A million martyrs await the call (They want to die and we want to kill them.)

The Times (London) ^ | November 19, 2005 | Kevin Toolis

[FerdieMurphy]

THEY WERE not hard to spot — the dead tanks — as they littered the sides of the main Baghdad-Tehran highway deep inside Iran. Heavy twisted monsters, blasted by artillery, mounted on stone plinths like trophies as a warning to any other army that came to fight and die here, as Saddam’s divisions had done. After 40 I stopped counting.

On the Iranian border itself the little town of Mehran had become a shrine to martyrdom and death. Like a mini-Stalingrad, it had been razed three times during the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-88, its streets filled with the corpses of Iranian child soldiers sacrificed in human-wave assaults; but in the end the Iranians expelled the invader at an awesome human cost.

Saddam has gone, but Mehran is once more in the front line of potential war. The Iran-Iraq border is just a few miles to the west of the town on a flat plain — ideal tank country. The border itself is marked by a meandering stream but on either side now are the opposing armies of the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, all waiting for orders from above. If the Americans do ever invade then it will be here, as the shortest distance to Tehran from Baghdad; and that little stream the Rubicon for a war of unimaginable consequences.

In No10 the tom-toms of war of war are drumming again as Tony Blair warns that he will not tolerate the meddling hand of Iran in the affairs of Iraq. In Washington the neoconservative tom-toms are even louder, warning that the West must “surgically strike” at Iran’s hidden nuclear facilities and robustly challenge Iranian state-sponsored terrorism. Nor it seems can the EU countenance Iran’s rise as a nuclear power either. A new nuclear crisis now looms later this month with the threat of UN Security Council sanctions over Iran’s controversial nuclear programme.

In Tehran the hardline President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has done little for foreign relations with his chilling call for Israel to be wiped off the map. We are, it seems, close to the on-ramp for another spectacular confrontation in the Middle East.

But before we succumb again to the hysterical warnings of our leaders it is worth seeking a cold-eyed measure of this new enemy they would have us fight. Iraq and Iran are very different. Iran is nearly four times the size of its neighbour and six times the size of Britain. How could an already undermanned American army expect to control such a huge territory?

Nor will those already fabled “surgical strikes” by the US Air Force deliver a decisive blow to Iran’s growing nuclear capability. Iran’s nuclear plants are already well hidden across its huge land mass. And all that a partial strike will do is unleash an unstoppable war without significantly damaging the enemy’s capability.

Iran’s population at 70 million is three times that of Iraq’s and it has one of the youngest populations in the world. Iran’s standing army is estimated by the CIA to be 520,000-strong, but each year 817,000 17-year-old Iranian boys are potentially available for military service. That is an awful lot of martyrs or suicide bombers.

The Iranians are Persians, not Arabs, a consideration entirely absent from most neoconservative analyses of Iran’s supposed weakness. Persian imperial dynasties date back to Cyrus the Great, around 530BC, and Xerxes, 486-465BC, who plagued the Greeks.Unlike the chaotic Arab shambles of Saddam’s Iraq, Iran remains a hierarchical society where the vast majority live in rigid terror of the authorities above them, religious or imperial, and will utterly obey their commands.

In many ways Ayatollah Khomeini, who came to power in 1979, was the greatest Persian Emperor, fusing his own version of Shia Islam into a state ideology. And during the Iran-Iraq war he revived the ancient Shia tradition of martyrdom: hundreds of thousands of soldiers, many of them children, died in futile suicidal assaults over minefields. “The Tree of Islam has to be watered with the blood of martyrs,” said Khomeini without regret.

Martyrdom is still the state religion. Huge posters of the war dead and Palestinian and Lebanese suicide bombers dominate every surface in Tehran and every speech of the political leadership. Any attempt to threaten or invade Iran will be a huge asset to a regime longing to re-energise its faded legitimacy among its own downtrodden population. Invasion by the Great Satan would be a godsend.

Nor should we underestimate Iran’s capacity to punish its enemies at long range. In 1982 Iran sent a thousand revolutionary guards to Lebanon to spread the Islamic revolution. The plan failed but Iran was behind three of the greatest acts of postwar terrorism: the American Embassy bombing in Beirut and the blowing up of the US Marine and French paratrooper barracks by suicide bombers in 1983. The French and the Americans left Lebanon in defeat soon afterwards.

