Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by OpinionatedB
because i am not directly familiar with Islamic laws, could you be more specific ??
i am confused because if they (Shia & Sunni) are separate, as you indicate, then who signed the Defense Treaty between Iran & Syria back in 2004 ??
(Shia or Sunni or does it really matter ?)
if it is against the laws to engage in defense of an ally, why bother signing the treaty at all ??
so, wouldn't Iran's (potential) participation be in accord with said treaty ?
As I stated above, it is permissable to provide weaponry, monies, and diplomatic support. Which was the reason in my understanding of the treaty
itself, to promise these supports if needed, and present a unified front to the world.
Assad is Alawiyyah, which you could in some stretch of the imagination say they are a 'type' of shia. But not the same type as Iran.
The only time any shia can fight is in self defense, the same holds true for Alawi (I think...lol) we can offer our aid to another shia, or another
muslim in need, but not in the physical sense, unless it is a personal choice... and I am talking individual personal choice, because of the
strictness of ahadith on the topic. But it is considered forbidden.
If you notice, no matter what happens even to other 12er shia in the world, Iran does NOT do anything for them but what I stated above, because to
leave the borders of your own country without being personally attacked is considered offensive, and not defensive....
the only time this would be possible would be if Islam itself were in danger of being lost, and Islam itself (Shia Islam) being fought against. (and
even then there would be too many questions on its permissability because we should first go into taqiyyah as this is what taqiyyah is for... and the
shia
have done it before, hide all the books and personal beliefs) but to up and go to the aid physically of another people, is simply not
allowed.
If you remember how vehemently Sadr was opposed for his little action in Iraq for just this reason! We can offer safety place for shia to go, we can
offer many things, but troops is forbidden, unless it is you and your country being attacked. Sadr never gained any support at all until it was
looking like it was Shia Islam being fought (see Najaf), and then he only garnered some personal individuals support, NOT broad spectrum.
Do not know how to explain this any better.
To put it very simply, the day that Iran sends thousands of troops into Syria, is the day Iran can no longer be called an "Islamic" Repubic... the
laws are too stricts on this matter. And Khamanei could be asked to step down, and if asked he would have 0 choice in the matter, this is something he
swore to uphold when he took the position of WF (Wilayah al Faqih, guardianship of the jurist) that if he ever breaks Islamic law he will be removed
from office. It is the ONLY thing can remove him from office. But it is a huge thing, it would/could result in his immediate replacement. It is part
of the constitution of Iran.
edit on 29-5-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)
