If the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria are the bad guys, then who are the goodies?
It’s a worthwhile question that has been lost in all the handwringing ever since ISIS launched its blitzkrieg towards Baghdad with US weapons.
The answer depends on who you listen to.
If you believe the head-honchos in the know, then the goodies are the guys that still own Baghdad, at least on paper anyway. Of course, the head-honchos in the know just spent five years telling us all that everything was hunky dory in Iraq and that things are going much the same in Afghanistan. So they might not be the best judge of what’s going on.
The other answer is that there are no good guys.
This is the correct answer.
The only difference between ISIS and the Iraqi government put in power with Western military might is the difference between which side their great-grandfathers joined the day Mohammad died.
Other than that, they are basically the same.
That’s why, as ISIS was arming itself with US weapons and planning on what it was going to do to the remaining Christian population in Mosul, the Iraqi government was debating laws that will allow Iraqi men to divorce their wives once they turn nine years old.
Remember, to get divorced you need to be married first.
And remember, this is the government we sent soldiers off to war to establish.
These are the key points of the Iraqi constitution that prove it really makes no difference whether ISIS emerges victorious in Iraq or not because Sharia Law is a given anyway.
- First: Islam is the official religion of the State and is a foundation source of legislation:
- A. No law may be enacted that contradicts the established provisions of Islam
ISIS isn’t making a beeline for Baghdad because it wants to change the laws. It’s beef with Maliki and the Shia running the show is just about who gets to implement laws allowing nine year old girls to skip Grade 3 so they can be divorced.
You’d think that after making such a stupid mistake as creating a state based entirely upon Sharia Law in Iraq that we might have at least done things a little better in Afghanistan.
And you’d be wrong.
Because in Afghanistan, it’s even worse. Here’s the proof.
- Afghanistan is an Islamic Republic, independent, unitary and indivisible state.
- The religion of the state of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam.
- Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of law.
- In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.
Just so you know, the limits of the provisions of the law in Afghanistan allowed the last church to be bulldozed to the ground about four years ago. I can’t really see Midnight Mass at Christmas time being part of the free exercise of faith in Afghanistan’s future.
This is the constitution that forty Australian soldiers gave their lives to establish. It’s a Sharia Law constitution.
And it’s the constitution of the good guys, who are good merely because they are not the Taliban, not because they are actually any different to the Taliban.
The Western world’s response to September 11 was to build two Sharia Law states. And after that got boring, the United States begun arming al Qaeda linked groups in Syria at the end of 2013.
It’s not the kind of plan that anyone with any sense would concoct to win the ‘War on Terror’.
And what it means is that it’s not just ISIS militants and al Qaeda henchmen who have been dying to implement Sharia Law; so have soldiers from Western militaries. Including Australia’s.