Iraq is a mess but widening the conflict by attacking Iran would be an act of madness. That little stream on the western edge of Mehran is a Rubicon we must never cross.

[Blueflag]

"hate-spewing christian"

hmmm. It took you only two posts before resorting to insult and ad hominem attack. GREAT critical thinking and a powerful argument on your part.

Now, I happen to understand your prior point -- Salem witch trials, Spanish Inquisition, various Papal indiscretions, Church of England persecuting non-conforming protestants, Irish Catholics vs. Irish Protestants, the crusades, etc., etc. You have a point. BUT the criticism needs to be directed at the christian RELIGION -- how the genuine article is practiced, interpreted and corrupted, NOT Christianity as a faith.

IF you were to critically compare Islam and Christianity, you would indeed see stark differences, which is, I believe, the point the response to you post was implying.

RELIGONS (human creations) are as corrupt as humanity. IF you believe in God, the great "I am" then your faith, and certainly God's grace, are pure.

There is a long-demonstrated difference between the Christian faith and the [various] christian religions, particularly those who call themselves 'christian' but have bizarre doctrines far distant from the original New Testament church.

I recommend you review, for example, two books --

Roger Williams, by Edwin S Gaustad (often in libraries)

and

Separating Church and State -- Roger Williams and Religious Liberty, by Timothy L. Hall.

These will give you a scholarly view into the role of church and state, the corruption of faith by religion, and the description of and search for a 'true' protestant faith -- all concerning a key founder of American Protestant 'faith' -- Roger Williams.

An no one gets called "hate-spewing" speciously.

I am not a religious scholar, but I am fairly well-schooled, and read in depth as I work to live my faith thru religion. ;-)

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"Any religion can be perverted by evil misfits."

Sure it can. But it has a head start when it's based on the largely incoherent ramblings of a megalomaniac who has no credentials as a "prophet" other then his self-appointment.

His first murder victims were Jews he he thought he could fool by incorporating some Old Testament into his ramblings. They knew the Torah well enough that they immediately saw him for the lying fool he was and laughed at him, and lo and behold he suddenly gets a "revelation" about how the Jews are enemies of his fledgling religion. Just as he got one revelation after another that put a stamp of approval on whatever personally benefited him at the moment.

Even his prepubescent last wife commented on how interesting it was that his revelations so conveniently coincided with whatever he wanted.

Too bad so many today don't have the benefit of the knowledge the Jews he murdered for recognizing him as a fraud had.

[bkepley]

It took you only two posts before resorting to insult and ad hominem attack

That's precious. Complaining about ad hominems in such a thread.

[TheClintons-STILLAnti-American]

"Christians burned the library at Alexandria. Probably history's greatest crime. "

I've heard some ludicrous pronouncements in my day, but that, my friend, has to rank up there near the top.

[skinkinthegrass]

Are you talking about (Radical :) Muslims or Democrats ? ;-)

Is there ANY REAL difference ?

[bkepley]

I've heard some ludicrous pronouncements in my day, but that, my friend, has to rank up there near the top.

Depends on your point of view. I'm in an Athenian mode right now. When I was reading about the Gulag Archipelago or the Holocaust I probably would not have gone quite so far :}

[Lucky Dog]

Christianity has had some pretty sick, perverted days.

You are mistaken, sir. The guiding principles of Christianity are succinctly stated (paraphrased) as “Love God with all your fiber” and “Love your neighbor as your self.” Nowhere in the guiding scriptures for Christianity is there any hint that followers should kill those who refuse to convert or commit any other act of violence against non-believers.

The same cannot be said for the guiding tenants of Islam. Muslims are commanded in the Koran to behead infidels and the only guaranteed path to heaven is martyrdom in physically fighting infidels.

Any religion can be perverted by evil misfits.

Apparently, your point was that, sometimes, those who call themselves Christians have perverted the tenants of that faith to justify committing acts of violence and depravity; no one can argue that there have been those who attempt to pervert any philosophy for their own ends. However, these depraved acts have always been condemned by the overwhelming majority of true followers of Christ who have the full support of the New Testament behind their condemnations.

Again, the same cannot be said of the followers of Islam.

I think it's more a question of nationalism and middle-eastern failure than a problem of religion.

