# Thanks toÂ PigMine5/Mullah pbuh
Here.Â Â by Hugh Fitzgerald
Unlikely to be fully realized, but it’s the thought that counts.
What score to settle is that? It’s the score of the Sunnis who resent the transfer of power to the despised Shiites, those “Rafidite dogs” — as Al-Zarqawi and many other Uber-Sunnis liked to call them — who, only because the American forces deposed Saddam Hussein and drove his regime permanently out of town, then pushed Sunnis out of Baghdad, even while the Americans were still in the Green Zone, trying to “reconstruct” the country and not paying attention to this,Â and then, whenthe Americans left, and the Shi’a formally took power (with a few ministries for Sunni Arabs and Kurds), and before Maliki, and even more under Maliki, to promote Shi’a economic and political power. The Shi’a, having suffered at the hands of the Sunnis not only under Saddam Hussein, but before him, under the rule of a Hashemite (Sunni) king until 1958, but always under a government run mostly by and for a Sunni elite,Â are not about to relinquish power. Maliki can be blamed for his toleration of corruption and for his incompetence in dealing with the Sunnis, but would it be much different under another Shi’a?
And while many Sunnis fear and hate ISIS — else why would so many Sunni Arabs have fled Mosul, along with Kurds, to seek refuge in Kurdistan this week? — Sunnis have been protesting against Shi’a ministries, and the Shi’a domination of government, for a long time. They resent their loss of political and economic power. And ISIS can exploit that resentment.
The texts of Islam are full of violence and score-settling, full of sudden raids on enemies, unsuspecting or prepared, full of the seizing of loot and women, full of the impulse to “strike terror in the hearts” of the Infidels — and to the extreme Sunnis, the Shi’a are not even Muslims, but Infidels, and for some Sunnis, they are “the worst of Infidels, worse even than Jews and Christians.”
There’s no end to this.
And while it is doubtful that ISIS will conquer Baghdad — it is now not an overwhelmingly Shia city — would it be bad for the world’s Infidels if ISIS did seize part of it anbd Sunnis and Shi’a were locked in combat, and perhaps Iran would feel compelled to send forces — if the Americans don’t send their drones and planes first — to help stave off ISIS, small but determined.
And what if the Sunnis could take first Samarra, where an important Shi’a mosque is located, and damage that site? Or what if ISIS could somehow send forces into Karbala and Najaf, and destroy an important Shi’ite mosque or shrine? What then? Then in Tehran the realization that the Sunnis are a mortal threat to Shi’ites everywhere, and that the Islamic Republic is never going to be regarded by Sunnis as the paladin of Islam, will finally sink in. Even into the minds of those who created, and continue to support, the regime that is known as the Islammic Republic of Iran.And then they may realize that a nuclear weapon to be used against the hated Zionist enemy will do nothing to win friends among the Uber-Sunnis, and Iran had best make a deal with the West, which does not threaten Shiites, theÂ better to husband its resources against many of the world’s Sunnis, including many right next door in Iraq,who do.