12-08-2006, 10:29 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Sunni bomb, Shia bomb </b>
FT
Khaled Ahmed
We can kill each other in the hope that collateral damage from our bombs will be so big that the nations we really hate will also be annihilated in the processÂ
 Â
Who will scare whom in the Middle East with a nuclear bomb? Iran is supposed to be poised to make a bomb so that it wonât be threatened again and again with regime change. It thinks that if you have the bomb you canât be invaded. Thatâs what the world thought too.
Pakistan said India had made the bomb so Pakistan too should have it or become Indiaâs slave. In 1999, India nearly invaded Pakistan, ignoring its bomb. Now Pakistanâs bomb is thought to be dangerous for Pakistan, especially if the clergy takes over in Islamabad.
Pakistanâs bomb was also called the Islamic bomb. Some of the money for it had come from the Arabs, so it became the property of the entire Islamic world. A religious bomb, if you please. We said the Quran had actually allowed its building in Sura Anfal.
Then Iran had its revolution which threatened the Arabs. Pakistan was used to old Iran as its strategic depth under the Shah. Since the Arabs came under pressure from Iran in the Gulf they got Pakistan and Taliban to pressure Iran from the east. Arab money and Pakistani clerics mounted an anti-Iran campaign in the 1980s.
Pakistan and Iran clashed in Afghanistan in 1998 and the Taliban ended up killing Iranian diplomats in Mazar-e-Sharif. There were first-ever anti-Pakistan processions in Tehran after that. Iran brought troops up to the Afghan border and threatened it. Strangely, the Taliban threatened Iran with a nuclear strike!
It was quite clear. The Taliban had no nuclear bombs. Iran understood that the message had come from Pakistan. It thus developed that Pakistanâs bomb was after all not an Islamic bomb; it was a Sunni bomb. And it was not actually meant for India!
Vali Nasr in his book The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam will Shape the Future says just that, and concludes that it was Pakistanâs Sunni bomb that first pushed Iran to think of its bomb in the 1990s: a Shia bomb (p.222). This poses yet another problem.
You canât even say that Iranâs bomb would be Islamic, let alone Shia. In fact, there will be no bomb. Spiritual Leader Khamenei says the Quran prohibits the making of a weapon of mass destruction. But Pakistan found its bomb in Sura Anfal! Who is telling the truth?
Author Ray Takeyh in his book Hidden Iran: Paradox and Power in the Islamic Republic also says that Iran thought of its bomb only after it began fearing that a nuclear Pakistan might be grabbed by the Deobandi clergy (p.141). Once again Pakistanâs bomb is being seen as a Sunni bomb.
This immediately triggers another discussion. Both Iran and Pakistan believe in martyrdom as explained in the Quran. When a Muslim dies in war he is shaheed , which means he remains physically alive.
This doctrine will work on India: when we destroy an Indian city with our nuclear bomb, all the Hindus will die; but when India destroys Pakistani cities all the Muslims will be shaheed which means physically alive. Indian Muslims will be the divine collateral damage.
President Ahmadinejad is naïve. He has started threatening Israel before he has got the bomb. Now Israel is thinking of doing something about it. Immediately other problems come to the fore. Can Iran be safe through âmutually assured destructionâ (MAD) with Israel? The problem is geographic: Israel can target Tehran but Tehran canât target Tel Aviv without killing the Arabs and destroying the First Kaaba.
Iran and Israel will achieve MAD and become safe from each other. Iranâs bomb on the other hand will allow Iran to dominate the Arabs. A Shia bomb will finally turn the tide of Sunniâs persecution of the Shia. But the Arabs will turn to Pakistanâs Sunni bomb for help.
Immediately, a doctrinal glitch will give pause. Who will remain physically alive and who will stay dead if both sides are Muslim? This complication was espied by the Deobandi-Wahhabi ulema of Pakistan in the mid-1980s. With much financial blandishment from the Arabs to sharpen the Pakistani mind, it was decided to declare the Shia non-Muslims.
Since the Constitution has not been duly changed to send the Shia out of the pale of Islam, we kill them in sectarian incidents. We have so far done to death thousands of innocent Shias in Pakistan.
Pakistan can launch its Sunni bomb on Iran after apostatising the Shia. Pakistan is used to this. It apostatised the Ahmedis in the 1973 Constitution when its ink was hardly dry. If the Shia of Iran are no longer Muslims they will no longer achieve martyrdom. Once this is done all the great monuments of Iran that are a part of Pakistanâs cultural identity can easily be sacrificed, like the Buddhas of Bamiyan.
After seeing how the Muslims kill each other in Iraq in order to defeat the Americans, one can forget about a secular bomb, an all-purpose device that only non-Muslims can make. An Islamic bomb is do-able, but it has the tendency of morphing itself into a Sunni or a Shia bomb soon after its birth.
