Iran, the battle of all Arabs

Discussion in 'Latest US & World News' started by MGB ROADSTER, Nov 21, 2017.

  1. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, According to the CIA Factbook on Iraq Shias make up 65% of population, while Sunnis 32%. Christianity accounts for 3%, and the rest practice Mandaeism, Yazidism and other religions.
     
  2. notme

    notme Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    22,510
    Likes Received:
    2,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It was the US who supported Saddam Husseins genocide against the Kurds and Iranians with his WMD weapons.
     
  3. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,904
    Likes Received:
    2,228
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Most of the things are pretty well known.

    You making a good point but what it proves is that there is not a long standing Sunni/Shia divide. What he is saying is that Is that both of them have been exploiting conflict by using religion.

    Basically he is saying that from 79 when Iran became a theocratic state, Saudi Arabia felt threatened. This caused tension. Iraq which was ruled by a Sunni kept things balanced. Sunnie and Shia lived together in villages and towns before the US invasion. That changed then.

    What is even more amazing is that frequently the people who do this to themselves were new to practising Islam. They obviously get people to believe that what they are doing will have a purpose. With the 7/7 UK bombers they showed them loads of videos of Muslim women and children being killed by the West. They wanted that stopped and were led to believe blowing themselves up would help to achieve that. - I could be wrong but I doubt they think of 72 virgins.

    However you mentioning the blowing up of people in mosques is one of the main ways I have read manufactured the sectarianism in Iraq though there is a twist to this that I can't for the life of me remember. It was like sunnis arranging for Sunni mosques to be blown up so that people would think it was Shia and probably ISIS to boot I can't remember the exact details but that was the sort of thing done to get people into hating Shia/Sunnies in Iraq and I am sure you can see how that would work.

    Many Koran linguistic interpretations are not accurate. In addition through the years the interpretation and laws would change in keeping with changes in society. Wahabism only began in the 18th C. That is the religion of Saudi Arabia and until the US became its friend that was where it stayed. However since the early 80's Western countries started importing it into the West. This is the Islam which is a bit like how Westerners try to understand Islam, that is taking texts literally. This is done even worse by the extremists. I think it was your own French journalist who said when he was released from ISIS that there was not a Koran in sight. They seem just to pick bits out they fancy.

    At the time of the first world war the majority of Arab Muslims at least incorporated Sufism in their practise. Isis and Al Qaeda kill Sufis ....and it is from these extremist groups that people in the West get their ideas of what Islam is.

    I know nothing about Iran's religion except that their theocratic state demands the same sort of punishments as Wahhabism....but there are loads of other things which affect the way everyone sees things which are then incorporated into religion. For instance a study showed that whether countries favoured harsh treatment for homosexuality depended more on whether they had been colonised by the British which had the death penalty for Sodomy than on Christianity or Islam. (South Africa was an exception to this) A now dead British Iman or professor said that homosexuality used to be perfectly acceptable in the Middle East that European Gays, Brits in particular used to go there for refuge and that in the Koran there was always a couple of handsome waiters seeing them off as well.

    The point being made is that Sunni and Shia do not have as people keep claiming a centuries old hatred based on the beginning. This is currently being manipulated by Iran and Saudi Arabia in a power play. He explains how that works in connection to tribalism

    basically it is a good psychological tool to get people on your side


    Wahhabism though is very much about 'purity'. I know you have some involvement in buddhism. Decades ago I lived for two years in a Buddhist community but when I watched a Sufi take some British Muslims on retreat they seemed to be doing exactly the same as we did using different words - basically if I remember well getting to know their inner feeling selves and taking responsibility for their thoughts and actions. Nothing to do with dogma.

    I don't know anything about the person you are talking about or who was threatening him. Mohamed believed in free choice as regards religion. That is definite. The bits which people now go around saying are about killing people who stop being Muslims are actually a wrong interpretation of what was being said which was about killing traitors. Of course the extremists do this also even killing Muslims who do not accept their way. They probably feel threatened by them and so in their minds believe they could be a traitor so off with their head.

