The Hashemite solution for Iraq.

[Ahmed Jo]

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/commentaryanalysis/560234-the-abdullah-solution
I honestly don't think this is a realistic or feasible option considering Jordan's current economic and military capabilities.. but something to think about.

Flag and Coat of Arms of Hashemite Iraq (I hope the links worked).

 

[asad71]

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/commentaryanalysis/560234-the-abdullah-solution
I honestly don't think this is a realistic or feasible option considering Jordan's current economic and military capabilities.. but something to think about.

Flag and Coat of Arms of Hashemite Iraq (I hope the links worked).

Link missing. Kindly repost.

 

[Ahmed Jo]

Link missing. Kindly repost.

I fixed the pictures. Does the link to the article work?

 

[asad71]

The Hashemites and the Alaouites of Morocco both claim they are descendents of the Holy Prophet through Bibi Fatima. Both are considered stooges of the West and the Zionists by all. They cannot think or act outside the glittering box that the West/Zioinsts have put them in.

 

[Ahmed Jo]

The Hashemites and the Alaouites of Morocco both claim they are descendents of the Holy Prophet through Bibi Fatima. Both are considered stooges of the West and the Zionists by all. They cannot think or act outside the glittering box that the West/Zioinsts have put them in.

and yet Jordan and Morocco are the only stable Arab countries outside the GCC (unless you count Tunisia as stable). King Abdullah II has only the best interest of his country and his people.

 

[JUBA]

That's not a bad idea at all, look at the Arab world now, every Arab monarch country is stable and flourishing while every Arab republic country is unstable and suffering from economic and political problems.

Compare the Arab republic countries today with the monarch rule in the past, Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Syria, all were good, happy and stable countries under monarchs till Jamal Abdulnassar came and messed it all up with his socialist ideology, thankfully the GCC managed to stay away from all that.

 

[KingMamba]

I am pretty sure Iraqis executed the last Hashemite King who was related to Jordan's current King.....

 

[Ahmed Jo]

I am pretty sure Iraqis executed the last Hashemite King who was related to Jordan's current King.....

and that worked out splendidly for them, didn't it?

 

[1000]

and that worked out splendidly for them, didn't it?

Qasim staged the coup, the country did better after the coup but that was short therm, not because of bad leadership of Qasim but because of foreign factors, the US was against him supporting another coup against him followed by all the other stuff that happened afterwards from more coups to wars & sanctions during Saddam's time. The US messed a lot in the middle east during the cold war to counter Soviets etc.

The reason for monarchies doing well is more because of the US protection for them keeping them stabile & safe.

 

[Falcon29]

@Ahmed Jo @JUBA

Why are you two obsessed with this tribal stuff? How about the Islamic solution to the Arab world?

 

[al-Hasani]

The Hashemites and the Alaouites of Morocco both claim they are descendents of the Holy Prophet through Bibi Fatima. Both are considered stooges of the West and the Zionists by all. They cannot think or act outside the glittering box that the West/Zioinsts have put them in.

My little Bengali friend. They don't claim it they ARE Hashemites. The Hashemites that have ruled Jordan are MAKKAWI HASHEMITES who ruled large areas of ME longer than any other ruling family.

The Moroccan royal family are not part of that family.

All Caliphates recognized their ancestry and held them in high esteem. The Ottomans and Brits included. They were not SHARIF's and Emirs of Makkah and Madinah for over 1 millennium under the Abbasids, Fatimids, Ayyubids, Ottomans etc. without reason. Nor were the Makkawi Hashemites having the highest clerical positions nor where they entrusted the greatest honors on this earth for such a long time without reason.

Don't confuse your average South Asian or Farsi claiming to be a Hashemite with the real deal and locals.

Now be a good boy and stop being a "puppet" and leave Canada to return to your Bangladesh.

PS: I am a Makkawi Hashemite myself. So keep your ignorance and nonsense out of this thread.

