“Iraq Has Enough Money to Pay Iran War Reparations”

[Saddam Hussein]

Cut budget of Barzanistan in half and pay that half to Iran. At least we wont put a knife in your back. Just an idea. Also things are to be negotiated. 1 trillion USD is not a law. No please, no akhoonds. We can give them for free to Iraq. At the moment Iran produces more than is needed, so we can export many if there is demand. We might pay as well for anyone who want to receive them for free.

Yes but you don't understand, you've seen my opinions in the previous thread similar to this. First of all let me say that the Iraqi gov is a piece of shit government. KRG is an enemy of Iraq which we should defuse and take over revoking their autonomy. As for the Iran-Iraq war, both sides were aggressors if you ask me. Saddam and the Iraqi former regime are gone, if you let the current regime pay for it (as many say shi'a-led regime) you will anger that entire country. Which you seem to be all ok with, however it means you lose a friendly neighbor which is keeping distance from the GCC. Even if the Iraqi regime would agree to it, there would be so much public anger, disapproval from the armed forces it will turn into a chaos, the government won't survive it.

It will also fuel Iraq's Sunnis to stand against the gov and perhaps give room for IS to exploit the situation as they would be angered, not that the Shi'a won't be angered they will as well. In short; the Iraqi gov won't accept it as it is suicide for them and the country.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

My problem is that your country is bitching and whining for a ludicrous amount of war reparations, even though Iran itself wasn't some pacifist party in the Iran-Iraq war, and the Iraqi regime which was involved in the war is no longer in power. It's incredibly idiotic, there's no justification for this outrageous demand.

Stuck a nerve did I? Grow up and learn to take some criticism, the world does not revolve around the dirt your artificial borders were setup around.

I don't care if you respect Pakistan or not, your opinion does not affect mine.

You should know that history does not change with governments that come and go. If so after Hitler Germany should have not paid anything to anyone. Is that so difficult to understand?
UN has condemned Iraq for the invasion, not Iran. Iraq invaded Iran, Iran did not invade Iraq. These are main facts, it's not about pigface khomeini being anpacifist angel or devil.

War compensation is nothing new, we've seen many examples (ww1, ww2, Iraq-Kuwait war etc). It's you who should grow up and put away your hate, lies and propaganda against Iran, involving yourself in conflicts which has nothing to do with you as a Pakistani.

If there is 1 country that is not artificial and not born after some sykes-picot agreement, treaty of Lusanne or treaty of sevres or anything like that, it's Iran. If there is one country which alsmost continuously has the same name since 1800 years ago it's Iran. If there is one country whos borders are not drawn by foreign powers (straight borders) it's Iran. If there's one country that is not named after a family or whos name is made up by a group of politicians/leaders who wanted to create a new country during the last 2 centuries, it's Iran. If there is one country which uses it's native name internationally and not one that foreigners use, it's Iran.

During the Safavid era (1501–1736), most of the territory of the Sassanid empire regained its political unity, and Safavid kings were assuming the title of "Šāhanšāh-e Irān" (Iran's king of kings). An example is Mofid Bafqi (d. 1679), who makes numerous references to Iran, describing its border and the nostalgia of Iranians who had migrated to India in that era. Even Ottoman sultans, when addressing the Āq Quyunlu and Safavid kings, used such titles as the “king of Iranian lands” or the “sultan of the lands of Iran” or “the king of kings of Iran, the lord of the Persians”. This title, as well as the title of "Šāh-e Irān", was later used by Nader Shah Afshar and Qajar and Pahlavi kings.

Iran's Human Development Index 0.774

Iraq's Human Development Index 0.649

Kuwait's Human Development Index 0.800

As long as Iraq is behind in developments there is no need to put extra pressure on them . there must be a different between Iran's actions and their so called Arab brothers .... !

this type of inequality will create problems in our region not just for Iran but for other countries too .

We're not parents of other countries. 30 years waiting already shows Iran respects Iraq and understands that they're in a difficult position. Iraq already shows that it does not care:
http://www.tehrantimes.com/news/426552/Iran-stops-fire-operation-in-Hour-al-Azim-amid-Iraq-s-no-move

Yes but you don't understand, you've seen my opinions in the previous thread similar to this. First of all let me say that the Iraqi gov is a piece of shit government. KRG is an enemy of Iraq which we should defuse and take over revoking their autonomy. As for the Iran-Iraq war, both sides were aggressors if you ask me. Saddam and the Iraqi former regime are gone, if you let the current regime pay for it (as many say shi'a-led regime) you will anger that entire country. Which you seem to be all ok with, however it means you lose a friendly neighbor which is keeping distance from the GCC. Even if the Iraqi regime would agree to it, there would be so much public anger, disapproval from the armed forces it will turn into a chaos, the government won't survive it.