    But a big look into the history of Islam is not necessary. It is just saying that hatred between sunnis and shia is a pretty new phenomena and that the real issue is a power struggle between Iran and Saudi Arabia for the hearts and minds of Muslims. Now when Iran chucks out its theocracy that will change. Into what I do not know but it will change.
     
  4. Cornergas

    Cornergas Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2017
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Nothing wrong with the USA either, except their war mongering governments, and their pushing for globalization and the control over all countries on the planet...
     
  5. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My bad.

    Yes they may use it but I think we can't deny they're is a religious aspect. For instance, the crusade wasn't only a religious project, they were many many political interest, that doesn't mean it's not a religious war.

    Yes and some people who would later denounce jews or participated to the genocide of jews lived next to them. During the Saint Barthelemy in France, some people slaughtered their neighbour. The fact that people live in the same places and are neighbour doesn't mean they're is no hatred sleeping and some demons are rather easy to awake. The US invasion was a major disaster, but did someone forced shia and sunni people to kill each other ? Many decided by themselve to attack the other.

    [/quote]
    What is even more amazing is that frequently the people who do this to themselves were new to practising Islam.[/quote]

    People new to islam in Pakistan. Seriously ? If you speak of westerner bomber, they weren't new to Islam, they were born to it, however, their care to their soul was more recent, and recruiter showed them from the text that they were one sure way to go in Allah paradise : martyrdom. Because they were former fornicator, drug addicts, they thought that nothing could erase their sins, nothing except martyrdom.

    It doesn't explain why they're is many djihadi even in muslim countries (boko haram, shebab, aqmi, ISIS in lybia, ISIS in syria, talibans in both Pakistan and Afghanistan).
    Furthermore, a lot of djihadist have very specific targets : schools, concerts (music is forbidden by salafi). When you really care of a war, you try to target the responsible : the government, you don't kill 17 YO girls.

    That's one of the problem of the quran : it pretend to be written by an all knowing, extremly wise god, and it's written many time in the quran that it's perfectly clear, however, the muslims themselve admit they understand nothing about it. When you criticize the quran, most muslims would say "it's very complicate, you need to be savant about that", and they would encourage you to listen a muslim scholar. So the quran is supposed to be perfectly clear, but many muslims renounced to understand the quran by themselve.

    Yes but islamic violence didn't start in the 18th century. Muslim conquest of india made an estimated 80 million death, the arabic slave trade provoked countless death. The big advantage of westerner is that they're accountant in the soul. You can precisely estimate the victims of slave trade or genocide because very often some people kept an accountant book of that. It's impossible however to estimate it for the arabic slave trade.

    Most westerners don't want to understand Islam. Most of them want to believe that terrorism have nothing to do with islam. 80 % of westerner have a PH.D in intellectual nihilism and relativism. If you speak of the violence in islamic texts (either the quran or the sunna), they would speak of the old testament or the crusades. I heard for instance a guy who pretended that female genital mutilation had nothing to do with islam. I told him that it had nothing to do with the quran and he thought it was the same, ignoring by a total lack of curiosity the existence of the sunna/

    The problem of the extremists in Islam is that they're everywhere. The two most important secular states in Islam are Turkey who started to stop teach darwin, and Bangladesh, where hindus are persecuted, where they were a hindu genocide in the 70's and where atheist bloggers are murdered.

    Almost all french journalists are islam apologist. Many of them quoted blindly "
    whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. ". Saying : see ? This have nothing to do with Islam. A consciencious journalist would have quoted the entire verse :
    Verse 5 : 32
    Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one - it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.
    And we can quote the next one : Verse 5 : 33

    Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

    The big problem is that in France, they're is two stances who are mainly heard :
    The one : this have nothing to do with Islam. For me it's the position of the willfull blinded.
    The second : Damn muslims ! They're inherently evil. For me, it's the position of the usefull idiot of the islamist.

