What's new

Iraqi FM: Iran cuts flow of 42 river tributaries to Iraq without warning

If Iran doesn’t help your country (be at your side), Turkey, US and Saudi will eat your country raw and attach it.

US is not an enemy they're helping.

Saudi is not hostile either, they have not done anything hostile. They remain at their side of the border, they barely meddle far less than Iran and Turkey (it's not even noticeable). Their meddling was indirect by aiding certain units in Syria which caused harm on Iraq. However this was an American-Turkish led project which they messed up.

Turkey has been violating Iraq for years, and Iran is Turkey's friend and has done nothing to help lol. You're in some illusion that Iran is Iraq's guardian, I don't see any of it.
 
If Iran doesn’t help your country, Turkey, US and Saudi will eat your country raw and attach it.

Turkey is already meddling in Iraq (Northern Iraq/KRG/Barzanistan more precisely) and a deluded group of Turkish nationalist/Neo-Ottomanists) dream of conquering Mosul, Kirkuk etc. Something, may I add, that will never happen.

KSA on the other hand have never had any territorial claims in Iraq nor meddled in Iraq as negatively at any point in history. Because Saudi Arabians consider Iraqis as their own brethren and outside of a tiny group of sectarian fanatics (which unfortunately exist in all Muslim communities nowadays), wish only the best for Iraq. More or less the same people live across the border. It would be very unnatural for each group of people to want to fight each other or talk about conquest of each other. Never seen such discussions anywhere. Other than in relation to Kuwait lol.

KSA's biggest crime (nothing to do with the people) is for past regimes allowing a few radical clerics in KSA to brainwash local youths to go to Iraq and fight some imaginary "holy war" against Americans/Western troops and militant Shia groups. Personally those that solely attacked Americans (an occupier), I do not consider as terrorists but those who took part in the internal Sunni-Shia conflict post 2003, are poison for all parties. Same story with the Iranians that went to Iraq and fought among the Shia militias.

KSA, now with MbS at the helm and a different policy (the old post 2003 will not return) does not pose any thread for Iraq, rather Iraq's natural brotherly, strategic and historical ally is actually KSA/GCC (Arabia), since the era of Dilmun and Sumer, and Syria/Jordan. From those sides, the least problems have historically reached modern-day Iraq since antiquity and modern age.

As long as Iranian and Turkish regimes have deluded dreams of ruling the Arab world, most sane Iraqis will understand where most of the negative meddling is coming from.

BTW KSA-Iraq ties are very cordial nowadays on all fronts. Direct flights occur once again after a way too long break (since Saddam invaded Kuwait actually), the border is open, many Saudi and Iraqi firms in both countries operating, pilgrims visiting both countries, military having open ties, leaders frequently visiting and talking etc. There are some disagreements (mainly related to Syria but less so nowadays) but that will always be the case. Even KSA and UAE disagree on many fronts.

You should visit this thread below.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/depu...g-relationship-with-iraq-in-all-areas.511831/

Youtube and Twitter clips not working on PDF currently. Anyway just read the comments of Saudi Arabians and Iraqis on Youtube and social media in Arabic (you can use Google Translate although that will not always help, lol).

BTW, you are totally mistaken about reducing this to imaginary ("Wahhabis", Hanbalis are a minority in KSA and mostly confined to Najd but those "Wahhabi Najdis have closer blood, tribal, dialect, history etc. ties with Iraqi Shia Arabs from the South than anyone else in the world actually) but in the real world Shia Arabs from KSA, Bahrain (GCC in general) are welcomed the most generously by locals in Najaf and Karbala. You can google this on Youtube as well or even @SALMAN F and @Malik Alashter will tell you it personally as those people have the best understanding/natural understanding with each other.

Another thing the current conflict in Yemen is also unnatural. Most of the Saudi Arabian soldiers fighting against Houthis are form next door Southern KSA (many are Zaydis or Ismailis) and just a few decades ago those same people and KSA supported the Zaydi monarchy against Southern Yemenis (Arab nationalists/socialists) while Egypt's Nasser fought the North.