It will also fuel Iraq's Sunnis to stand against the gov and perhaps give room for IS to exploit the situation as they would be angered, not that the Shi'a won't be angered they will as well. In short; the Iraqi gov won't accept it as it is suicide for them and the country.

If I ask you you might even say that Iran has to compensate Iraq. We leave that question to objective sources, international law.
What does it change for Iran if Iraq loves us or hates us. As I said we're receiving no sweets or gifts or anything from Iraq. The country has already some angry elements who are chosen by Iraqis, it does not matter that much. Is Iraq our friend? no it's a neighbour, it's independent and it would like to work with US against Iran if they were able to do so. We have seen nothing special from Iraq as neighbour, it has been mostly one sided, the balance has been more in favor of Iraq when it comes to helping each others.
Those sunni elements who might resist such moves should be dealth with like Iraqi has done in the past years. We've also some isis elements who want to kill 90% of Iranians. But it's us who will kill them to prevent terrorism.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

^^

Iran has a shitload of benefit in Iraq since Saddam's overthrowing by America. First of all an enemy next door was removed, Iran was not able to do that and war is very costly.

Second, Iraq imports billions of products from Iran. Just because it imports some more from Turkey doesn't mean it doesn't import from Iran, Iranian products do not have the best quality control practices to start with, seems Turkey's industries are ahead with that for now likely due to the fact that Europe imports a lot from them whom set higher requirements than Iraq does.

And third, tens of thousands of militiamen whom are now under the PMU are part of groups that have helped Assad stay in power,

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

That's unbelievable amount of money.
Do you realize that 1 trillion means 1,000,000,000,000?
How do you expect Iraq to pay you all this huge amount of money?

I mean let's for argumentative purposes assume that Iraq agreed to pay you, then how much do you expect to get paid annually?

If Iraq decided to pay $1 billion every year starting from next year, that means the last pack of money you receive would be in 3019.

Why not? 100 year agreements are not rare. 150 years x 6 billion each year = 900 billion.

^^

Iran has a shitload of benefit in Iraq since Saddam's overthrowing by America. First of all an enemy next door was removed, Iran was not able to do that and war is very costly.

Second, Iraq imports billions of products from Iran. Just because it imports some more from Turkey doesn't mean it doesn't import from Iran, Iranian products do not have the best quality control practices to start with, seems Turkey's industries are ahead with that for now likely due to the fact that Europe imports a lot from them whom set higher requirements than Iraq does.

And third, tens of thousands of militiamen whom are now under the PMU are part of groups that have helped Assad stay in power,

Americans removed saddam, not Iraqis. Also that would be an American gift (if intentions of US was giving a gift to Iran), not Iraqi gift. And neighbours not fighting each other is normal.

Iraq importing billions of products from Iran is normal trade. If Iraq gets those products cheaper from Turkey or Saudi Arabia, they will switch!

Those militiamen are getting paid. There are also Iranian militiamen Iranian advisors, Iranian weapons involved. Also those militiamen know that if they don't care about terrorism in region, the terrorist will again visit them in Baghdad and Basra and Karbala, as seen since 2003.

There is nothing extraordinary about the points you mentioned.

 

[Tps43]

What is your problem with Iran idiot? your mom is the dog who's barking, do you have a illegitimate father from mosul? Don't use this word again (barking) when talking about Iran haroomzade madarjende. I've respect for Pakistan and use Pakistani flag as my second flag here in forum. Kosmadars like you who have some personal problem with Iran wont change my opinion.


We should put pressure on their government if they step on blood of martyrs and victims of chemical weapons. We're not in a position to be polite as usual.


It can be paid yearly/monthly in long term. They're paying tiny kuwait 52 billion dollars.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-gulf-war-reparations-to-kuwait-idUSKBN1HR26Q

Ena kuskholan vel kun inha ro

 

[pin gu]

@Shapur Zol Aktaf
Even if you want to be selfish and look after your own people you must watch closely whats going on around you .

This type of thinking remained in our culture for thousand years :

بنی آدم اعضای یکدیگرند

که در آفرینش ز یک گوهرند

چو عضوی به درد آورد روزگار

دگر عضوها را نماند قرار

 

[Hamza913]

You should know that history does not change with governments that come and go. If so after Hitler Germany should have not paid anything to anyone. Is that so difficult to understand?
UN has condemned Iraq for the invasion, not Iran. Iraq invaded Iran, Iran did not invade Iraq. These are main facts, it's not about pigface khomeini being anpacifist angel or devil.

War compensation is nothing new, we've seen many examples (ww1, ww2, Iraq-Kuwait war etc). It's you who should grow up and put away your hate, lies and propaganda against Iran, involving yourself in conflicts which has nothing to do with you as a Pakistani.