    My stance is neither of them, and it's a third one : Yes the problem if the islamic ideology, no, it's not the muslim by themselve.

    But why they killed them ? Because they classified them as hypocrites and the surate 9, the second to last to be revealed, so the second to last in order of importance in the quran, is full of declaration of hatred toward the hypocrites. Furthermore, sufism are a minority today.
    Furthermore, everywhere in muslim countries, the right of religious minorities, women, homosexuals are poor.

    It's not impossible that the brits influenced them, they were days where muslim countries were safer for homosexuals. As far as I know, homosexuality is not evocated by the Quran (even if the quran pretend to not abolish the jewish law who criminalize homosexuality, which is false), but it's only forbidden in the
    However, it belong to the muslims to get rid off nefast influences. I have the impression too that female genital mutilation (fgm) exist only in countries colonized by the brits (Egypt and Nigeria). I don't deny the crimes my country (France) commited in the colonies, but as far as I know, it was during the colonial epoch that fgm was abolished, aswell slavery (except tunisia, the bey of tunisia abolished slavery before tunisia was invaded, and we failed to eradicate that from Mauritania too).

    [quote)
    The point being made is that Sunni and Shia do not have as people keep claiming a centuries old hatred based on the beginning. This is currently being manipulated by Iran and Saudi Arabia in a power play. He explains how that works in connection to tribalism[/quote]


    People are not simply puppets. They're responsible of their believe. Even if Iran and SArabia exalted the hatred of sunni/shia, muslims decided to agree with that. Muslims are too often fatalistic people, and they seems to consider they have no controle on their own fate or believe. Some roots of that mind can be found in the islamic scriptures.

    Yes, it have to been noticed that at the opposite of christians and muslims, all buddhist don't share the same sacred texts. All muslim believe in the same quran, all christian believe in the same bible, but buddhist have diffrent sutras.

    Yes suffism is rather a noble way of thinking. It influenced Sikhism who is too a noble religion but it's seen as a heresy by manu muslims, unfortunately.

    During his early period as a prophet yes, later it's less obvious. First he instituted the djizia. Is it a real free choice for christian and jews when you're strongly financially incited ? Furthermore, polytheist under his reign had the choice between death or conversion. I would have personnaly choose death.
    Furthermore, episodes like the one of Banu Qurayzan (I know that banu qurayzan are supposed to have betrayed muhammed, but even treason doesn't justify to sell children as slaves and to commit a genocide).




    The hatred of "hypocrites" is rather old, and Surate 9 is the second to last to be revealed. The traditionnal point of view of muslims is that when 2 verses of the quran contradict each other, the one who was revealed the latest is the one who is superior. And Surate 9 was the second to last to be revealed, the last one is so short it almost doesn't matter (110 or 111 if I remember well).

    [/quote]
    But a big look into the history of Islam is not necessary. It is just saying that hatred between sunnis and shia is a pretty new phenomena and that the real issue is a power struggle between Iran and Saudi Arabia for the hearts and minds of Muslims. Now when Iran chucks out its theocracy that will change. Into what I do not know but it will change.[/QUOTE]


    New ? No. It started soon after the death of Muhammed and it ended in a bloodshed (death of Ali that shia muslims commemorate during that strange ritual that is ashurah). Crusades were successfull too because the war was raging between shia and sunni, so when the crusader came, they could have reigned among the divized.
     
  6. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Music is very popular in the Muslim world and it is every where.. every shop and taxis cab is playing music.

    Sufism with a big S is a sect that includes the Dervishes.. . With a small s it is the spiritual aspect of all slam.

    You might enjoy reading the Wahhabi Myth.
     
  7. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Music is very popular around mankind.
    I'm speaking of the most fundamentalist of the salafist and djihadist sect. As far as I know, that come from the sunnah, not the quran, they're is a hadith about people turned into pigs and monkey if they listen music. A salafi imam created a scandal in France by saying 8YO that music will turn them into pigs and monkey. It's in sahih bukhari 5590. I know you don't like hadith, but coranist is extremly rare around the muslim world.

