Might as well bang your head against a wall...

[zenith-nadir]

Feb 22, 2006 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060222/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us_shrine_1)

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A Shiite political leader said Wednesday that U.S. Zalmay Khalilzad shares some of the responsibility for the bombing of a major Shiite shrine because of his criticism of Shiite-led security forces

Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, cited Khalilzad's statement at a press conference Monday that America would not continue to support institutions run by sectarian groups with links to armed militias.

"For sure, the statements made by the ambassador were not made in a responsible way and he did not behave like an ambassador," al-Hakim told reporters.(emphasis mine)

So the "Americans are responsible" for muslims blowing up an ancient Shiite shrine/mosque Wednesday because the US ambassador to Baghdad "would not continue to support institutions run by sectarian groups with links to armed militias".

What the hell do you say to people that think like Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim? He cannot even accept that muslims blew up the al-Askari shrine in Samarra without blaming something American. You might as well bang your head against the wall.

[Mark]

Pity Islam (and most other religions) don't teach personal responsibility. What a better world it would be if they did.

[zenith-nadir]

Well there will be no embassies burning over muslims blowing up one of the most sacred Muslim shrines in the world.... but rest assured there will be more muslim on muslim violence which many muslims will blame on the "American invasion of Iraq!"

[Luke T.]

When I heard about the bombing of the shrine, I wondered why anyone would be so stupid. It could only provoke anger of Shiites everywhere toward the insurgents.

But I guess the insurgents are smarter than me. They must be counting on precisely this reaction.

It's amazing when you think about it, really.

[shecky]

When I heard about the bombing of the shrine, I wondered why anyone would be so stupid. It could only provoke anger of Shiites everywhere toward the insurgents.

But I guess the insurgents are smarter than me. They must be counting on precisely this reaction.

I wondered about the wisdom of invading Iraq. But I figured the grown ups in charge must have known something I didn't. My bad.

Not to absolve any of the nuts causing trouble in current Iraq, but the whole mess is ultimately US responsibility. We broke it, we gotta fix it. I guess.

[zenith-nadir]

...but the whole mess is ultimately US responsibility.Actually I disagree. When America invaded Iraq I am quite sure they didn't expect muslims to blow up sacred muslim shrines in order to start a sectarian war between muslims.

It's amazing when you think about it, really.What is amazing is the backlash will not be a turning point against the insurgents doing these horrible acts but more sectarian violence between muslims.

[shecky]

Actually I disagree. When America invaded Iraq I am quite sure they didn't expect muslims to blow up sacred muslim shrines in order to start a sectarian war between muslims.

The US inability to foresee such events is a serious f***up, IMO. There are at least a few folks more knowledgeable than I who regarded deposing of Hussein as a very serious destabilizing factor in the ME. Shiite and Sunni acrimony had long been known after all. Some of Iraq's neighbors were expected to not be much help, either.

[pgwenthold]

I don't see the confusion here.

If you are an innocent bystander and your car windshield is smashed in a fight between two people you don't like, would you only blame the guy that crashed into it? Or would you also blame (and maybe even put more blame on) the guy that started the fight in the first place?

I don't see the response as surprising from an Iraqi perspective.

[billydkid]

Actually I disagree. When America invaded Iraq I am quite sure they didn't expect muslims to blow up sacred muslim shrines in order to start a sectarian war between muslims.

What is amazing is the backlash will not be a turning point against the insurgents doing these horrible acts but more sectarian violence between muslims.

Well, shouldn't we have expected all sorts of unpredictable things to happen? Weren't the unpredictable set backs really very predictable? We (the administration) went in there with the notion that our best case scenario would be what transpired when we should have gone in expecting the worst case scenario. Many have said from the beginning that we would not be able to control the situation and that the invasion of Iraq would develop into a huge and unpredictable mess and the notion that we could maintain control (create a new reality as some of the prime movers have suggested) and manufacture a credible democracy where no such thing has ever existed and wear trible grievances have festered for centuries. I just have complete contempt for any of the people who championed this occupation when they start saying "We didn't expect this to happen" and making excuses when there were tons of people saying Iraq would turn into the hell hole it has become and the occupation would become a nightmare.

[toddjh]

If you are an innocent bystander and your car windshield is smashed in a fight between two people you don't like, would you only blame the guy that crashed into it? Or would you also blame (and maybe even put more blame on) the guy that started the fight in the first place?

Only if I considered the fight to be a reasonable response to that person's actions...

[TragicMonkey]

Not to absolve any of the nuts causing trouble in current Iraq, but the whole mess is ultimately US responsibility. We broke it, we gotta fix it. I guess.