The Yemen conflict is due to the Mullah regime brainwashing poor people in Northern Yemen to such an extend that they have convinced them of KSA wanting to kill them off (LOL) while KSA was their main ally historically and even to this day employs and feeds their families the most (directly and indirectly). The blame here is mostly on the harmful Mullah influence and spread of Wilayat al-Faqih and erosion of local Zaydi culture.

Just look at the slogan of the Houthis. It is like taken out of Iran post 1979. This is shared with Hezbollah too.

Death to Israel, USA, Jews etc. What the hell has Northern Zaydi Yemenis to do with those conflicts?

Mullah's dream about creating a Hezbollah in Northern Yemen so they can pose a threat for KSA and KSA (logically) will not allow such a hostile proxy group at their borders who moreover is totally incompetent and which has destroyed Yemen completely. If not for Mullah meddling, this internal conflict would have been solved and KSA and Houthis would have no reason to be hostile despite ideological differences like before.
 
Last edited:
US is not an enemy they're helping
US is your worst enemy as long as you are heaven of petrochemical resources...

As well as Turkey (almost same + territorial reasons) and Saudi (for religious reason).

Anyway have fun with your delusional Iranophobia thoughts.

Future will prove which country is your enemy and friend.
 
KSA's biggest crime (nothing to do with the people) is for past regimes allowing a few radical clerics in KSA to brainwash local youths to go to Iraq and fight some imaginary "holy war" against Americans/Western troops and militant Shia groups. Personally those that solely attacked Americans (an occupier), I do not consider as terrorists but those who took part in the internal Sunni-Shia conflict post 2003, are poison for all parties. Same story with the Iranians that went to Iraq and fought among the Shia militias.

These radical clerics (operating on Wesal TV for example) have indeed led to a lot of Saudi support for IS but this obviously was not the gov policy. It has been done in Syria for a few years with US overwatch as stated by former US chief of staff Gen. Martin Dempsey in a congressional hearing.

However throughout the years 2002-2011 Syria was the main entry point for terrorists into Iraq, to this day this is still the case. Looking at this direct Saudi meddling is very minimum. In Iraq politicians are either nationalists(Abadi), or they lean to Iran(many) or Turkey (Nujaifis), this is a result of meddling. Which politician leans to the GCC? None that are visible. When it comes to Iraq, Anbar would be a place where Saudi would be able to establish influence. However there has barely been Saudi influence there even when the battles between tribes/sahwat and ISI took place during American presence.

The problem of ISIS ideology has been linked to Saudi strongly, truth is it's Muslims from everywhere, Iraq as well.

US is your worst enemy as long as you are heaven of petrochemical resources...

As well as Turkey (almost same + territorial reasons) and Saudi (for religious reason).

Anyway have fun with your delusional Iranophobia thoughts.

Future will prove which country is your enemy and friend.

Turkey is Iraq's biggest threat when it comes to territorial and direct internal meddling through its proxy Barzani. That's followed by Iran which is meddling heavily in Baghdad. As I said these 2 states are hostile to Iraq.

KSA barely meddles, nowhere to be seen infact. ISIS problem lies in Sunnism not Saudi Arabia. Algeria experienced it in the 90's and they are far far away from the Gulf states. Kuwait has been the biggest problem as they cannot give the 1990 invasion a rest.

Yes i'm sorry, the great Khamenei saved us all. I forgot, I should return to the 80's and tell my family members they should joined the Iranian side. I do not need anything from you or Iranians, but if Iraqis would get to know this the country would be in a better state. Many have been fed the wrong information.
 
Oil exports were completely banned between 1990/1991 and 2003(except for a shitty oil for food programme LOL. Imports very heavily constrained, there was a complete isolation between Iraq and the rest of the world. The economy, living standards, connection with the outside world improved on every front. Medicine was in short supply and as a result hundreds of thousands of kids died, the country basically became North Korea and this is what started a wave of migration out of Iraq. What went backwards is security.


