A post Islamic Iran will be more dangerous to Pakistan.

[Old School]

No it wouldn't. But it would be FAR MORE dangerous for Ukranian or Russian civilian passenger jets though.......

It does make a sense for the Soros gang to shoot down a civilian jet over a convenient conflict zone which can trigger their signature color revolutions.

 

[Zane_K]

No it wouldn't. But it would be FAR MORE dangerous for Ukranian or Russian civilian passenger jets though.......

Mr Pakistanforever dam! you’re going in fresh on Ukrainian Jet jokes. You made me smile ( a little) though I am bitter and twisted.
seriously though...
RIP to the passengers and to the families..deepest sympathies.. may Allah give you the peace that you seek.

 

[Kambojaric]

A non-theocratic Iran means less focus on spreading the influence of Shia groups. That will inevitably improve relations with Pakistan.

 

[Philosopher]

No it wouldn't. But it would be FAR MORE dangerous for Ukranian or Russian civilian passenger jets though.......

@Irfan Baloch

Apparently this kid thinks it's funny to joke about incidents that cost the lives of hundreds of people.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Great summary. The mullahs effectively divert the US-India-Israel axis (which is a real thing btw) from decisive efforts at our western flank by bogging the Americans down in the middle east.

The mullahs foolishly fail to realise that they need a unified, independent and strong Pakistan because despite there being some transactional elements to our association with USA, by default, because of American and Israeli bias towards Hindutva pakistan can never be an ally of either USA or Israel. We can reach a neutral stance but no more because of their support for Delhi's current regime. Now given this natural limit to pakistan's relationship with USA and Israel, you'd think the mullahs would try harder to keep Pakistan happy - alas they failed to realise these geopolitical realities ever since their revolution gave them all 20:20 tunnel vision, and we also failed to make them realise. If the mullahs do anything to weaken the state of Pakistan, the balochi separatists in Iran become stronger by default. Let's not forget AQ Khan's assistance to the Iranian regime.

The more I think of it, the more it bugs me how ungrateful these mullah scumbags truly are. Indian chabahar is what Pakistan got as thanks for nuclear know-how. The Bollywood effect is strong.

However the neo-Persians love Bollywood even more - like the neo-kabulites in many ways - so as you said, the current regime is our preference.

Iran-Pakistan Ties since 1979 has been up and down when the Shah was overthrown Pakistan was the first Nation to recognise the new regime and send a Foreign Minister to Tehran when others were breaking ties or observing the crisis, Zia Ul Haq even praised the new leadership as well, during the 1980s when Iran was isolated we provided them arms and food while Saddam was getting arms and support to terrorize the Iranians and Kurds, by the same west who toppled him decades later, we stayed neutral but under the table supported Tehran's case when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan we were on the same team as well, relations only started to tank in 1990s when our politicians failed to use the success of Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan and frankly bootlicking of the Gulf Arabs became paramount plus we failed to reign in the Taliban and their anti Shia pograms in the Hazara region and it did not help they killed Iranian diplomats in Herat in 1998 almost declared war against Taliban Govt in Afghanistan by then they switched on us, and supported the Northern Alliance in 2001, however we had another opportunity under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who was elected President in 2005 to renew ties he was not sectarian,pro Kashmir and Pakistan, lots of visits between the two nations talks over the pipelines and cheap electricity but what did Mushy do nothing he shat on it pissed the Iranians off and bootlicked the Saudis and Americans missed opportunity Rouhani again missed opportunity now we got Chabahar but this is nuisance rather than a threat

The US interests lie in having a Molla-controlled Iran...

A "secular" Iran would try to emulate Turkey; hence, it'd be OK for Pak...

I like you as a bot but this time you are mistaken Iranian secularism and their secularists are nothing like the Kemalists and Turkish nationalists.

I respectfully disagree. Secular Iranians are not like secular Turks, who retain a strong sense of nationalism. They will be more akin to neo-kabulites. These neo-Persian types are already in love with Indians through Bollywood, see Pakistanis as ethnically inferior to themselves and constantly tout their ancient relationship with Hindu tribes. Pakistan has no interest in such folks. The old Shah was different but then Pakistan was also different back then - both Pakistan and the Shah's Iran were US allies and India was not. Those circumstances are off the table presently.

You're also overlooking the main difference - Turkish secular nationalism secured and still constantly sustains the modern state of Turkey against US opposition. A secular Iran would only arise through US support, hence modern Iranian seculars will be a client state of USA permanently. They're all sitting in USA as we speak, waiting for the mullahs to shoot themselves in the legs.