@Ahmed Jo

What is the point of this thread bro? You know the events of 1958. The savages that killed them were surely cursed and so has Iraq been by large ever seen. I think that it was destiny that the ancestors of Hussein ibn Ali (ra) were martyred in Iraq 1300 years later…..Once again. Cowardly too ONCE AGAIN.

Anyway without Hashemites and the Arab Revolt Iraq would not have existed nor any other Arab country in the ME for that matter excluding Egypt which already was independent back then, Oman and Yemen. At least Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Jordan would not have existed today.

 

[1000]

What is the point of this thread bro? You know the events of 1958. The savages that killed them were surely cursed and so has Iraq been by large.

After the coup good things were done, the country got the best education system of the Arab world among other things, the coup was not the problem. It was the foreign intervention and wars & sanctions which came after the coup.

The coup was in 1958, the country was leading in many fields in the Arab world till the Iran-Iraq war started which turned everything downhill. You should leave emotions out of it for prefering Hashemites, cursed is BS by some medieval religious minds.

 

[al-Hasani]

After the coup good things were done, the country got the best education system of the Arab world among other things, the coup was not the problem. It was the foreign intervention and wars & sanctions which came after the coup.

The coup was in 1958, the country was leading in many fields in the Arab world till the Iran-Iraq war started which turned everything downhill. You should leave emotions out of it for prefering Hashemites, cursed is BS by some medieval religious minds.

That education system was modeled after the English system with a few influences from the Soviet Union mainly (socialism basically). There is no evidence of the Hashemites not being able to do those reforms when they did so in Hijaz earlier (a pioneer in terms of secular rule, press freedom etc. in the Arab world and that was 100 years ago) and Jordan during that same period. They were just influenced/dominated by the wealthy Sunni political elite and the Sunni landlords who wanted to regain power by keeping the majority Shia poor. The Hashemites wanted to do a lot of reforms but the people nor the country were ready for those reforms nor were Iraq in the 1930's, 1940's or 1950's any worse on a political/state level than other ME countries. In fact it was quite good despite the big complexities of the country.

Anyway the young King Faisal barely had any power. The real power during the reign of King Faisal II and King Ghazi was found among the military (labelled after the English model) and politicians and prime ministers such as Nuri as-Said (especially), Rashid Ali Al-Gillani (himself from a well-known Sadah family), Al-Midfai etc.

The alternative to King Faisal bin Hussein was this man below and he was from a Sadah family too:

Abd Al-Rahman Al-Gillani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

in any case there is no excuse to what those uneducated masses did in 1958. The Hashemites never committed any crimes and wanted the best for the country and besides that then NUMEROUS branches of their family had been living in Iraq since the time of Hasan ibn Ali (ra) and Hussein ibn Ali (ra) and obviously still do to this day in great numbers. The Makkawi Hashemites themselves intermarried with people from what is now Iraq before they ended up in Iraq.

Anyway people can choose whoever should rule them but defending those massacres is wrong. Tell me, what did a 23 year old King Faisal II do wrong for him to be gunned down cowardly before his wedding and the executioners not being able to look him in the eyes when they executed him? Aside from other relatives, females (!) included etc. Nothing more than a savage act committed by cowards who made up false rumors to rally a few uneducated masses.

Excellent report by Al-Sharqiya that depicts the historical reality of the sole survivor of the 14 July massacre in 1958:

Of course I can never accept those savages for more than what they are.

 

[1000]

That education system was modeled after the English system with a few influences from the Soviet Union mainly (socialism basically). There is no evidence of the Hashemites not being able to do those reforms when they did so in Hijaz earlier (a pioneer in terms of secular rule, press freedom etc. in the Arab world and that was 100 years ago) and Jordan during that same period. They were just influenced/dominated by the wealthy Sunni political elite and the Sunni landlords who wanted to regain power by keeping the majority Shia poor. The Hashemites wanted to do a lot of reforms but the people nor the country were ready for those reforms nor were Iraq in the 1930's, 1940's or 1950's any worse on a political/state level than other ME countries. In fact it was quite good despite the big complexities of the country.