ISIS is a later story, you have to go back to 2003 and Iran's interference in organizing, arming Shi'a militias which then fought public security forces (The ISF) such as in Baghdad (Sadr city district mostly), Basra and many other area's. These same groups previously killed random Iraqis in Baghdad and elsewhere based on sect which gave Al Qaeda in Iraq fuel to recruit others. This all developed further and further into the Askari shrine bombing of 2006 which led to a civil war. Surely this cannot be blamed on Iran completely, however when you have a neighbor that is an Islamic Republic and meddles extensively in other states it's obvious what impact they have. Had Iran not meddled this would not have been the mess it has become. Remember that prior the the invasion Iraq was an area where Iran was unable to do anything, once Saddam was removed they did so to ensure that it would not become a hostile state to them again. However the process was destructive for Iraq and nowhere in our benefit as Iranians themselves seem to believe. Not to mention the countless of Iraqi air force pilots assasinated after the invasion, who else but Iran would have an interest in that.

As for IS and Iran's support, Iran offered major support (offering Iranian ground troops in 2014) but if Iraq had accepted that the country would have entered another civil war and been broken up. The US led coalition took the largest role in support.

In the end Iraq(is) does not need or want Iranian interference, the country is capable of fulfilling all its needs including military. Any such inteference only fuels hostility as is evident in the country where people in Baghdad and Basra as well as the north protest Iranian involvement. The many PMU groups would not exist without the IRI, they're nothing but complication and decreasing military effectiveness by tieing armed brigades to political figureheads who will take decisions based on playing the political game which only hampers military effectiveness. We don't need Hezbollah, and Asaib ahl al Haq, Kataib Sayyid al Shuhada, Badr Brigades and all that shit. Similarly Iran does not have 50 militia's they only have the regular army, the IRGC and Basij as they understand the importance of centralizing command. But when it comes to other nations they do not want other countries to have centralized command as that could be a threat to them. It's not in our benefit but in the benefit of IRI.
Are you implying that the shia militants started the civil war in Iraq?
Could Israel or other country be behind the assasinations? being scared of a pilots serving a shia-majority country/government? there is no evidence of Iran being behind the assasinations.
I say ok if you don't want Iranian interference (be it negative or positive), however would Iraq be able to make a balance in the region because other countries (turkey, saudi, usa etc) also want influence.
While sadr party got most votes, still Fatah alliance and Sate of Law coalition together got 72 seats... which is not a sign of biggest part of Iraq being against Islamic republic interference. The "anti-islamic republic influence parties" saairun and wataniya got together 75 seats... in this analysis we consider victory alliance with 42 seats as neutral.
Do the militias not act under command of Iraqi army and government?
Next to that you admit Iran had a role in saving Iraq from ISIS, do you admit that Iran played a role in preventing Barzanistan?

I want to add this: Iraq is now a democracy. By elections they can easily decide their direction... it's not that their hands are tied.. if they are not happy with something, they can change it by votes.
 
These radical clerics (operating on Wesal TV for example) have indeed led to a lot of Saudi support for IS but this obviously was not the gov policy. It has been done in Syria for a few years with US overwatch as stated by former US chief of staff Gen. Martin Dempsey in a congressional hearing.

However throughout the years 2002-2011 Syria was the main entry point for terrorists into Iraq, to this day this is still the case. Looking at this direct Saudi meddling is very minimum. In Iraq politicians are either nationalists(Abadi), or they lean to Iran(many) or Turkey (Nujaifis), this is a result of meddling. Which politician leans to the GCC? None that are visible. When it comes to Iraq, Anbar would be a place where Saudi would be able to establish influence. However there has barely been Saudi influence there even when the battles between tribes/sahwat and ISI took place during American presence.

The problem of ISIS ideology has been linked to Saudi strongly, truth is it's Muslims from everywhere, Iraq as well.



