Saddam's state was overtly secular in character. Why he has ever been associated with a theocracy is beyond me.
Because many peop[le'd brains just go ahead and switch off when Islam is mentioned
His country was held together by a common religious belief and his power derrived from Islam (sunni muslim).
Explain what you mean by this, and yes, citation is needed Ecofarm. Explain what you mean. That sentance, not anything else. What were you referring to?
The only reason the other sunnis supported him without question is because sunni islam says so.
Explain what you mean by this, and yes, citation is needed Ecofarm. Explain what you mean. That sentance, not anything else. What were you referring to?
He also slaughtered the Kurds and horsehockye muslims on a regular basis.
Explains what this has to do with religion and how it shows how religion moptivated Saddam. Please alsom explain how in the context of almost all Kurds being Sunni themselves. Explicitly explain this contradication.
His genocide was largely based on religion (although Kurds are sunni, they disobeyed his rule), but you pretend religion has nothing to do with his regime.
Explain how his genocide was laregly based on religion. explicitly explain that assertion.
Iraq is a bastion of backwards religious teachings, and Islam has everything to do with that. Islam is so much a part of the state and the law, it can hardly be separated.
Show how. Explain your remark and show how, explaining the difference between the UK and Sweden's state religions and Iraq's under Saddam. Prove your point or withdraw it.
Please, spare us the "Saddam and Iraq had nohing to do with religion!" Saddam's secularism was only skin-deep window dressing.
Show how. Explicitly show how the Baathist state was motivated by religion and how Saddam personally was. Explain how his genocides were motivated by religion.
I know Saddam was a muslim and ALL OF HIS PEOPLE are muslim, and I'm not buying any BS about him being a secularist. I know it is "common knowledge", but I find to to be "common BS". It wouldn't be the first time that a bunch of people bought a load of BS, ya know.
It wouldn't be the first time you have taken a contrary position without having any understanding of a subject for the first time either.
When the entire country gets on their knees 5 times a day and stones their wives, I'm not buying the secular BS. Sorry.
When did this happen? what are you talking about? Either explain what you mean here, and if you dont, it officially becomes classified as "eco's imagination"
The mosque could decide who lived and who died.
Explain what you mean by this, and yes, citation is needed Ecofarm. Explain what you mean. That sentance, not anything else. What were you referring to?
They determined who got stoned, who got raped and who got FGM.
Explain what you mean by this, and yes, citation is needed Ecofarm. Explain what you mean. That sentance, not anything else. What were you referring to?
Those clerics could dictate life and death... that is very real power in the hands of the church. They might not have acted directly to Saddam's orders, but their power was absolute (below him).
Explain what you mean by this, and yes, citation is needed Ecofarm. Explain what you mean. That sentance, not anything else. What were you referring to?
So what if they were not offcially part of the government?
Well given the fct that this entire argument started because of your bizarre, unfounded and unsupported claims about Saddam being motivated by Islam, your entire point collapses without this.
They acted as the legislature, judiciary and executioners. When the church decides who lives and who dies... that's kinda theocracy - even if the church is only sanctioned by and not part of the state.
Explain what you mean by this, and yes, citation is needed Ecofarm. Explain what you mean. That sentance, not anything else. What were you referring to?
As far as the power of the mosques, no citation is needed.
Of course it is. When you make a ridiculous claim that flies in the face of all common knowledge and sense, you do need to back it up, otherwise you look like an ignorant, dimwitted idiot, and I know you are none of those things.
Saying Iraq was secular is only possible when one examines merely the official/paper government policy at top levels (ignoring the power of mosques) and ignores 90% of Baath Party history.
'The power of the mosques' is something you and you alone seem to be privy to. Tell us what you are referring to.
"underground" means "not state sponsored" but "illegal"
This is important Eco. Explain how your entire argument isn't destroyed by this point. Dont ignore it, respond to it.
I think we can just accept that mosques have MAJOR power in Iraq then and now.
Now? yes. Then? I dont think we can accept that, which is why every single person who has posted on this topic so far is disagreeing with you.
Then the debate is over. Saddam endorsed a state religion. Iraq was secular compared to other mid-east countries... not in general.
What debate? I never said Iraq under Saddam was secular. you just imagined I did.
![[party]](/images/smilies/partytime.gif "Party [party]")