    It didn't prevent however muslim to develop their music traditions, preventing human to like music is like trying to prevent them of love or breath.

    In Iran, I know they're is laws restricting music, like they have not the right to show an instrument on a movie or something like that. I didn't take the time to find sources for that post but iranian tend to love music and a lot of music is exchanged on the black market. Marjan Satrapi spoke of that in her movie Metropolis.
     
  8. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am speaking of REALITY in Saudi Arabia.. anywhere in the country music is blaring out of every Taxi , shop and apartment window. Concerts are well attended and they are building a new Opera house.
     
  9. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I wasn't speaking of Saudi Arabia particulary. I'm speaking of the most fundamentalist muslims. They're is a tendancy of people in Islam who consider music as haram, but they don't represent either all muslims and they can even less forbidd something who is as natural to human than breath.
    I'm a big fan of people like Anuar Brahem or Ibrahim Malouf even if globally I'm not a huge fan of arabic music.
     
    Mayerling likes this.
  10. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Just remember there are clerics all over the world calling themselves Salafi who aren't........
     
  11. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe, but they're still spreading a poison of hatred in the mind of their followers.
     
    Mayerling likes this.
  12. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,904
    Likes Received:
    2,228
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Part 1

    I have had a rethink about what you said concerning things not being given sufficient sources although I think probably in an article that was as much as could be done but I would say that just to say it is a power struggle I think a bit simplistic.


    This is where we get started in a massive need to look at Islam from the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and at the same time the arrival of Wahhabis on the scene - the Theocratic State of Iran came later.



    The vacuum create by Ataturk's treatment of Islam in Turkey and the removal of the Ottoman Empire as the final authority on Islam left a vacuum which Wahhabism wanted to fill. That as well as other issues for instance the creation of Israel, the US support for it including the extremist groups it spawned, modern media and Saudi Wealth allowing it to export itself all over the world at the expense of all other Islam has seen it grow massively- indeed may sects of Islam, all of whom until recently were considered Muslims, have either been put into coventry claiming they are not Islam or even killing them. This article describes to some extent the mistakes that the West makes in its conception of Islam after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and its role as being the final authority on Islam

    http://www.unz.org/Pub/WashingtonMonthly-2004nov-00013

    The Saudis wanted to take on that role. That role was not just for Sunnies. It was for all Muslims. To go into that a little more, before the Afghan/Russia/US/Saudi war I had heard nothing about any sunnis/shia long time hatred. Indeed I did not even know there was anything but Islam and I had made a short visit to Ian in 1975 or 76 and had not discovered that when I was there either. What I had discovered was that the people hated the Shah.

    The first I heard of any issues with Muslim being against Muslim was in a Documentary on BBC4 on Abdul Haq after he had been executed by the Taliban during the coalition invasion of Afghanistan. I haven't seen it since but it has a mass of information about that war that is difficult to find in other places. I have found a copy of it and will myself being looking at it though unfortunately the sound isn't good.



    Now what has pertinence to what we are talking about is that he is talking about the the Afghan war I speak of above and he speaks about all the newcomers who arrive - extremists having been let out of Arab jails or from Saudi Arabia. What I remember is him saying how shocked he was as they were putting 'Muslim against Muslim'. These were the extremists who the US supported instead of the non extremists from Afghanistan and he went to the trouble of learning English so that he could go to the US and try to get them to stop funding these types and instead to start funding democratic minded Afghan warriors. The US refused.

    That was the first I had ever heard anyone speak of putting Muslim against Muslim and that dates to 79.

    Then I had a look at the Salmon Rushdi affsir as I have no memory of it being anything about just Sunni or Shia. I have no memory of only Shia getting started and when I looked I discovered here what seems to be the first introduction into the West of the competition between the Sauds and Iran to be world authority on Islamic Law - both sadly have forgotten all the changes which happened through the centuries and gone back to biblical type law.