Turkey is Iraq's biggest threat when it comes to territorial and direct internal meddling through its proxy Barzani. That's followed by Iran which is meddling heavily in Baghdad. As I said these 2 states are hostile to Iraq.

KSA barely meddles, nowhere to be seen infact. ISIS problem lies in Sunnism not Saudi Arabia. Algeria experienced it in the 90's and they are far far away from the Gulf states. Kuwait has been the biggest problem as they cannot give the 1990 invasion a rest.

Yes i'm sorry, the great Khamenei saved us all. I forgot, I should return to the 80's and tell my family members they should joined the Iranian side.
It was Saudi regime and Americans who started war and your madog Saddam also attacked Kuwait.
 
Are you implying that the shia militants started the civil war in Iraq?
Could Israel or other country be behind the assasinations? being scared of a pilots serving a shia-majority country/government? there is no evidence of Iran being behind the assasinations.
I say ok if you don't want Iranian interference (be it negative or positive), however would Iraq be able to make a balance in the region because other countries (turkey, saudi, usa etc) also want influence.
While sadr party got most votes, still Fatah alliance and Sate of Law coalition together got 72 seats... which is not a sign of biggest part of Iraq being against Islamic republic interference. The "anti-islamic republic influence parties" saairun and wataniya got together 75 seats... in this analysis we consider victory alliance with 42 seats as neutral.
Do the militias not act under command of Iraqi army and government?
Iraq is now a democracy. By elections they can easily decide their direction...

The situation was ripe for civil war. No presence of public security forces, emergance of Shia militia`s linked to the IRGC and local warlords acting under this banner to enforce their rule. Perfect fuel for Al Qaeda in Iraq which already settled in Iraq before the invasion (Abu Musab al Zarqawi traveled to iraq in 2002 as he anticipated the invasion). Balance cannot be achieved by Iran retreating, balance can only be achieved by Baghdad itself, it`s up to them to play their cards right which is quite hard as democracies are open to foreign influence, even the US is so through lobbying.

That`s right, because the biggest part of Iraq is very religious and do not share my opinions. For them Shiasm is important. Most PMU act under the gov, some small groups do not. However in the end they are military groups that answer to political leaders, a flawed chain of command.

It was Saudi regime and Americans who started war and your madog Saddam also attacked Kuwait.

It was in your interest that he got removed, what are u complaining about..

What`s the big deal you have with me stating Iran`s inteference is negative? Seems you are unable to understand that there`s a border. Anyway continue as you like, all it does is anger people in Iraq and make them become anti-Iran. I do not live there it does not make much difference to me.
 
These radical clerics (operating on Wesal TV for example) have indeed led to a lot of Saudi support for IS but this obviously was not the gov policy. It has been done in Syria for a few years with US overwatch as stated by former US chief of staff Gen. Martin Dempsey in a congressional hearing.

However throughout the years 2002-2011 Syria was the main entry point for terrorists into Iraq, to this day this is still the case. Looking at this direct Saudi meddling is very minimum. In Iraq politicians are either nationalists(Abadi), or they lean to Iran(many) or Turkey (Nujaifis), this is a result of meddling. Which politician leans to the GCC? None that are visible. When it comes to Iraq, Anbar would be a place where Saudi would be able to establish influence. However there has barely been Saudi influence there even when the battles between tribes/sahwat and ISI took place during American presence.

The problem of ISIS ideology has been linked to Saudi strongly, truth is it's Muslims from everywhere, Iraq as well.

Wesal TV (may I add that similar religious channels exist in most Middle Eastern and Muslim countries, including Iran) is a private channel that operates outside of KSA and personally I believe that it should be closed. 4 years ago it was banned by the government (so locals could not watch it inside KSA without a VPN) but not sure what the situation is today.