Anyway the young King Faisal barely had any power. The real power during the reign of King Faisal II and King Ghazi was found among the military (labelled after the English model) and politicians and prime ministers such as Nuri as-Said (especially), Rashid Ali Al-Gillani (himself from a well-known Sadah family), Al-Midfai etc.

The alternative to King Faisal bin Hussein was this man below and he was from a Sadah family too:

Abd Al-Rahman Al-Gillani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

in any case there is no excuse to what those uneducated masses did in 1958. The Hashemites never committed any crimes and wanted the best for the country and besides that then NUMEROUS branches of their family had been living in Iraq since the time of Hasan ibn Ali (ra) and Hussein ibn Ali (ra) and obviously still do to this day in great numbers. The Makkawi Hashemites themselves intermarried with people from what is now Iraq before they ended up in Iraq.

Anyway people can choose whoever should rule them but defending those massacres is wrong. Tell me, what did a 22 year old King Faisal II do wrong for him to be gunned down cowardly before his wedding and the executioners not being able to look him in the eyes when they executed him?

Excellent report by Al-Sharqiya that depicts the historical reality of the sole survivor of the 14 July massacre in 1958:

Of course I can never accept those savages for more than they are.

I'm not too well known with that monarchy so I can't talk a lot about it.

What I mean is that it doesn't matter a lot whether (Hashemite) monarchy will rule or the state will be ruled by a president ( republic ). Both can do well and did well in Iraq pre 1980. The only main difference is that most Arab monarchy rulers don't have ideologies of conquest and resistance like most republic leaders have in this region be it Saddam, Nasser, Ba'ath Syria, Islamic Iranian regime. All looking to expand through any way possible paving the road for trouble for both them and neighbors which is what we still see today.

For example in case of Iraq, PM Abadi or Hashemite king it's irrelevant if both are secular which they are. Hashemites coming to power won't suddenly stop terror and bring stability with the current regional religious tensions, they would seek good relations with the US, leading to US forces stationed in the country who would deter neighbors and allow the country at least 10 years to rebuild and regain it's strength. That's why someone like the Jordanian king would do better then Maliki who has an ideology that goes on cost of the country and it's people, he kicked the Americans out knowing the army was not ready but it would go well with better relations with Iran and his own resistance ideology against Israel/US/Gulf etc.

Nevertheless history has happened and we're at a different time now, the Hashemite solution is unrealistic anyway. The current President & PM seem a lot better then the former ones, this time both are educated ones with doctorate degrees. The US is also planning to send more troops to Baghdad, if you ask me it looks like in a year of time they will have quite a lot of forces in the country again, the US generals never agreed on leaving except for Obama who gained his votes with that promise many say. For whatever reason it is that they want to return it looks like they will and have let ISIS go on it's way for that reason denying any co-operation with Maliki, he asked for drone attacks on ISIS a year before this happened but they kept denying, after all why would they help him while he kicked them out. Now they can return to Iraq and Maliki has been removed, something they might have wanted after all.

 

[Ahmed Jo]

After the coup good things were done, the country got the best education system of the Arab world among other things, the coup was not the problem. It was the foreign intervention and wars & sanctions which came after the coup.

The coup was in 1958, the country was leading in many fields in the Arab world till the Iran-Iraq war started which turned everything downhill. You should leave emotions out of it for prefering Hashemites, cursed is BS by some medieval religious minds.

the downward slope began when they overthrew the monarchy, they let power hungry politicians have control of the country instead of a constitutional monarchy where are all were treated fairly. In the context of the cold war and socialism gaining popularity among young Arabs (the work of the UAR), it's easy to see how someone like Saddam could seize power. Btw, Iraq's most stable period was under the reign of Faisal II , I can link the source if you want.
@al-Hasani nothing really. As I said, I don't think it's a viable option anymore for quite a few reasons. I just thought it was interesting.