We can kill each other in the hope that collateral damage from our bombs will be so big that the nations we really hate will also be annihilated in the process
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
FT
Khaled Ahmed
We can kill each other in the hope that collateral damage from our bombs will be so big that the nations we really hate will also be annihilated in the processÂ
 Â
Who will scare whom in the Middle East with a nuclear bomb? Iran is supposed to be poised to make a bomb so that it wonât be threatened again and again with regime change. It thinks that if you have the bomb you canât be invaded. Thatâs what the world thought too.
Pakistan said India had made the bomb so Pakistan too should have it or become Indiaâs slave. In 1999, India nearly invaded Pakistan, ignoring its bomb. Now Pakistanâs bomb is thought to be dangerous for Pakistan, especially if the clergy takes over in Islamabad.
Pakistanâs bomb was also called the Islamic bomb. Some of the money for it had come from the Arabs, so it became the property of the entire Islamic world. A religious bomb, if you please. We said the Quran had actually allowed its building in Sura Anfal.
Then Iran had its revolution which threatened the Arabs. Pakistan was used to old Iran as its strategic depth under the Shah. Since the Arabs came under pressure from Iran in the Gulf they got Pakistan and Taliban to pressure Iran from the east. Arab money and Pakistani clerics mounted an anti-Iran campaign in the 1980s.
Pakistan and Iran clashed in Afghanistan in 1998 and the Taliban ended up killing Iranian diplomats in Mazar-e-Sharif. There were first-ever anti-Pakistan processions in Tehran after that. Iran brought troops up to the Afghan border and threatened it. Strangely, the Taliban threatened Iran with a nuclear strike!
It was quite clear. The Taliban had no nuclear bombs. Iran understood that the message had come from Pakistan. It thus developed that Pakistanâs bomb was after all not an Islamic bomb; it was a Sunni bomb. And it was not actually meant for India!
Vali Nasr in his book The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam will Shape the Future says just that, and concludes that it was Pakistanâs Sunni bomb that first pushed Iran to think of its bomb in the 1990s: a Shia bomb (p.222). This poses yet another problem.
You canât even say that Iranâs bomb would be Islamic, let alone Shia. In fact, there will be no bomb. Spiritual Leader Khamenei says the Quran prohibits the making of a weapon of mass destruction. But Pakistan found its bomb in Sura Anfal! Who is telling the truth?
Author Ray Takeyh in his book Hidden Iran: Paradox and Power in the Islamic Republic also says that Iran thought of its bomb only after it began fearing that a nuclear Pakistan might be grabbed by the Deobandi clergy (p.141). Once again Pakistanâs bomb is being seen as a Sunni bomb.
This immediately triggers another discussion. Both Iran and Pakistan believe in martyrdom as explained in the Quran. When a Muslim dies in war he is shaheed , which means he remains physically alive.
This doctrine will work on India: when we destroy an Indian city with our nuclear bomb, all the Hindus will die; but when India destroys Pakistani cities all the Muslims will be shaheed which means physically alive. Indian Muslims will be the divine collateral damage.
President Ahmadinejad is naïve. He has started threatening Israel before he has got the bomb. Now Israel is thinking of doing something about it. Immediately other problems come to the fore. Can Iran be safe through âmutually assured destructionâ (MAD) with Israel? The problem is geographic: Israel can target Tehran but Tehran canât target Tel Aviv without killing the Arabs and destroying the First Kaaba.
Iran and Israel will achieve MAD and become safe from each other. Iranâs bomb on the other hand will allow Iran to dominate the Arabs. A Shia bomb will finally turn the tide of Sunniâs persecution of the Shia. But the Arabs will turn to Pakistanâs Sunni bomb for help.
Immediately, a doctrinal glitch will give pause. Who will remain physically alive and who will stay dead if both sides are Muslim? This complication was espied by the Deobandi-Wahhabi ulema of Pakistan in the mid-1980s. With much financial blandishment from the Arabs to sharpen the Pakistani mind, it was decided to declare the Shia non-Muslims.
Since the Constitution has not been duly changed to send the Shia out of the pale of Islam, we kill them in sectarian incidents. We have so far done to death thousands of innocent Shias in Pakistan.
Pakistan can launch its Sunni bomb on Iran after apostatising the Shia. Pakistan is used to this. It apostatised the Ahmedis in the 1973 Constitution when its ink was hardly dry. If the Shia of Iran are no longer Muslims they will no longer achieve martyrdom. Once this is done all the great monuments of Iran that are a part of Pakistanâs cultural identity can easily be sacrificed, like the Buddhas of Bamiyan.
After seeing how the Muslims kill each other in Iraq in order to defeat the Americans, one can forget about a secular bomb, an all-purpose device that only non-Muslims can make. An Islamic bomb is do-able, but it has the tendency of morphing itself into a Sunni or a Shia bomb soon after its birth.
We can kill each other in the hope that collateral damage from our bombs will be so big that the nations we really hate will also be annihilated in the process
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->