Gee I wonder how this happened

[Godboy]

There are more than two sects....see you're not as bright as you think you are

The Sunni-Shia Divide

I know all that and it's been going on for centuries, that's why this thread and claim is ridiculous

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

All out war between Shia and Sunni countries Saudi against Iran, Iraq splitting apart as is yemen

Now who invaded Iraq admitting he didn't know the difference between Sunni and shia or the history?

Ambassador: Bush Didn’t Know There Were Two Sects of Islam


http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/amb...ects_of_islam/

You know, Obama's been President for a longer period of time than the entirety of WWII. At some point you have to stop fluffing and give him at least some of the blame.

Oh, and Boooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh

 

[TheCrusader]

The Sunni-Shia Divide

I know all that and it's been going on for centuries, that's why this thread and claim is ridiculous

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

 

[Godboy]

I know all that and it's been going on for centuries, that's why this thread and claim is ridiculous

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

You asked, "name one major conflict before 1970". He named one, then you threw a tantrum. The truth is there have been countless conflicts between the two sects over centuries. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

 

[dannyboys]

I know all that and it's been going on for centuries, that's why this thread and claim is ridiculous

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Yes and no TheCrusader

Just because we don't hear this in the news to consider it major
doesn't mean religious and political violence and wars weren't going on between the two.

here's one example of political violence for dominance:

"Shiism in Persia after Safavids
Ismail I initiated a religious policy to recognize Shiism as the official religion of the Safavid Empire, and the fact that modern Iran and Azerbaijan remain officially Shia states is a direct result of Ismail's actions.

Shah Ismail I of Safavid dynasty destroyed the tombs of Abū Ḥanīfa and the Sufi Abdul Qadir Gilani in 1508.[58] In 1533, Ottomans restored order, reconquered Iraq and rebuilt Sunni shrines.[59]
Unfortunately for Ismail, most of his subjects were Sunni. He thus had to enforce official Shiism violently, putting to death those who opposed him. Under this pressure, Safavid subjects either converted or pretended to convert, but it is safe to say that the majority of the population was probably genuinely Shia by the end of the Safavid period in the 18th century, and most Iranians today are Shia, although there is still a Sunni minority.[60]"

How many more wars, genocides, and military coups actions and oppression / dominance
do we not hear about?

So by your standards, if you only count incidents that Western powers have used to justify involvement,
sure you can blame that on the West.

If you count the underlying conflicts, there were always going on.
You may not consider that major.

None of those were major, the Islamic Empires under their various dynasties were more unified then than ever since 1919.

The European Imperialist betrayal of the Arabs after dismantling the Ottomans is both NEVER FORGOTTEN and has caused the Sunni-Shia schism as you know it today.

What WILL HAPPEN is the Sunni-Shia will reunite, a new Islamic Empire will destroy the Western puppet dictators, and then the world will move into a much different phase of what's going on over there.

LOL You're ignorant

I have a formal education in Islamic history, what do YOU have?

I bet you do. Interesting to have a real live radical Islamofacist amongst us.
I'm letting the FBI/CIA/DHS about your "formal education" in muslim terrorism.
Hope you like eating ******* hot dogs for lunch every day. ******* rag head!

 

[TheCrusader]

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Yes and no TheCrusader

Just because we don't hear this in the news to consider it major
doesn't mean religious and political violence and wars weren't going on between the two.

here's one example of political violence for dominance:

"Shiism in Persia after Safavids
Ismail I initiated a religious policy to recognize Shiism as the official religion of the Safavid Empire, and the fact that modern Iran and Azerbaijan remain officially Shia states is a direct result of Ismail's actions.

Shah Ismail I of Safavid dynasty destroyed the tombs of Abū Ḥanīfa and the Sufi Abdul Qadir Gilani in 1508.[58] In 1533, Ottomans restored order, reconquered Iraq and rebuilt Sunni shrines.[59]
Unfortunately for Ismail, most of his subjects were Sunni. He thus had to enforce official Shiism violently, putting to death those who opposed him. Under this pressure, Safavid subjects either converted or pretended to convert, but it is safe to say that the majority of the population was probably genuinely Shia by the end of the Safavid period in the 18th century, and most Iranians today are Shia, although there is still a Sunni minority.[60]"

How many more wars, genocides, and military coups actions and oppression / dominance
do we not hear about?

So by your standards, if you only count incidents that Western powers have used to justify involvement,
sure you can blame that on the West.

If you count the underlying conflicts, there were always going on.
You may not consider that major.

None of those were major, the Islamic Empires under their various dynasties were more unified then than ever since 1919.

The European Imperialist betrayal of the Arabs after dismantling the Ottomans is both NEVER FORGOTTEN and has caused the Sunni-Shia schism as you know it today.

What WILL HAPPEN is the Sunni-Shia will reunite, a new Islamic Empire will destroy the Western puppet dictators, and then the world will move into a much different phase of what's going on over there.

LOL You're ignorant

I have a formal education in Islamic history, what do YOU have?