KSA, outside of religious influence (at least as long as the Hanbali Ulema dominates, if future Saudi Arabian Ulemas included Twelvers, Zaydis and Ismaili representatives, then not), could have influence from Mosul to Basra for cultural, linguistic, historical, religious, ancestral, tribal, clan, geographic, media (Saudi Arabian shows, media etc. is the most watched in Iraq outside of Egyptian and Lebanese, not to mention the huge Saudi Arabian social presence online which many Arabs watch) but since KSA and Iraq post 1990 (after Saddam invaded Kuwait) until 2003, the ties were very very sporadic (Iraq was isolated as a whole), post 2003 we know the story (KSA and most Arab countries did not trust the Iraqi regimes for reasons that we have already discussed in this thread) and first until recently (almost 15 years later) normality has returned.

Anyway many people forget (in particular in Iraq) that it was actually the Al-Assad regime that was most destructive towards Iraq (just like the traitorous Al-Assad regime was when it betrayed Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war as the only relevant Arab country to do so), just like it did in past wars against Israel, by facilitating Syrian and foreign fighters to enter Iraq with the same Syrian regime doing the ground work to facilitate this (even training those Jihadists) to hurt US interests and destabilize Iraq.

This among the "Malik types" is all forgotten now due to the Syrian civil war.

Modern-day Muslim Jihadism has nothing to do with 250+ year old "Wahhabism".

Suicide bombings, nothing to do with it.

Destroying tombs/shrines, nothing to do with it, Abdul-Wahhab did not destroy any tombs during his lifetime, just discouraged worshipping ancestors/holy figures. What happened 150 years after his death was politically motivated when the Sauds conquered Hijaz and wanted to destroy/weaken the strong Sufi tradition in Hijaz to better uniform the country similar to how Ibn Saud married with important dynasts, clans etc. from across KSA to gain legitimacy and for his off-spring to have legitimacy by saying that they are part of the old status quo.

Similarly no Shias were slaughtered anywhere doing that time. Majority Shia Eastern Province next door was not harmed even once.

As for some raid on Najaf and Karbala 200 years ago done by fighting Arab tribes (looting as was common by everyone back then and still is to this day among many), there is only 1 source that reports this incident, and if it happened, it had nothing to do with "Wahhabi" preachings.

Al-Qaeda, ISIS etc. all originates from the Muslim Brotherhood teachings and more precisely Qutbism. This was even admitted by OBL and every "old-school" Jihadi.

KSA became radicalized (Sahwa period) in the 1970's (the process already began in the 1960's) due to a influx of Muslim brotherhood members from Egypt and Syria (who escaped Nasser's and Al-Assad's governments and where welcomed by KSA due to KSA back then being Pan-Islamic and not pan-Arab) which were mixed by local puritanical ideas/streams.

At this same period, KSA was becoming more and more "Westernized" (like Arab and Muslim societies by large in the 1970's) so the fanatics had the perfect excuse.


KSA in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's





upload_2018-7-10_4-14-45.jpeg

Women students being interviewed by Western reporters in English in 1966.



Jeddah beach front (bikini cladded Western expats mingling with locals)



Of course you can find such photos from Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan etc. as well and it does not meant that KSA was not majority conservative like the other countries but it was a different time (pre-Sahwa, pre-1979, pre-moronic laws) than afterwards. Obviously not a liberal paradise (LOL) but people should understand the point.

Later came the "Islamic Revolution" in Iran next door in 1979, largely as a reaction to the Shah's aggressive "Westernization" process. Then after 1979, KSA used religion as a counter to Iran's use of religion and the crap that we have witnessed since then is history that we are all aware of.

Later came the Afghan-Soviet war (same time period moreover).

After that war splinter groups (OBL and his likes) started going after their own regimes that they considered not Muslim enough or "Western agents" leading to OBL (who btw was half Yemeni and half Syrian) being stripped of his citizenship back in 1994. Some locals agreed with this moronic rhetoric and joined Jihadi outfits back home or went abroad to fight numerous wars that were not their own (Tajikistan civil war, Chechnya in the 1990's, Bosnia in the 1990's) etc.

