countries: Iran, Iraq, Pakistan and India, according to Pew.
For the world’s Sunni Muslims, there is a certain confidence, perhaps even arrogance, that comes with having a billion friends.
NBC's Richard Engel, who has just returned from his third trip inside Syria, since the uprising began, joins Andrea Mitchell Reports to discuss the situation on the ground.
Arab Spring shake-up
At first, the current unrest was unrelated to the Sunni-Shiite divide. The first eruption came in Tunisia, which exploded in protests in December 2010. Then came Egypt, Bahrain, Libya and Yemen.
The region’s dictators were caught off guard by student demonstrators who had mobile communications that government security forces couldn’t track or monitor. The students could organize flash mobs. They could communicate directly with hundreds of millions of supporters though social media.
The Arab regimes in 2011 in many ways were legacies of Israel’s victories in 1948 and 1967. Faced with the catastrophic defeats, military strongmen grew in power. Over time they become corrupt. By 2011, most Arab governments were brutal, uncreative and thoroughly uninspiring.
In Tunisia, lawyers, students and women’s groups protested in because of the country’s secret prisons and because the former president’s wife was taking a cut of nearly everyone’s business.
The Egyptian regime was similarly ossified and out of touch. Hosni Mubarak had been an effective president in his early years and relatively popular. But by the time protests began in Cairo’s Tahrir Square, he was 82 years old, his military cohorts and family had become increasingly corrupt, he had been president for nearly three decades, and he was insistent that his bland son take over from him.
The Arab Spring put the Middle East back in flux — and, encapsulated by the current situation in Syria — put religious divides back in the spotlight.
The rise of religious tensions started in Egypt, where the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood — a Sunni organization — mobilized and easily hijacked the 2011 revolution started by liberals, anarchists, socialists, students, artists and techno-nerds who were joined by millions of the unemployed and disenfranchised. Sunni Islamists, albeit moderate, took over in Tunisia, too.
Goran Tomasevic / Reuters
After months of protests and violent crackdowns, a look back at the violence that has overtaken the country.
But it is Syria that has become the epicenter of the historic battle between Sunnis and Shiites. And Lebanon will probably follow.
I spoke with a rebel in Syria about a month ago who explained the religious calculation.
"We lost Iraq to the Shiites and Iran. We’re going to take Syria for us," he said.
Nearly all of the rebels in Syria are Sunnis and the fighting in Syria remains almost exclusively in Sunni areas. Alawite areas remain generally supportive of the Assad regime and therefore haven’t been attacked by the central government. The worst massacres have taken place in Sunni villages that are surrounded by Alawite towns.
The rebels claim the Alawites want to drive out Sunnis from their areas to make pure Alawite blocks for self-defense in case they lose the war and are hunted. Although the rebels say they want to create a Sunni-led government, which they promise will be open and democratic, this isn’t Tahrir Square anymore. It’s not even close.
Iran-Syria alliance
The Syrian government has long found Iran and Hezbollah to be useful allies. Iran is technologically advanced and offers a big market for Syrian goods. Hezbollah is a sword Damascus can wave over Israel's head, and a way to maintain influence in Lebanon, which Syria claims (with some reason) was historically part of Syria before the horribly planned British and French division of the Middle East during and after World War I.
U.S. officials: Iran supplying Syrian military via Iraqi airspace
But war changes the dynamics between allies. As Assad’s grip on power weakens, Iran and Hezbollah’s position in Syria grows stronger. The tail is starting to wag the dog. Iranian and Hezbollah advisers are becoming increasingly dominant in Syria.
U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta spoke out publicly about Iran’s increasing presence in Syria last month.
"There’s now an indication that they’re trying to develop or trying to train a militia within Syria to be able to fight on behalf of the regime," Panetta said at a Pentagon news briefing. "So we are seeing a growing presence by Iran and that is of deep concern to us."
In Syria, I saw evidence of Hezbollah’s influence at an army outpost that the rebels had just taken over. Rebels claimed there were 20 Hezbollah fighters in the outpost. They said that they occupied their own room and fought to the death. I saw boxes of unpacked Hezbollah flags.
