Posted on 02/18/2007 10:19:43 PM PST by freedomdefender
PEWSEY, WILTSHIRE, UK -- Against a backdrop of unremitting violence and the constant threat of persecution, Iraqi Christians are being forced out of their communities and onto the road in a desperate search for safety. In the third of a series of special reports on life within Iraq, Barnabas Fund, based in the UK, has discovered that life as a Christian refugee brings its own dangers and hardships.
“Leaving your home, your job, the life you have always known,” said the report posted on their website – www.barnabasfund.org. “Fleeing for your life, with nothing but your memories, to an unknown destination. It is a decision that few of us in the West will ever be forced into taking. For a growing number of Iraqi Christians, this nightmare is their life.
“Ebrahim Awisha* took this decision when he found out that his son had been targeted by Islamic militants and had broken his leg in the effort to escape their attack. Mrs. Lila Attar* felt she had no choice when her husband was killed by insurgents. Different circumstances, difference trigger points, one similarity; they were targeted because of their Christian faith.
“The ongoing sectarian violence in Iraq preoccupies the Western media. The headlines are dominated by the groups undertaking the fighting – primarily Shia militia and Sunni insurgents. Minority groups get forgotten in the rush to provide the story on the latest atrocity, the newest horror. Iraqi Christians are one such group whose plight is often overlooked.”
Christians make up disproportionate number of refugee population The Barnabas Fund report stated that the latest figures from the UN estimate that around 3.7 million Iraqis - 1 in 8 - have been forced out of their homes by the violence since 2003. Christians, who made up only 3-4% of the population of Iraq, account for nearly a quarter of the refugee population. The number of Christians left in Iraq has fallen from 1.4 million in the 1980s to less than 500,000 now.
“The high number of Christian refugees is not accidental; it is part of the plan of Muslim insurgent groups to clear Iraq of its Christian heritage,” the report continued. “Christian refugees will commonly tell of being given a timeframe - two days, a week - to leave their homes or face death at the hands of insurgent groups. In this time they have to pack up what they can for the long journey and their new life.
“Some try to sell items to pay for the passage, but find few buyers. After all, say some Muslims, why pay for something, when it will be available for free in a few days time? Some simply do not get the chance to go back to their homes. Ebrahim was too scared to take his family back to their house, and so sent his neighbor to collect food and clothing for the journey.
Hey, we could use them in Wisconsin. Bring 'em on over!!
ping
I hope we'll let them into the US.
It's important that we establish order in Iraq as soon as possible. The people we came to liberate are being brutalized by the Islamists who've been empowered by the post-Saddam chaos.
We came to liberate them but the democrats have now decided to abandon them. Thanks for helping the coalition forces and have a nice life.......
Sound familiar? See the end of Vietnam.
The Christians have been fleeing Iraq for three years. The refugee crisis - a million or more Iraqis fleeing the chaos - is several years old; it didn't start with the Democrats taking Congress. The blame lies with Bush and Rumsfeld. they were warned by US generals that we would need hundreds of thousands of US troops to keep order after Saddam was toppled. They didn't listen. they sent too few troops. they were arrogant and stupid. Sorry, but not every stupid act can be blamed on Democrats.
freerepublic's bushbots know, deep down, that Bush and Rumsfeld made a deadly mistake by not sending more troops (even though the generals told them to). that's why freerepublic's bushbots don't want to talk about the massive regufee crisis that's going on now. the millions of refugees are a result of the chaos in Iraq - and the chaos (which Bush was warned would happen if 300,000 or more troops weren't sent in) was predictable and Bush bears part of the blame. Sorry, but that's true.
I don't disagree that mistakes were made and miscalculations have proven costly. You can say the same thing about most wars or conflicts throughout history. It's the nature of the beast.
My comments were simply frustration that there are thousands of Iraqi's over there who have openly assisted the coalition (for a variety of motives including trying to make their country better) who will be abandoned to death/torture if the dems get their way.
We started the mess and we should finish it. It's the only honorable thing to do and it will avoid the domino effect in moderate muslim nations that are at risk.
We can finish it now and show we are a nation that backs up it's promises or we can leave and show the world we are cowards.
The Iraqi Christians are not the only people we condemn to death by taking the cowards way out.
You will not get an argument from me.
Mistakes were made and will be made again.
The real question is what do we do now?
Cut and run (and blame Bush) or do we finish what we started?
With 500,000 Christians You would think thy would arm up and protect themselves the best they can, making there neighborhoods the one not to go into for head chopping. If they can't to that they best leave.
At the rate the Muslims are killing Christians there won't be many left in 50 years and they will be coming here to finish the job.
We should send lawers,guns and money.
My point is, you want to blame only Democrats, instead of looking at the situation honestly. Bush was told that if he didn't send 300,000 or more troops, there would be chaos after Saddam fell. HE DIDN'T LISTEN. You dismiss that as say, "mistakes were made" - but then you single out Democrats for a direct attack (even though they didn't make the stupid strategy, Bush did). Yes, they're wrong for wanting to cut and run, but Bush is STILL wrong in not sending enough troops - even now - to bring order to the country. This has been a deliberated decision on his part, because he didn't want to make Americans feel the pinch of sacrifice that this war, if waged effectively would require. The result of his foolishness - and COWARDICE - is chaos in Iraq and a phenomenal refugee crisis. You can't honestly say "mistakes were made" - if you're honest you have to say BUSH made SERIOUS ERRORS - and people have paid with their lives.
Iraq is in a shambles, lunatic Islamists are ruling the countryside, a civil war is blazing, and millions are fleeing the country - including ALL the christians.
you try to frame it as Demo v Republican, as if Bush's "Republican" policy is the answer. But of course it isn't. 20,000 more US troops are less than a bandaid. For peace and order, we need to double the troop presence. But Bush is too spineless to do that.
No I just asked a question. So right now you want shy of 200,000 troops deployed to Iraq. Is that correct?
You got it. I want the number that Gen. Shinseki told Rumsfeld we would need in the first place. If you're going to do something, do it right damnit. Not half-ass'd. The problem with half-as''d in war is that people die and chaos reigns,
The specific warning you are referencing is Gen Shinseki comments?
He wasn't the only one, but he was one of them
First and foremost I am not a big Bush fan.
Again..... we can write the history books later but what do we do right now while our boots are on the ground???
More troops might have made a difference in the first year in Iraq but without addressing Iran and Syria we still would fail.
Iran, the Islamofascist, and Syria are committed to the failure of democracy in Iraq.
We can sit around and bash Bush all night long and it does not answer the question of the moment. What do we do?
Do we abandon the crucial battle in the WOT and leave with our tail between our legs or do we finish what we started in Iraq even if it means we bloody the nose of some other countries over there?
The first solution assumes they will never attack us again. Do you believe that?
What will the Middle East look like when the moderate governments fold one by one after we abandon Iraq?
I got out of the Army in 2001 and I have alot of friends over there. My best friend is over there now. My brother-in-law leaves next month for a year. My old unit has been over there three times now (3+ years).
If we are not going to do what it takes to win over there we should just bring them home because it's not worth losing any more soldiers. We should just tell all those who lost loved ones that we are sorry but their deaths were in vain. We should tell all those who have helped us that we are sorry but they are on their own. We should admit that the conflict was simply too difficult and the sacrifices were too much for our country to stomach.
Is that what you want?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.