    Here is what I found. This happened in 89 and this guardian article is from 2009


    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2009/jan/11/salman-rushdie-satanic-verses

    What I thought I would get in that search was confirmation that there was no Sunni/Shia Muslims fight that time. What the above written in 2009 suggests is that it was the Sauds who initiated the furore against the Satanic verses, that it was initially freely available in Muslim countries including Iran and that only after having heard himself described in a way which his ego could not take did Khomeini issued the Fatwa. Yet here there is no evidence of any conflict between Sunni and Shia in the UK or around the world, just the Iranian clerics butting in and trying to get a superior place in the furore after Khomeini discovered how he had been portrayed though of course it has since been Iran Clerics who have been presented as those responsible for censuring his book when they were only responding to the actions of the Sauds and in particular ridiculing of Khomeini.

    In the changes that have happened with Muslims in the West since '79 The Guardian suggests this was a landmark. I know I have heard British Muslims who took part in these protests say that what motivated them was that it was a way of rebelling against the racism (against people from Pakistan or Bengal) that brought them together and before that our Muslims had seemed very docile people.

    It looks as if Rushdi is questioning the legitimacy of the Iranian and Saudi clerics to be acting in the manner they were and suggesting thought police were in evidence. This work by the Sauds finished by Iran also acted in bringing British Muslims under the influence of these ME countries whereas before they were not.

    The suggestion in that article is that Saudi Arabia felt threatened by the emergency of theocratic Iran and that neither of them have a legitimate right to control Islam. Clearly as Iran has obviously also gone back in time re its theocratic position and draconian punishments. Something which prior to creation of the Saud's in the 18th C were not the way Islam had acted for a long time.
     
  13. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,904
    Likes Received:
    2,228
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Part 2
    Yes the information is that they had good relations. Personally I think this came from the Sauds who felt threatened.



    Well no I was not thinking of Pakistan suicide bombings I was thinking of the UK ones and other European suicide bombers. Research shows they usually are new to Islam.

    No that is not true. Certainly not in the UK. I remember most Muslims were not religious in the 70's and 80's and were very much trying to integrate into British society but facing much racism. Most of them when growing up just learned to say the Koran in a language they did not understand and do a few dances. However all that changed in the 80's when the Saudis started building mosques and proving material for them to be taught Salifism/Wahhabis which many of them got into and from this got the belief that they had to be involved in terrorism and what not.

    They did not come from a Wahhabi background. They did not come from Saudi Arabia. They were not taught this is their homes. Again the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and its authority left a vacuum which the Sauds were trying to change with a type of Islam which was completely at odds with how Islam had been for centuries.

    In the UK an Islam convert who is a professor at Cambridge confronted them with a Canadian and Jordanian and together they taught them about Traditional Islam and Sufism which was much nearer where their background was. This was all new to them.

    again this is only to do with Wahhabism and its extremist out shoots. For Islam as it has been through the centuries I remind you

    It also speaks about the insanity of believing you can interpret an Islamic text as you just have illustrated

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/28/theislamicreformation

    He goes on to give an example if you want to have further understanding.

    You are talking about Jihad. Jihad is part of Islam most often on working on themselves.


    Indeed they do say it is very complicated unless you are a literalism which the Saudis are and which because of their massive wealth and support of the US have been able to spread far and wide whereas in my childhood the only place it was was Saudi Arabia

    again
    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/28/theislamicreformation

    I have to go out now so do not have time to reply to any more at the moment.
     
  14. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hello, right now, I don't have the time to answer completely.

    None of them were new in Islam, Mohammed Merah, Kouachi, Coulibaly, the killer of Nice, the Saint Charles killer, all of them were raised in islam. However, most of them became very faithfull lately and it explain why they wanted to know martyrdom : they lived a life they thought full of sins (alcohol, drugs, fornication, music), the only way they thought they would reach paradise was martyrdom.
    All of them were from muslims families, wearing muslim names...
    Classical portrait of a french muslim terrorist :
    Born in a muslim family, when teenager become a little thug/criminal, end in prison, meet salafo djihadi there, use his criminal background to get guns on the black market, go gill some people.
    Some are unable to get a gun, so they take a machete and end with a bullet in the head.
     
