Posted on 10/20/2012 8:41:18 AM PDT by gandalftb
“Brothers, Moscow has become the enemy of Islam and of Muslims these days. It has become the number one enemy of Islam and Muslims”.
Sheikh Yousuf Al-Qaradawi is the Sunni’s most respected theological authority. He is also the sole spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the rest of the world.
Also a spiritual leader of the Hamas movement, he encouraged suicide bombings.
Amit Assa, a former Colonel in the Israeli Security Service (Shabak) told the Voice of Russia: “Such declarations of animosity will be understood by Al-Qaeda, Muslim brothers and other radical organizations as a theological permit to attack Russians around the world. There is no need for a direct call ‘to kill Russians’. They have their codes and without any doubt the declaration of ‘enemy number one’ is one of them”.
(Excerpt) Read more at english.ruvr.ru ...
I don’t think Saddam was a mistake. Mo-mo was a HUGE blunder.
I’d love to see this happen, I can remember how they took care of those Somali pirates, you rock pooty.
It’s about time.
More overtime work for the FSB.
What with the Imam in Chief in the White House, who would that leave to be the big enemy? I guess Russia won the contest.
To say that we should not pick either side makes sense. To say that we should make sure neither side wins makes even more sense.
To join Putin's side would be stupid and evil and would align us with Shiite terrorists waging jihad against Israel, as evil Putin has done. That is not acceptable in any way.
So is "Enemy Number One" better or worse than "The Great Satan"? I'm just trying to figure out where we stand.
Maybe Putin is a Jooo? Oy vey, I shouldn't be on the 'pweter on Shabbos but I can't find a dagumed Gentile to change the channels. Really really wish our government had some Ruskie balls. Meanwhile in Benghazi...
Putin is no weak sister like Obama. Putin, ex-KGB, will not suffer the Muslims’ aggression lightly. Go get ‘em Vlad. Whack the Imams and their whole family tree. It’s better to be feared by your enemies and Putin is the guy to do it.
“To join Putin’s side would be stupid and evil and would align us with Shiite terrorists waging jihad against Israel, as evil Putin has done. That is not acceptable in any way.”
I am only suggesting that our only point of shared view with Putin to be one of wearing it as a badge of honor when Islamists condemn us, and it would not/would not have hurt us to publicly say that to Putin with respect to any Islamist condemnation of him - and that’s all.
As far as Syria goes, I think Putin is likely more correct than we are in his understanding of what is going on there - it is a proxy war between the Shia fundamentalists and the Sunni fundamentalists, and the excuse for why it started now is “opposition to the Assad dictatorship”, which has actually been more secular-minded than either side.
Putin also has national security concerns that more directly, more immediately concern Russia than they do the U.S. - they share a border with Iran and they have large Muslim populations in their southernmost regions as well. Being a friend of convenience - not true shared interest - with such a neighbor on your border is likely and simply good regional politics from a Russian point of view. For Russia to take a position with regard to Iran that was 100% in sync with the U.S. would require Russia to change and to fund and to protect an entirely different military posture in the region; something Russia is neither politically nor economically willing to do and I expect they see that view not as an “anti-U.S.” view as much as a pro-Russian view.
I am sure they are not blind to the fact that such a policy eases any constraints WE seek to place on Iran, but it suggests at a minimum that Russia is saying we will have to make any constraints on Iran work without dragging Russia into it too easily or in too close a cooperation by them. At the end of the day, even after the current theocracy may be toppled in Iran from within, Russia wants to be seen by the Iranian people as a “friendly northern neighbor”, not a threat on their border, regardless of Iran’s politics. That’s simply a local, and immediate security and diplomatic policy that fits Russian self-interest, whether we like it or not.
It also fits with the history in the region, and it’s a history westerners have unlearned but one that modern day Russians and Iranians have not; a history that pre-dates the cold war; a history that was once part of “the great game”, beginning in the early 1800s, where the British Empire and the Russian Empire vied for strategic advantage for themselves all across central Asia, and where the weaker central Asian states were used by both sides - used for Russian and British self interst and often at the expense of the client or allied state. At the end of the most direct conflicts over influence in central Asia bewteen the two empires, Persia (Iran) was divided between a Russian zone of influence in the north, a British zone in the south and a nuetral zone between them. Russia has no desire to give the impression that it seeks such a proxy/subordinate role for Iran today in its relations with Iran. Iranian nationalism, no matter what it’s politics were, would not react kindly to it and Russia does not need to foster such a reaction from Iran; no matter what Iran’s politics are.