The whole region became more Islamized. Islamists won an election in Algerian in the early 1990's, Saddam (otherwise a secular nationalist) started his Islamization program in the same period, Hosni Mubarak did not combat MB presence in Egypt as prior regimes, Erdogan appeared (Muslim populists) in Turkey and the first few open challenges against Kemalism/military rule etc.

Similarly in Pakistan Bhutto (a Shia) began the Islamization of Pakistan (nothing to do with KSA) and afterwards Zia. But KSA is blamed for this process (LOL) by some on PDF.

All what I have written can be backed up by facts and simple google searches but it is obviously more complicated than this.
 
Last edited:
@2800

Is it hard for you to understand that it angers locals when you send your national treasure, general Ghassem the great to tour Baghdad and meddle in forming a government?

Statements like this:

Ali Akbar Velayati, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's top adviser on international affairs, paid an official visit to Iraq from Feb. 15-18. He made statements on issues related to Iraq's internal affairs, including the upcoming elections, which sparked controversy in the Iraqi political scene.

“We will not allow liberals and communists to govern in Iraq,” Velayati said during a speech Feb. 17 at the Founding Conference of the Iraqi Assembly of Islamic Unity in Baghdad.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/02/iran-iraq-election-velayati.html#ixzz5KoWxXCfn

But I can't blame you, your regime treats your own people like shit to start with. You need to solve it for yourself.
 
It was Saudi regime and Americans who started war and your madog Saddam also attacked Kuwait.

Iran (Mullah's) were the ones that started the provocations against Iraq (actually it was the previous Iranian regime led by the Shah that already back then supported Kurdish separatists against Baghdad - this is well recorded in history books). It was the same Iranian Mullah's that after gaining power through executing all other political enemies (communists mostly but not only) that started the hostile behavior by calling neighborly regimes and countries for being led by "kafirs" and "Western puppets". Khomeini's hostile speeches are out there as well.

It was the same Khomeini that prolonged the war as well.

THe irony here was that KSA and Iran had rather cordial ties prior to 1979. Iran's main dispute with Arabs were 3 useless (overall islands, as KSA for instance is home to almost 1500 islands, many more than all Iranian islands combined) disputed islands with the newly formed UAE federation and the Shah's support for stateless Kurdish separatists in Northern Iraq.
 
Wesal TV (may I add that similar religious channels exist in most Middle Eastern and Muslim countries, including Iran) is a private channel that operates outside of KSA and personally I believe that it should be closed. 4 years ago it was banned by the government (so locals could not watch it inside KSA without a VPN) but not sure what the situation is today.

KSA, outside of religious influence (at least as long as the Hanbali Ulema dominates, if future Saudi Arabian Ulemas included Twelvers, Zaydis and Ismaili representatives, then not), could have influence from Mosul to Basra for cultural, linguistic, historical, religious, ancestral, tribal, clan, geographic, media (Saudi Arabian shows, media etc. is the most watched in Iraq outside of Egyptian and Lebanese, not to mention the huge Saudi Arabian social presence online which many Arabs watch) but since KSA and Iraq post 1990 (after Saddam invaded Kuwait) until 2003, the ties were very very sporadic (Iraq was isolated as a whole), post 2003 we know the story (KSA and most Arab countries did not trust the Iraqi regimes for reasons that we have already discussed in this thread) and first until recently (almost 15 years later) normality has returned.

Anyway many people forget (in particular in Iraq) that it was actually the Al-Assad regime that was most destructive towards Iraq (just like the traitorous Al-Assad regime was when it betrayed Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war as the only relevant Arab country to do so), just like it did in past wars against Israel, by facilitating Syrian and foreign fighters to enter Iraq with the same Syrian regime doing the ground work to facilitate this (even training those Jihadists) to hurt US interests and destabilize Iraq.

This among the "Malik types" is all forgotten now due to the Syrian civil war.

Modern-day Muslim Jihadism has nothing to do with 250+ year old "Wahhabism".

Suicide bombings, nothing to do with it.