  15. MGB ROADSTER

    MGB ROADSTER Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do not forget that once there was a big Jewish population in Iraq... it ended during the Jewish Nakba.
    Christianity soon will disapear also
     
  16. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Most yezidi disappeared with ISIS and a lot prefer to find a new country rather living where their brother were murdered and their sisters sold as sex slave on Mossul marketplace.
     
  17. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, Iraqi Jews left Iraq in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973.. If there are any left, they would just be a handful of people.

    There were over 50 Christian Churches in Baghdad in 2003 when Bush invaded... Americans have never cared about Arab Christians.
     
  18. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    American governement don't even care of their own people. The war in iraq don't even killed a lot of iraqis, but too a lot of young american, 15 000 on the battlefield, many more ended bad when coming home.
    Democracy is the less evil of the form of governement, but elections tend to select people who have easiness to please and seduce, and they're rarely people with a lot of empathy.
     
  19. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Empathy is considered a "liberal" trait.... Rugged individualism means kill em all and let god sort them out.. and then spit tobacco.
     
  20. VotreAltesse

    VotreAltesse Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    4,735
    Likes Received:
    1,915
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's not particulary the problem of conservative. H.Clinton was a great advocate of war in iraq and plaid for war with iran.

    It's just a general flaw of democracy, and no partis or opinion can be spared of that flaw.
     
  21. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    68,325
    Likes Received:
    11,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    She was a bit of a hawk. What do you mean "plaid"?
     
  22. Grau

    Grau Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    4,802
    Likes Received:
    1,685
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    There is no "problem with Iran" as your transparent OP suggests.

    Iran has attacked no one in 300 years & its most significant "crime" has been supporting Hezbollah which defeated US & Israeli supported ISIS & Syrian Rebels.
    Because of Israel's repeated murderous forays into Lebanon and its expansionist Oded Yinon Plan, Hezbollah has served as a defensive deterrent & de facto government for S. Lebanon. As S. Lebanon's de facto government, Hezbollah has provided all the rebuilding & Social Services required of a government from building hospitals to garbage collection.

    Iran is a country in transition and its President Rouhani offered a UN speech that stressed moderation & peace seeking that was in stark transition to the bellicose tantrums spewed by Trump & Netanyahu.

    The problem is not Iran but America's fawning subservience to war mongering, foreign Israeli lobbies that forbid a normalization of US & Iranian relations which is in the best interest of the US
     
  23. MGB ROADSTER

    MGB ROADSTER Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do no make it sound so easy ... Iraqi Jews left ?? They were expelled and deported , butchered and abused.
    The Jewish Nakba.
     
  24. MGB ROADSTER

    MGB ROADSTER Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2012
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    702
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you support Hezbollah which is considored a terror orginazation by the UN ??
     
  25. alexa

    alexa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    15,904
    Likes Received:
    2,228
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    I can find nothing that says the UN considers Hezbollah a terrorist group. Of course there was the attempt to stitch them up for that terrorist attack in Bulgaria but that is almost certainly what that was a stitch up.

    Hezbollah was considered more a resistance group. That is why they got formed. To free Lebanon from Israel occupation and we can see from what has happened in the West Bank that this was a very wise move if they wanted to keep their country. A part of the cease fire agreement was that Hezbollah give up their arms. However coupled with this was that Israel withdraw from all of Lebanon's territory. Because Israel failed to do this, they saw the need to stay to protect Lebanon. They were massively involved in getting real terrorists out of Syria.

    Hezbolla was born as a resistance group. It is now part of Lebanon accepted as such by Lebanon. They continue to protect Lebanon much to Israel's annoyance.
     

Share This Page