It’s no longer a situation where Hezbollah is just providing arms and intelligence, but appears to have mobilized and is fighting alongside Syrian forces.
Youssef Boudlal / Reuters
Free Syrian Army fighters from Qadissiya Brigade detain two Syrian army soldiers in the El Amriyeh neighbourhood of Syria's northwestern city of Aleppo in Sept. 4, 2012.
And al-Qaida is also trying to make up for lost time. Its leader is dead and Afghanistan and Pakistan aren’t as safe as they used to be. Even Yemen is unsafe with increasing American drone strikes. Al-Qaida trying to do in Syria what it failed to accomplish in Iraq. Al-Qaida has learned from its Iraq’s experience. Sensing an opening, al-Qaida fighters are going into Syria offering money and arms to the rebels, their Sunni brothers.
They are going in politely, or at least as politely as al-Qaida can be. They are offering rebels cash with no strings attached, at first. Initial payments tend to be small, around $5,000. It is tiny sum in a war zone, but enough to give strapped rebel units a taste of what’s to come. They also have RPGs, the weapon rebel commanders seem to value above all others.
After taking a few payments, according to rebels who’ve seen this process, al-Qaida fighters — from Algeria, Iraq, Libya, Chechnya and other countries — ask that the rebels receive some of their men. An increasingly number of rebels commanders are taking the deal, even though they worry what al-Qaida could ask for in the future.
They reason that it’s better to take the support than die with nothing. Without American troops to worry about — not even drones —Syria could prove to be a far better base for al-Qaida than Iraq ever was.
What’s next?
What happens if Washington continues to watch from afar?
Well, Syria is likely to become an even bigger battleground for a proxy war between Hezbollah, Sunni rebels, government troops, Iran and al-Qaida. And once Syria collapses — or even before — Lebanon could ignite as well.
My Iraqi friend was right. The Arab Spring no longer exists.
More world stories from NBC News:
- Smoking ban leaves Lebanese fuming
- London 2012's legacy under spotlight as end nears
- Car crash politics: Laws don't touch rich in Thailand
- I planted what?! Farmer mistakenly grows dope
- Afghan soldiers detained over 'links with insurgents'
- Couple held hostage by pirates to set sail again
Follow World News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Remember that in Arab/Muslim countries, change of government or business leadership or religious leadership is often accomplished by a bloodbath. Traditional. No sense of democracy in any Muslim country.
Nor here in America either.
That's because they are too primitive (un-evolved) to understand how to make democracy work. These are tribal people, small minded people, (I am reminded of the joke about a fellow who unearths a genie's lamp, and is granted a wish. Since he doesn't not have a cow, and his neighbor does, he wishes for his neighbor's cow to die) and they need some one to tell them how to live. Otherwise, it disintegrates into chaos and civil war, until one faction wins out over another and they are back to dictatorships.
Oh, I know you liberals will jump down my throat for being "Racist", but prove me wrong. Show me a Democratic Muslim Country, one not nominally run by a "Royal Family" or unelected Imams. And don't say Iraq, the US is still influencing things, once we leave entirely, it will dissolve into chaos, it has already started. I used to believe, when we first invaded Iraq, it would be like Germany or Japan, and the people would thrive once the dictator was over thrown. NO, not anymore. The reason it worked in those countries after WWII, is that, in those countries the people have evolved far enough to make it happen.
And there is a really good map on Wikipedia; GDP per capita, go look it up, I think it explains the evolution of human civilization very well.
@ BP
That's because we do not live in a DEMOCRACY, that is the liberal rendition of history. We live in a Democratic Republic. When and if you learn the difference, maybe you'll understand why Conservatives are fighting so had to get that Communist out of the White House.
There has never been an "arab spring". This is a cute name the liberal media gave the overthrow of governments friendly to the US and take over by the muslim fundamentalists.