Destroying tombs/shrines, nothing to do with it, Abdul-Wahhab did not destroy any tombs during his lifetime, just discouraged worshipping ancestors/holy figures. What happened 150 years after his death was politically motivated when the Sauds conquered Hijaz and wanted to destroy/weaken the strong Sufi tradition in Hijaz to better uniform the country similar to how Ibn Saud married with important dynasts, clans etc. from across KSA to gain legitimacy and for his off-spring to have legitimacy by saying that they are part of the old status quo.

Similarly no Shias were slaughtered anywhere doing that time. Majority Shia Eastern Province next door was not harmed even once.

As for some raid on Najaf and Karbala 200 years ago done by fighting Arab tribes (looting as was common by everyone back then and still is to this day among many), there is only 1 source that reports this incident, and if it happened, it had nothing to do with "Wahhabi" preachings.

Al-Qaeda, ISIS etc. all originates from the Muslim Brotherhood teachings and more precisely Qutbism. This was even admitted by OBL and every "old-school" Jihadi.

KSA became radicalized (Sahwa period) in the 1970's (the process already began in the 1960's) due to a influx of Muslim brotherhood members from Egypt and Syria (who escaped Nasser's and Al-Assad's governments and where welcomed by KSA due to KSA back then being Pan-Islamic and not pan-Arab) which were mixed by local puritanical ideas/streams.

At this same period, KSA was becoming more and more "Westernized" (like Arab and Muslim societies by large in the 1970's) so the fanatics had the perfect excuse.


KSA in the 1950's, 1960's and 1970's





View attachment 485317

Women students being interviewed by Western reporters in English in 1966.



Jeddah beach front (bikini cladded Western expats mingling with locals)



Of course you can find such photos from Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan etc. as well and it does not meant that KSA was not majority conservative like the other countries but it was a different time (pre-Sahwa, pre-1979, pre-moronic laws) than afterwards. Obviously not a liberal paradise (LOL) but people should understand the point.

Later came the "Islamic Revolution" in Iran next door in 1979, largely as a reaction to the Shah's aggressive "Westernization" process. Then after 1979, KSA used religion as a counter to Iran's use of religion and the crap that we have witnessed since then is history that we are all aware of.

Later came the Afghan-Soviet war (same time period moreover).

After that war splinter groups (OBL and his likes) started going after their own regimes that they considered not Muslim enough or "Western agents" leading to OBL (who btw was half Yemeni and half Syrian) being stripped of his citizenship back in 1994. Some locals agreed with this moronic rhetoric and joined Jihadi outfits back home or went abroad to fight numerous wars that were not their own (Tajikistan civil war, Chechnya in the 1990's, Bosnia in the 1990's) etc.

All what I have written can be backed up by facts and simple google searches but it is obviously more complicated than this.
Well jeddah next to Mecca is a crazy sin city.

6DD88EDB-FDCD-4DC6-AB89-111E4B445112.jpeg


I think you completely agree with me too. Feels sorry.

But I can't blame you, your regime treats your own people like shit to start with. You need to solve it for yourself.
I respect my goverment and love my government.
 
I respect my goverment and love my government.


Well jeddah next to Mecca is a sin city. I think you completely agree with me too. Feels sorry.

Love your country and people instead of blind love for a regime. If KSA (House of Saud) were pursuing such policies (largely failed) for 40 + years, I would be sitting here today and speaking openly against such a regime and supporting every outside help to remove such a failed regime as long as it could occur as peaceful as possible.

BTW I am not a fan of any regime but I see hope in MbS and like his reforms and what he is doing so far so that is that. Maybe I will be proven wrong, I do not know as I cannot predict the future.

This regime in Iran is the biggest enemy of Iran itself and not good for the region either. You don't have to agree personally but we can all read history and what has occurred in the past 40 years.

BTW, let's not even talk about the usual standard of regimes in the region as it is not worth it.

Those were the times among a certain part of the population just like in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere but most locals/people did obviously not engage in such practices.

My personal opinion is irrelevant here.
 