If there is 1 country that is not artificial and not born after some sykes-picot agreement, treaty of Lusanne or treaty of sevres or anything like that, it's Iran. If there is one country which alsmost continuously has the same name since 1800 years ago it's Iran. If there is one country whos borders are not drawn by foreign powers (straight borders) it's Iran. If there's one country that is not named after a family or whos name is made up by a group of politicians/leaders who wanted to create a new country during the last 2 centuries, it's Iran. If there is one country which uses it's native name internationally and not one that foreigners use, it's Iran.
During the Safavid era (1501–1736), most of the territory of the Sassanid empire regained its political unity, and Safavid kings were assuming the title of "Šāhanšāh-e Irān" (Iran's king of kings). An example is Mofid Bafqi (d. 1679), who makes numerous references to Iran, describing its border and the nostalgia of Iranians who had migrated to India in that era. Even Ottoman sultans, when addressing the Āq Quyunlu and Safavid kings, used such titles as the “king of Iranian lands” or the “sultan of the lands of Iran” or “the king of kings of Iran, the lord of the Persians”. This title, as well as the title of "Šāh-e Irān", was later used by Nader Shah Afshar and Qajar and Pahlavi kings.

By that logic, why aren't you asking for reparations from others such as Saudi Arabia, Greece, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mongolia, etc?

I don't think Germany should have paid reparations for WW2, so that argument doesn't work on me.

It wasn't just Iran defending itself, you guys also tried to invade Iraq after repelling their invasion, not to mention the new regime in Iran was stirring up Iraqis to rebel against the Iraqi government. Large numbers of people also died on both sides, just because Iraq killed more of you guys than vice versa doesn't mean they are liable for reparations where as you are not, that's just you guys being sore losers (well, technically you didn't lose the war, but you get the point).

It's irrelevant as to whether or not it concerns Pakistan, I'm allowed to have an opinion and express it.

I don't care how long you think your nation lasted, it's still another piece of dirt with random lines drawn around it, just like every other nation. Hence why your borders have constantly varied throughout history, and mean next to nothing in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Yongpeng Sun-Tastaufen]

America told Saddam to butcher Iranian civilians. 8 years of slaughter because Iranians refuse to be subjugated by America.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Americans removed saddam, not Iraqis. Also that would be an American gift (if intentions of US was giving a gift to Iran), not Iraqi gift. And neighbours not fighting each other is normal.

Iraq importing billions of products from Iran is normal trade. If Iraq gets those products cheaper from Turkey or Saudi Arabia, they will switch!

Those militiamen are getting paid. There are also Iranian militiamen Iranian advisors, Iranian weapons involved. Also those militiamen know that if they don't care about terrorism in region, the terrorist will again visit them in Baghdad and Basra and Karbala, as seen since 2003.

There is nothing extraordinary about the points you mentioned.

\

That's what I said, Americans removed him. Iran couldn't remove him, that's a massive 'gift' which you overlooked. You couldn't ask for these repairs without that American gift.

Iraq is importing bllions of products that it could easily manufacter locally, and i'm not even talking about cars. Iraq imports the most basic items and the market is flooded with shit that they can produce locally.

That aside, i've got nothing else to say on this. Of course you want money, everyone wants money. However the chance of this happening is very small.

US War on Iraq in 2003 was without UN approval, (illegal). You think we get to claim money? Yet you're speaking about a war from the long gone 80's whilst in the meantime since Iraq has experienced 3 other major wars. Time for you to get over it and move on.

The war could have lasted only 2 years, Khomeini deemed it so necessary to waste hundreds of thousands of life's more and make it 8 years. That affected all of us including me, and you're asking for reperations?

 

[Aramagedon]

I think we should wait to see more stabilty in Iraq then want them that amount of money.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

By that logic, why aren't you asking for reparations from others such as Saudi Arabia, Greece, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mongolia, etc?

I don't think Germany should have paid reparations for WW2, so that argument doesn't work on me.

It wasn't just Iran defending itself, you guys also tried to invade Iraq after repelling their invasion, not to mention the new regime in Iran was stirring up Iraqis to rebel against the Iraqi government. Large numbers of people also died on both sides, just because Iraq killed more of you guys than vice versa doesn't mean they are liable for reparations where as you are not, that's just you guys being sore losers (well, technically you didn't lose the war, but you get the point).

It's irrelevant as to whether or not it concerns Pakistan, I'm allowed to have an opinion and express it.

I don't care how long you think your nation lasted, it's still another piece of dirt with random lines drawn around it, just like every other nation. Hence why your borders have constantly varied throughout history, and mean next to nothing in the grand scheme of things.