I realize that all of this does not undo, or change, or excuse or suggest as “O.K.” the existential threat that Iran may pose to others in the Middle East. At the same time, I expect Russia believes that it’s own nuclear abilities are reminding Iran that it is in Iran’s self-interest to NOT include Russia among those whom it could threaten and get away with it. So, simply from a point of mutual self-interest to NOT be militarially any danger to each other, Russia does not have the same sense of urgency about any threat that Iran may pose to others.
So, yes, Russia may be “helping” Iran by helping Assad in Syria, but a Russian perspective simply does not see the situation the same way we do, and for reasons of Russian self-interest that are not so hard to understand.
I imagine the way Russia sees it, is that it is up to Iran and the U.S. to mend their own relationship; and meanwhile it is not Russia’s job to antagonize Iran in a manner that would be too critically taking sides in the U.S.-Iranian disputes. I am sure that it is not lost on our own intelligence and foreign policy community that if Russia wanted to it could be helping Iran vastly more than it has. Instead, it has walked a fine line of not 100% taking a totally pro-Iran position or set itself as a total hinderance to Iran. Iran sees this too.
I am sure that the U.S., as a client-state of Saudi Arabia in the region, does not want to keep the “status quo” in Syria, and while I see that the status-quo might help Iran, for the moment, I am not so certain it would not help the U.S., once we could remove ourselves as the servant of Saudi Arabian interests in the region. What we ignore right now is that fundamentalist Wahabi-Saudi backed interests would be trying to oppose, and obtain supremacy over, Shia interests in the region EVEN IF TRUE DEMOCRATIC MODERATES INSIDE IRAN COULD TOPPLE THEIR THECRAT DICTATORS.
As it is, the U.S. policies in the region are effectively taking sides between two fundamentalist radical Islamist groups, as if one is “better” than the other. Neither is better from either an immediate or long term western interest, and it is a contest in which we do not have a horse in the race.
It might be amazing to see what changes we could get from Assad if we admitted to ourselves that we do not want to see an increase of Muslim Brotherhood and radical fundamentalist Wahabi-Saudi influence in Syria, and joined Russia in supporting the “status quo” in Syria. We might even be able to break the Syrian-Iran and Syrian-Hezbolla friendships.
If Russia and Iran are friends of convenience, it is because they do in fact have a shared interest: anti-Americanism.
If Iran was ruled by a pro-American government, then the anti-American Putin would be hostile to them as he is hostile to all of America's allies around the world.
You say America is a servant of the Saudis, but you seem to have a bunch of excuses for Putin's slavish devotion to serving the Iranian jihadist agenda and making sure they get nukes.
Why is it that the people who blame America first always seem to have a bunch of excuses for why our enemies ally themselves with jihadists against us, and explanations of why they are right to do so?
I don’t know why you assume that an Iranian government that was quite simply not hostile to America would automtically be “pro-American” in any sense, by a Russian view or otherwise, when such a state is not necessary. India for example is not hostile to America without necessarily being “pro-American”.
Second, I am no fan of Putin and I recognize his government as a type I call a mobacracy. However, I aslo see that as fact that represents a deeply rooted cultural element of Russia, which began in the earliest days of the Russian czars and has not changed over the centuries - a culture with a very high, and very embeded acceptance and tolerance for autocrats.
Russia, like the U.S. seeks as much influence as it can over/with its closest neighbors, by all means, friendly or otherwise. However, with but a few exceptions, the vast majority of former vassal states are not now nor willing to be Russian vassals, and Russia is not going to threaten any of them with its nuclear arsenal, and the Russian economy, demographics and military abilities represent right now a dimenishing cability for empire building.
Influence, partnerships and such yes - empirial domination is not in my opinion in the cards.
Lastly, like the U.S. with respect to central and south America central asia IS THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD.
Shall we refer to U.S. interests in our hemisphere as imperial, just because we seek such influence out of our own self-interest?
We will stand up to the savage stupid mass-murderer Putin and we will smash his imperial dreams to pieces.
“So is “Enemy Number One” better or worse than “The Great Satan”?”
We are now referred to as the Little Satan.
Note: this topic is from 10/20/2012. A re-ping. Thanks gandalftb.
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.