Love your country and people instead of blind love for a regime. If KSA (House of Saud) were pursuing such policies (largely failed) for 40 + years, I would be sitting here today and speaking openly against such a regime and supporting every outside help to remove such a failed regime as long as it could occur as peaceful as possible.

BTW I am not a fan of any regime but I see hope in MbS and like his reforms and what he is doing so far so that is that. Maybe I will be proven wrong, I do not know as I cannot predict the future.

This regime in Iran is the biggest enemy of Iran itself and not good for the region either. You don't have to agree personally but we can all read history and what has occurred in the past 40 years.

BTW, let's not even talk about the usual standard of regimes in the region as it is not worth it.

Those were the times among a certain part of the population just like in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere but most locals/people did obviously not engage in such practices.

My personal opinion is irrelevant here.
Love my democratic, proud, powerful and regulated country.

As many as we have more enemies it shows that Iran is moving in direct way and it is progressing more & more.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Iran

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/made-in-iran.156164/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-space-program.291303/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-uavs-news-and-discussions.228310/

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranian-missiles-news-and-discussions.227673/

We should call Iran, second Safavid empire. There is no reason to hate the entire system.

PS. There are not every 4 years elections in Iran! There are presidential and parliamentary elections in Iran every 4 years which means there are every 2 years one major election in Iran and every single year/ 5 - 6 months one local/sub elections...

Anyway good luck with your DEMOCRATIC Saudi regime !
 
Last edited:
Jeddah lies 70 km from Makkah. Two very different cities. Jeddah is not a holy city and traditionally and to this day is a liberal city as most coastal/port cities in the region have been. Jeddah is and was for 1400 years one of the most cosmopolitan cities in the Muslim world as pilgrims arrived to it from all over the world by sea or land route before they embarked across the mountains and desert to Makkah.

Makkah is a religious city but actually locals were traditionally one of the most well-versed in Muslim theology out there and had a strong leaning towards Sufism. Even traditional dresses of Makkah were not overly conservative.


The last 40 years of "Islamic conservatism" on the Sunni and Shia side, is unnatural. It was not like that 100 years ago.


https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/made-in-ksa.475488/page-18

Elections in Iran (if we are honest) are a scam due to few select approved candidates (all part of the same system) are running. Moreover elections in this region of the world is not always the best thing as many people end up voting populists/failures. China is doing well without voting/democracy and KSA/GCC is also doing well on many fronts (irrespective of oil and gas riches) compared to so-called democracies in the region.

Elections are not alfa and omega. Voting every 4 years, as if that will change the course of a country completely. Even in Europe, where there is full-scale democracy, the systems remain in place and more or less the same, irrespective of who and what parties people elect.

Politics is a dirty game everywhere. Politicians (most) that have no clue about ruling entire countries are telling lies/fairytales to voters to convince them. For 4 years or 8 years, they pursue their goals until a totally different party/ideology takes over and this process starts from the beginning again.

Civilains (most) have no clue about how to run countries either. Millions are voting on politicians that they find "charming", "good-looking" can "identify with", "from the same city, region", and not thinking about whether they are fit for running.

Every 18 year old can vote as well even those half of the people voting have no clue about politics but their vote counts as much as a professor of politics.

I prefer a meritocracy to govern states/countries and institutions. Also the smartest people never end up in politics as this is a fools job mostly.
 
No need to beat them, they're not the enemy. Their interference is, all that has to happen is for interference to stop. But then you got another problem with is Iraq itself, Iraqis are a problem for Iraq. These people are ashamed of work, they consider work to be a shameful thing. Goodluck with such a people.
Those are not the Iraqis who are lazy and ashamed of working these are yours in Saudi and the some of the GCC

Iraqis work and like to work but Iraqis don't like to dedicate their life just to work they have families and friends whom they like to spend time with

I know you are not Iraqi and that's for sure. You know it's shame for some one to adapt another nationality that he doesn't belong to
 

Back
Top Bottom