No, not by that logic because those wars were not in modern era, with international laws, observers, journalists etc. You might have an opinion, but international decided to condemn germany and to let them pay reparations for WW2. That weights heavier than your opinion.

Ofcourse Iran pushed Iraqis back and even invaded Iraq. It's war. Allied forces also invaded germany after pushing them out of Netherlands, Poland etc. Before the war Iraq did not abide by the agreement it signed with shah in 1979. Saddam tore it apart and said I decided to do so when I signed the agreement! (in 1975). already in 1969 saddam said Khuzistan province belongs to Iran. Somehow you don't mention these points, I don't know why. Iraq even invaded Iran different times in the 70s and we defeated them everytime. The clashes, war of words from both sides never justify a full invasion.

There is no technically tactically strategically bla bla. We did not lose the war and in fact the casualties were almost equal according to neutral sources. 200000-600000 Iranians killed, 250000-500000 Iraqis killed. Because Iraq had a lower population and was smaller, the lost of men and destruction was heavier for them.

And finally after the war:

De Cuellar mentioned the attack against Iran on September 22, 1980 as the most prominent event which showed a breach of international law as specified in Paragraph 5 of his report. He added that aggression against Iran could not be justified on the basis of any principle or rule of international law or ethics.
In Paragraph 7, the former secretary-general of the United Nations acknowledged that even before the beginning of the war, Iraq had made encroachments upon Iran’s territory. He noted that such encroachment could not justify Iraq’s aggression of Iran which had led to protracted occupation of Iran’s territory by Iraq.

I think we should wait to see more stabilty in Iraq then want them that amount of money.

yeah lets wait for another 15 years.

@Shapur Zol Aktaf
Even if you want to be selfish and look after your own people you must watch closely whats going on around you .

This type of thinking remained in our culture for thousand years :

بنی آدم اعضای یکدیگرند

که در آفرینش ز یک گوهرند

چو عضوی به درد آورد روزگار

دگر عضوها را نماند قرار

Bebakhshid pin gu, bani adam kire manam nist. Man giti-gara/globalist nistam. Hamin(koso)-sheraro migoftim ke doshmana oomadan kharemoono gayidan dar in 1000 sale pish az emrooz. Ma saadi va hafez lazem nadarim, Shah Esmail lazem darim.

 

[Hamza913]

No, not by that logic because those wars were not in modern era, with international laws, observers, journalists etc. You might have an opinion, but international decided to condemn germany and to let them pay reparations for WW2. That weights heavier than your opinion.

Ofcourse Iran pushed Iraqis back and even invaded Iraq. It's war. Allied forces also invaded germany after pushing them out of Netherlands, Poland etc. Before the war Iraq did not abide by the agreement it signed with shah in 1979. Saddam tore it apart and said I decided to do so when I signed the agreement! (in 1975). already in 1969 saddam said Khuzistan province belongs to Iran. Somehow you don't mention these points, I don't know why. Iraq even invaded Iran different times in the 70s and we defeated them everytime. The clashes, war of words from both sides never justify a full invasion.

There is no technically tactically strategically bla bla. We did not lose the war and in fact the casualties were almost equal according to neutral sources. 200000-600000 Iranians killed, 250000-500000 Iraqis killed. Because Iraq had a lower population and was smaller, the lost of men and destruction was heavier for them.

And finally after the war:

De Cuellar mentioned the attack against Iran on September 22, 1980 as the most prominent event which showed a breach of international law as specified in Paragraph 5 of his report. He added that aggression against Iran could not be justified on the basis of any principle or rule of international law or ethics.
In Paragraph 7, the former secretary-general of the United Nations acknowledged that even before the beginning of the war, Iraq had made encroachments upon Iran’s territory. He noted that such encroachment could not justify Iraq’s aggression of Iran which had led to protracted occupation of Iran’s territory by Iraq.

That may justify viewing the invasion of Iraq as worse than the other invasions that have occurred throughout Iranian history, but it still doesn't justify reparations. In fact, your logic only weakens your case, since I doubt the majority of the world will support your position of demanding war reparations from Iraq.

Your country was literally calling for the destruction of Iraq prior to Saddam's invasion, we've seen how much damage these kinds of words can do, e.g the Arab spring. I wouldn't be so hasty to paint an innocent picture of Iran.

Again, you've shot yourself in the foot by claiming the casualties were roughly equal, because that means you both inflicted the same amount of damage upon each other and as a result nobody has any right to demand reparations since you are now both even. You even went a step further by saying that because Iraq had a smaller population at the time the damage inflicted upon them was even worse, which would mean that now they have more of a right to demand reparations.

I don't really care about what you mentioned in the last paragraph, it still doesn't justify your demand for reparations.