Never in the history that a muslim country was ever democratic. They live under dictatorships, pro US or anti US. Get used to the facts.
Shame Obama supports the anti-US ones.
Shiites vs. Sunnis??? We, as Americans, are suppose to do what, Mr. Engel? Pick one? Pick neither? If there are 1 billion Muslims in the world, as you point out, eventually one will dominate the other in the Middle East, although it may take decades and will cost an ocean of (Muslim) blood. Unfortunately, it will probably be the use of nukes that eventually determines which side prevails.
America attempting to control the flow and outcome of this epic (centuries-long) Shiite vs. Sunni conflict in the 21st century would be equivalent to the British trying to control the flow and outcome of the American Civil War in the 1860's (the 19th century). It won't matter. Even if it did, the Muslim world will never be democratic, anymore than America will ever be a Muslim nation.
Down the road, America may face a tough response decision if a single nuke, traced to a Muslim nation or group, is ever detonated on American soil. In that event, clearly we should (would?) do WHATEVER is necessary in response to ensure that a second or more such detonation doesn't occur on our soil. In the meantime, let the Shiites and Sunnis battle themselves for supremacy over one another. It ain't our fight.
The Bush/Cheney mess goes on and on and just gets bigger and worse.
Elect Romney and we can turn everything to poop.
dreams
No one ever said the ME wasn't all fukked up before Bush. Until Bush, though, it just wasn't our problem.
@Agnomad74:
And it still isn't!
Blaming Bush for Shiite vs Sunni blood-letting is idiotic. Why are so many American ideologues, BOTH the liberal ones and the conservative ones, so fixated on a worldview that America causes (or can cause) everything -- good and bad -- that happens in the world.
According to conservative ideology none of this matters as long as we always and forever state our undying love and support for Israel. Let's be honest in all of this as well, as far as governments are concerned we are more alligned with Sunni interests. As far as the people in these countries, we are much less hated by Shiites than we are Sunnis. However things play out in the Middle East the U.S. is never going to have an easy time of it. It's only our money and military that gives us any influence over there.
$173.94
Actually I think the capital of Israel is Morts Deli!
Retired SFC-2541031, nah, that's an Italian deli. It's Jerusalem.
"Never interfere with developing civilizations." < we should have put that into law in 1947. It still isn't too late.
Welcome al-quaeda, to Syria: courtesy of Obama and HClinton.
Putin: "Today some want to use militants from Al Qaeda or some other organizations with equally radical views to accomplish their goals in Syria. This policy is dangerous and very short-sighted. In that case, one should unlock Guantanamo, arm all of its inmates and bring them to Syria to do the fighting – it's practically the same kind of people. But what we should bear in mind is that one day these people will get back at their former captors. On the other hand, these same people should bear in mind that they will eventually end up in a new prison, very much like the one off the Cuban shore.
I would like to emphasize that this policy is very short-sighted and is fraught with dire consequences."
Whilst fighting al-quaeda in Afganistan, Obama and Clinton have supported, armed and financed al-quaeda into power in Libya, Egypt and soon in Syria.
Soon, we'll be sending shiploads of troops and spend trillions of tax dollars to fight the same jihadi hooligans that we are helping, now.....
Four more years of this, America??????
The Arab Spring was wishful thinking by Western countries - all it ever really was is readjusting of despots - and perhaps a ramping up of hatred.
In Engel's final paragraph, he states (paraphrased)
"Syria is likely to become a bigger battleground for Sunnis, Shiites, gov't forces, AlQuaeda, Iran and Hezbollah . . ."
Where's the downside for the US? Every dead fighter from any of the groups listed above is FINE by me. It's like hearing, in 1943, that the Nazi SS is at war with the Japanese Navy.
Nazis? DNA shows that Hitler was an AshkeNAZI jew. So were most of the top Nazi figures. DNA shows that the Ashkenazi are a offshoot of Turkish tribes. Last year when the movie producers released 'The King's Speach' the documents were released that showed that that same King of England conspired with Hitler to bomb London. So much for good wars. It's all about the Military/Congressional/Industrial complex. Most people are just victims of mass propaganda. For instance, on December 5, 2005 the documents were released that showed that the Gulf of Tonkin 'incident', that the Vietnam War was based on, never occurred. All wars are based in lies, it is always that way. Wise up, ladies and gentlemen.