I disagree vehemently. I challenge you to name a major “nationalist movement” (excluding any involving Muslims) that has employed “suicide bombers” to the vast extent that Islamist fascists have done. Let me extend the challenge to cite any modern “nationalist movement” that has used “fatwah’s” or “religious edits” to justify killing innocent non-combatants in attacks on targets with no military or political value. I think the only example you could use that would even come close would be the Japanese used of kamikaze tactics during WWII. Such would be a false analogy as that effort was not a “nationalist movement” and the attacks were restricted to those with obvious military value.

I submit that the logical conclusion from the facts I have cited as well as others in the news and recent history is far distant from your assertions.

[bkepley]

I have been around muslims and none of them have committed suicide.

[dagoofyfoot]

Christians burned the library at Alexandria. Probably history's greatest crime.


I can't freakin' believe you just said that.


So according to you Hitler or Stalin had nothin' on these guys...right?


Dude, I think like, you must be on the wrong forum, spewing the same crap like any other liberal mental midget.

[Blueflag]

"If the Americans do ever invade then it will be here,"

As you suggest -- the Maginot line was a similar idiocy.

We long prepared for the Soviet Armoured Divisions to roar through the Fulda gap, yet ALSO war-gamed a wide variety of non-shortest-distance thrusts by an invading Eastern Bloc thrust.

We won Iraq War 1 in 100 hours (really the first 24) because of the "left hook" thru the western deserts while the Marines, the British and the Kuwaiti's feinted up the middle. The French were a fine ready reserve ;-P.

The author of this article apparently has no grounding in military tactics, particularly US combined forces maneuvering. Also he apparently forgot the fact that our air power bombed the pathetic Iraqis into a state where they were largely NOT mission capable prior to advancing our forces on the ground. The Republican Guards did put up a good fight, but were no match tactically or technically for our forces.

When you can't communicate, you can't maneuver, you can't resupply, and your air power, armour and artillery are in fragments -- as the Iranians WOULD BE prior to substantial ground unit contact -- you WILL lose the fight.

PAy no attention to this man behind the curtain. He off base strategically and poorly-grounded tactically.

[bkepley]

Christians burned the library at Alexandria. Probably history's greatest crime.

I can't freakin' believe you just said that.

The more I think about it, the more I like it.

[THEUPMAN]

pig urine come in a spray


hmmm ... what an idea!
I have a few pigs, this could be the market nich I'v been looking for.

Perhaps a whole line of personel "pig" products.

hmm...

[Blueflag]

bkeply -- CAN you stay on point? Do you HAVE the intellectual capacity to debate a point reasonably?

I quoted you my man. So if I was "complaining" - go to the source.

Now, how about defending your point instead of attacking the responders.

I believe I UNDERSTAND your point, and might even help you make it on this thread, but YOU have to do a better job and NOT resort to the insults dude.

I even pointed you and other to 'scholarly works' that would SUPPORT your argument.

I would suggest you avoid the insults and the hyperbole and make some good points supported in fact.

[dagoofyfoot]

The more I think about it, the more I like it.


I'm sure you do, Mr. Bin Laden.

[skinkinthegrass]

Thanks. BF & TCSAA, Your posts #21 & 22 are great!

[Lucky Dog]

I have been around Muslims and none of them have committed suicide.

I have been around mental patients who have not committed suicide... Because I can make that statement does that mean that some "mental patients" do not commit suicide?

In any case, your reply was a logical non sequitor. Please address my challenge.

[Doogle]

this could be the market nich I'v been looking for

..don't forget your analysis and product project manager (me) when the cash rolls in....and instructions about wind direction

Doogle

[bkepley]

bkeply -- CAN you stay on point? Do you HAVE the intellectual capacity to debate a point reasonably?

This is your idea of reasoned debate?

Now, how about defending your point instead of attacking the responders.

My point is obvious and I stated it at the start. Muslims are not all killers today and the history of Islam has not always included so many killers.

I would suggest you avoid the insults and the hyperbole and make some good points supported in fact.

Hypocrite!

[skinkinthegrass]

Perhaps a whole line of personal "pig" products...hmm...

That's the spirit!..."Just how are you gonna bottle via that stuff."...by the bucket or ditch, not that I'm volunteering! :D

[bkepley]

I have been around mental patients who have not committed suicide... Because I can make that statement does that mean that some "mental patients" do not commit suicide? In any case, your reply was a logical non sequitor. Please address my challenge

There is no question that today Christians are better behaved and more civilized than muslims. My point being just that history is continuous and Islam might need to work things out the same way Christianity did. Or, maybe it needs to die out. Who knows?