Only to a point, though. We stepped on an anthill. We are responsible for repairing the damage we caused, but not the damage the ants cause by fighting each other. After a certain point, they are only using our actions as an excuse and opportunity to savage each other. They even get a degree of absolution for their squabbling, as they cast the blame on us.

[pgwenthold]

Only if I considered the fight to be a reasonable response to that person's actions...

But also only if you considered the person initiating the fight to be reasonable in the first place.

And remember, we aren't talking about initial responses. We are talking about a fight that has escalated. It's like a fight that starts out with pushing and punches, and leads to one guy busting a chair over the other ones back, and the other picking him up and throwing him through the windshield of my car.

In that case, "busting a chair" and "through the windshield" were not responses to anything that started the fight, but were collatoral damage in the escalation. If it's my chair or my car, I don't wonder if busting a chair over the back was a reasonable response to someone hitting on a guy's wife, I just get PO'd at the clowns who are fighting. Particularly if I don't like either of them.

[Ohmer]

When I heard about the bombing of the shrine, I wondered why anyone would be so stupid. It could only provoke anger of Shiites everywhere toward the insurgents.

Indeed.
Gunmen strike 27 Baghdad mosques, kill imams (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/22/iraq.main/index.html)


But I guess the insurgents are smarter than me. They must be counting on precisely this reaction.

It's amazing when you think about it, really.

Yes, it is.

[shecky]

Only to a point, though. We stepped on an anthill. We are responsible for repairing the damage we caused, but not the damage the ants cause by fighting each other.

I would think insecurity to be perhaps the greatest damage we have caused in Iraq. Would the US not be responsible for the chaos in the aftermath of Hussein?

After a certain point, they are only using our actions as an excuse and opportunity to savage each other. They even get a degree of absolution for their squabbling, as they cast the blame on us.

They couldn't get aways with this sort of thing under Hussein, even if they wanted to. They might have had a excuse to give it a go, but no opportunity. The invasion gives them the opportunity. I don't think that responsibility could be so easily shrugged off.

[Luke T.]

If you are an innocent bystander and your car windshield is smashed in a fight between two people you don't like, would you only blame the guy that crashed into it?

Yes, if the guy who smashed my windshield went out of his way to deliberately smash it. Why should I blame the other guy? Do you think the shrine was blown up by accident while trying to throw a punch at America? Oopsie!

[TragicMonkey]

I would think insecurity to be perhaps the greatest damage we have caused in Iraq. Would the US not be responsible for the chaos in the aftermath of Hussein?

Only the chaos caused directly by his removal, not the chaos that resulted from people seizing the opportunity to go nuts.

They couldn't get aways with this sort of thing under Hussein, even if they wanted to. They might have had a excuse to give it a go, but no opportunity. The invasion gives them the opportunity. I don't think that responsibility could be so easily shrugged off.

The problem with assuming responsibility for all the results of an action is that it will never end. We did A, A caused B, B caused C, infinitely. After a certain point, the responsibility shifts to the people performing the individual actions. The burden of responsibility lies upon the people who have a choice. The Iraqis weren't given a choice in the removal of Saddam, true. But they certainly have a choice about not blowing each other up.

[zenith-nadir]

After a certain point, the responsibility shifts to the people performing the individual actions. The burden of responsibility lies upon the people who have a choice. The Iraqis weren't given a choice in the removal of Saddam, true. But they certainly have a choice about not blowing each other up.Exactly. The invasion of Iraq did not force any person or group in any way to blow up the al-Askari shrine in Samarra today.

[zenith-nadir]

...and as expected the "blame the jews" flag gets run up the pole, on state television no less.

Feb 23 3:12 AM US/Eastern (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/23/D8FUMST00.html)

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad blamed the United States and Israel on Thursday for the destruction of a Shiite shrine's golden dome in Iraq, saying it was the work of "defeated Zionists and occupiers."

"They invade the shrine and bomb there because they oppose God and justice," Ahmadinejad said, referring to the U.S.-led multinational forces in Iraq.

"These passive activities are the acts of a group of defeated Zionists and occupiers who intended to hit our emotions," he said in a speech that was broadcast on state television.

The really sick part is muslim insurgents are blowing up muslims wholesale in Iraq and even willing to blow up 1,200-year-old muslim shrines just to start a sectarian war between muslims...but god forbid some Danes draw a few cartoons.

[Lurker]

It really pisses me off that they are blaming the US for this. Sure they said we "share" the blame but my guess is the extremists will only read that as "America is to blame".

Lurker

[Orwell]

Ah the Law of Unintended Consequences rears it's ugly head once again...