Yeah, nevermind the fact that everyone in the Middle East hates everyone else in the Middle East and has for centuries (as the author points out)...no, all the violence is clearly America's fault.
And by the time of Bush's invasion of Iraq, the difference between the 2 communities had mostly been forgotten, what with people intermarried and such. But, the invasion opened old wounds and animosities. So, yes the current state affairs is mostly America's fault.
Yeah, because it took America to remind them how much they really hate each other.
After reading about 60 seconds of this article, 95% of Americans probably said, "TL;DR" (too long; didn't read)...too many big words and complex stuff. Just give them the oil and they're happy. New motto for Fox News: "No big words; lots of pretty colors."
This article is a brilliant analysis and explanation of a very complicated and messy situation. Is there a book (or books), or will there be a book or long essay, which explores the long history of rebellions and wars based on religious strife (not just Muslims)?
The rise of religious tensions started in Egypt, where the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood – a Sunni organization –mobilized and easily hijacked the 2011 revolution started by liberals, anarchists, socialists, students, artists and techno-nerds who were joined by millions of the unemployed and disenfranchised. Sunni Islamists, albeit moderate, took over in Tunisia, too.
So...wasn't this exactly what Glenn Beck has been screaming for 4 years?....YEP! The Muslim Bro hood is pissed and Barack the Bro is weak...What could possibly go wrong?
Russia, China, and the US should go in there and kick all of these mideast crazy asses and split the oil 3 ways. It's no wonder they are ruled by ruthless butcher dictators, that is the only way to control this insane section of the world.
Mainly our CIA, MI6 created and installed dictators, do you mean?
I wonder how long it will take for GW, Billy, Donni, and Conndi to be standing in dock at the Hauge answering for their war crimes of prosecuting an aggressive war with the intent of regime change?
USA's arrogance and stupidity made a bad situation worse.
Unfortunately we send incompetent politicians to Washington, and they not only make a mess of things, but they spend trillions of dollars, and kill thousands of people while making the mess.
We could save 100s of billions a year, by just reducing our military 20%, and just paying attention to things that really affect us instead of trying to do nation building in parts of the world where we haven't a clue how things work. We piss off the whole world with out arrogance and stupidity.
The whole Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been a mess from the start. Yes Bush go us in, but Obama has let the one in Afghanistan go on way too long. Now we find out the people we are training are killiing us. We need to come home, and avoid these stupid ill-informed wars
Engle just doesn't know what he's talking about. For one thing the word 'infidel' is a French word. It is what the French called the muslims, along with Moslem, which no Muslim calls himself....then there is the word mosque, which is another French word, the Muslims(once again) call their 'places of prostation' a Masjid. How is it that westerners confuse their own racist terminology with reality? What a Muslim calls one whom doesn't accept Islam is Kafir, meaning one that doesn't accept Islam, but, that doesn' mean that that person doesn't believe in God. As far as the difference between the Sunni and the Shia go, it is the same as Catholicism and Protestantism versus the Coptic Church. The Coptic church goes back to Jesus, the others go back to Constantine and Paul, both murderers. Same with the Sunni/Shia split. Most people don't care, they just follow like sheep, baa, baa, baa.
If Iraq had turned the way Bush and Cheney and rest of Neo-cons thought it would they would be publicly bragging about it. But once again they were WRONG
It turned out just as Bush wanted it, in chaos, with the rest of the middle east.
This like blaming America for Anti-Antisemitism for defeating Hitler, or Blaming America for the Catholic/Protestant conflict in Ireland because we left England in power after WWII. REALLY?!!
So, what I am hearing this reporter say is that it would have been better for everyone, if American would have left Saddam and the Taliban in power. And, It was American Troops who forced (pitted) Sunnis and Shiites against each other?!