I bet you do. Interesting to have a real live radical Islamofacist amongst us.
I'm letting the FBI/CIA/DHS about your "formal education" in muslim terrorism.
Hope you like eating ******* hot dogs for lunch every day. ******* rag head!

 

[TheCrusader]

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

You asked, "name one major conflict before 1970". He named one, then you threw a tantrum. The truth is there have been countless conflicts between the two sects over centuries. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

I throw a tantrum because morons like her and yourself don't seem to understand that having to reach back 1,400 years for noteworthy "battles" between Shia-Sunni means that the divide is a relatively recent phenomenon.

It's intellectual stupidity on your behalf.

 

[dannyboys]

I know all that and it's been going on for centuries, that's why this thread and claim is ridiculous

It hasn't been going on for centuries you retard.

Name one major Sunni-Shia conflict before 1970. You ******* republicans are as dumb as dirt.

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

All the better to ******* Moab all of you!
You stupid rag heads all need to gather by the millions just before you"take over the world" at some ******* sand pit. Putin and KSA and soon to be President Trump have a really big surprise for all of you.
Oh you mean like the "massive empires' that twice put in with the ******* Germans? HAAA HAAAA!
How did THAT end up?
You're full of a "massive amount" of radical muslim bullshit. American Patriots have you first on the list pig ******!

 

[dannyboys]

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

You asked, "name one major conflict before 1970". He named one, then you threw a tantrum. The truth is there have been countless conflicts between the two sects over centuries. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

I throw a tantrum because morons like her and yourself don't seem to understand that having to reach back 1,400 years for noteworthy "battles" between Shia-Sunni means that the divide is a relatively recent phenomenon.

It's intellectual stupidity on your behalf.

What happens when a Sunni man marries a Shia woman? Ya ******* right they are one big happy family UNITED AGAINST THE WEST!!!!!
Asshole liar!

 

[TheCrusader]

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

You asked, "name one major conflict before 1970". He named one, then you threw a tantrum. The truth is there have been countless conflicts between the two sects over centuries. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

I throw a tantrum because morons like her and yourself don't seem to understand that having to reach back 1,400 years for noteworthy "battles" between Shia-Sunni means that the divide is a relatively recent phenomenon.

It's intellectual stupidity on your behalf.

What happens when a Sunni man marries a Shia woman? Ya ******* right they are one big happy family UNITED AGAINST THE WEST!!!!!
Asshole liar!

The Sunni-Shia divide didn't prevent the union of the Ottoman Empire, the Fahtimid, the Mamluk, the Abbasid, and so forth.

 

[emilynghiem]

Battle of Camel 646 AD

So the only thing you can think of is a googled battle from 1400 years ago?

You're an IDIOT.

You asked for evidence prior to 1970.... idiot.

One battle from 1,400 years ago PROVES MY POINT, that typically the Shia/Sunni do not fight each other and historically have united to form massive Islamic Empires.

You asked, "name one major conflict before 1970". He named one, then you threw a tantrum. The truth is there have been countless conflicts between the two sects over centuries. Just admit you were wrong and move on.

I throw a tantrum because morons like her and yourself don't seem to understand that having to reach back 1,400 years for noteworthy "battles" between Shia-Sunni means that the divide is a relatively recent phenomenon.

It's intellectual stupidity on your behalf.

Dear TheCrusader the example I cited was from the 1800's
so this is an ongoing conflict.

Yes I agree that the Western politics exploits this.
but that doesn't mean the conflict wasn't already there,
wasn't already causing political wars. if it had been resolved, it couldn't have been riled up over and over.

The REAL issue I see is the division separating
Jews Christians and Muslims who are ALL supposed to be under unified Scriptural authority.

The problem is people aren't practicing Christian rebuke to RESOLVE and RECONCILE relations with neighbors, which is the meaning and purpose of Christ Jesus as bringing Restorative Justice. See Matthew 18:15-20 which is a prescribed form of "due process" for resolving conflicts grievances or trespasses to RESTORE good faith relations. I know Christians who practice this successfully, but many more who have never been taught how mediation works; much less experienced it firsthand. So how can Christianity be taught to reconcile with fellow Jews and Muslims if the Christians aren't even reconciled by it?

So that is causing division not only among Muslims who don't invoke Christ Jesus to reach agreement, but also between Muslims and Christians, Christians and Jews, Christians and Secular Gentiles. We are ALL supposed to be governed as distinct folds of ONE flock by establishing universal truth justice and peace FREELY by agreement.
Not divided and not coerced.

As long as these religious issues cause factions to split and blame each other,
ANY political group can take advantage and stir wars between the sides.

This isn't limited to just Muslims. The gay issue and abortion issue
were used to stir up Christians against secular and vice versa.

I understand your point that politics is taking advantage of religious differences
to stir up wars for political points and gain.

I also understand that if these groups were reconciled, despite their differences whether or not these change,
they couldn't be exploited this way by their worst fears and divisions blamed on others.

I appreciate you not blaming the victims of the political ploys that play religious groups against each other.
But there is work to do to resolve those religious differences where they are immune to such victimization.