What sick twisted, worthless POS journalist comes up with this assessment? And What Sick, Twist POS "American" could agree with it? (Oh, I understand the EMOTION behind it, but not the RATIONAL.) It is like pulling off the lid of a pressure cooker and the water boils over. Yeah, it was the US that pulled the lid off, but it was the Muslims who had the heat turned up, and have had it on for 1,400 years. It is kinda like blaming the car maker for a person driving into a tree. (Well, if they hadn't made the car, then the tree would not have been damaged)
We bear only the responsibility of bringing freedom from an oppressive, bully dictator, his perverted, sadistic sons and Oppressive Religious Regime. What they have chosen to with that freedom is their business. I have said it before, these are primitive un-evolved people, and they NEED a keeper. Just like Afghanistan, we help them evict the Russians, left them alone, and how do they repay us? They helped the terrorist who CRASHED planes into our buildings and kill American Civilians just going about their day. Is that CIVILIZED?
Saddam was our man, The CIA put him in power. And armed him, and when he failed to conquer Iran for us, we got rid of him, and a million other Iraqis. The Taliban are the Militia of Afghanistan, subbordinate to the traditional gov't of Afghanistan, not the Heroin dealing Karzai Government.
And that's why he had so much Soviet hardware?.
Yes, and poison gas by Germany and French Mirage Jet fighters, and their pilots(French).
Well if what you say is true, then Saddam came to power under LBJ's or Carter's and a Democrat Controlled Congress oversight, depending on which report you read about when he CAME to power. 1968 when the Ba'athist took power or in 1979 when he was "elected" President. Does this sound like something Democrats would do?
Of course the French have been in bed with Arabs for Decades, they are only slightly more evolved more the Arabs, Persians or what ever you call 'em, I have other names for them, but I'd get deleted by the Politburo for using them. I would have to see your evidence on the German gas, but most likely, it was not an exchange sponsored by the FRG (West Germany), but more likely the DDR (East Germany), or some form of espionage.
I think you are confusing the history, and that the CIA only gave Iraq military Intelligence during the Iran/Iraq war during the '80's in retaliation for the hostage taking.
The US SOLD the Iraqis a few helicopters and munitions, but the bulk of the US supplies were actually on the Iranian side, left overs from the Shah's days.
an epic tug of war between Sunnis and Shiites for control of the Middle East is like the epic war between conservatives and liberals for the control of America
The Sunnis have higher IQ's and a plan
The Christians have lost control to the Sunni American Liberals ehh ! We can compare American libs to Sunni arabs. Liberabs ! Suniliberittes ! The power of "ONE" . NWO ! No Way Out ! OWO !
Centuries ago, someone told a lie - a very big lie - about some god who is angry and who demands blood. Over time, billions of people swallowed that lie - hook, line and sinker. They perpetuated that lie over many centuries while murdering anyone who failed to form the prescribed sets of opinions (or beliefs) and slaughtered anyone who failed to maintain those opinions or changed their opinions or formed their own opinions freely based on Reason - as new knowledge and evidence became available. Even today, we still have the ignoramus who imagines himself to be enlightened - Billions of them actually - those who see as Evil anyone who fails to form and maintain the exact same sets of opinions that the Priest or Prophet claims to hold - anyone who dares to think for himself and abandon religion. And so the killing continues. Man should never be bribed into the forming of his opinions with promises of rewards or threats of punishments - it is a bad cause which requires such arts.
Good ALL of those rebellions should have been CRUSHED ..it had NOTHING to do with democracy but a group of extremists that want 6th century Sharia law ..Hopefully every one of the governments that were overthrown take their rightful power back at ANY cost
thus we have America land of the free where we seperate theocrats from technocrats. Support free will. Let the sleeping dogs lie where they may/lay.
There never was an Arab spring, this is all silliness. It never was the people taking over. If you look at the reality, the Arab spring is fantasy, in every country that there was an Arab spring the military, or an extremist group took over. The people have let to have control in one country.