Iranians in the west are 50/50 the ones in the West Coast mainly in the US esp-Los Angeles/SF are hardcore Shah loyalists and are anti-Islam to the core they disparage Pakistanis, and Pakistan as artificial "British" creation willing to be destroyed.Biggest White Wannabe folks claiming to be "Aryan" and white some even dye their blond and get nose and boob jobs many are also neo-Zoorastrian and left the fold of Islam.In LA many are also Jewish these feefeejoons or grifters are elite or upper middle classes that left their nation when needed when it was attacked claiming to be patriots but wanting it to be destroyed by Yankee because the lower and middle classes wanted something else for their nation disgusting people basically , some are part of the MEK /MKO cult a pseudo Marxist so called Islamists group led by the Rajavi Family again a sordid bunch of traitors back by the current Trump Administration, however not all are like this where I live the Northeastern US(NYC) and in Toronto Canada most are decent people not all are religious some are but they still respect Pakistanis in general, some actually seeked refuge in Pakistan in the 80s when Iraq was at war with Iran as well.

The anti Mullah establishment has a hatred for Islam. I've met some of these mother …...They drink, eat pork and let there sisters marry non muslims. They also have strong links with Jews and Hindus

The ones in Los Angeles are very much like this feefeejoon grifters basically

Russia is a key player here. It will not allow its Iranian ally to fall. Without Iran the Western establishment will shift attention to further disrupting EU and Russia's trade and energy ties there. It is vital for Russia that its enemy remains tied down in the Middle East, Venezuela and elsewhere far from Russia's borders.

You hit the bullseye despite some regional interests that vary between Iran and Russia the two countries and Iran being anti-Soviet in the 80s they are very close its blessing for Moscow that Iran is isolated and its one the few key allies they got in the region strong enough to stand on its feet unlike Syria.

Sorry can’t see it.. ‘very close to Americans, the west & the Israelis’... nah!

Could be if the regime changed

I would also add that from my own interactions, Turks (both completely secular and religious) tend to respect their history and the historical ties between ottomans and Pakistanis. Modern Iranian seculars have no such shared history with Pakistanis (or the pre-existing Indian Muslim khalifah movement etc) hence would have no hesitation in siding against Pakistan if USA tosses a bone or two their way.

Yes I agree most Turks still in general respect Pakistanis a lot more in the west than Secular Iranians

A non-theocratic Iran means less focus on spreading the influence of Shia groups. That will inevitably improve relations with Pakistan.

The opposite would occur actually with a pro western Iran, Pakistan would be easily be the next target in the US drive to increase influence in its sphere

 

[Zane_K]

Iran-Pakistan Ties since 1979 has been up and down when the Shah was overthrown Pakistan was the first Nation to recognise the new regime and send a Foreign Minister to Tehran when others were breaking ties or observing the crisis, Zia Ul Haq even praised the new leadership as well, during the 1980s when Iran was isolated we provided them arms and food while Saddam was getting arms and support to terrorize the Iranians and Kurds, by the same west who toppled him decades later, we stayed neutral but under the table supported Tehran's case when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan we were on the same team as well, relations only started to tank in 1990s when our politicians failed to use the success of Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan and frankly bootlicking of the Gulf Arabs became paramount plus we failed to reign in the Taliban and their anti Shia pograms in the Hazara region and it did not help they killed Iranian diplomats in Herat in 1998 almost declared war against Taliban Govt in Afghanistan by then they switched on us, and supported the Northern Alliance in 2001, however we had another opportunity under Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who was elected President in 2005 to renew ties he was not sectarian,pro Kashmir and Pakistan, lots of visits between the two nations talks over the pipelines and cheap electricity but what did Mushy do nothing he shat on it pissed the Iranians off and bootlicked the Saudis and Americans missed opportunity Rouhani again missed opportunity now we got Chabahar but this is nuisance rather than a threat

I like you as a bot but this time you are mistaken Iranian secularism and their secularists are nothing like the Kemalists and Turkish nationalists.


Iranians in the west are 50/50 the ones in the West Coast mainly in the US esp-Los Angeles/SF are hardcore Shah loyalists and are anti-Islam to the core they disparage Pakistanis, and Pakistan as artificial "British" creation willing to be destroyed.Biggest White Wannabe folks claiming to be "Aryan" and white some even dye their blond and get nose and boob jobs many are also neo-Zoorastrian and left the fold of Islam.In LA many are also Jewish these feefeejoons or grifters are elite or upper middle classes that left their nation when needed when it was attacked claiming to be patriots but wanting it to be destroyed by Yankee because the lower and middle classes wanted something else for their nation disgusting people basically , some are part of the MEK /MKO cult a pseudo Marxist so called Islamists group led by the Rajavi Family again a sordid bunch of traitors back by the current Trump Administration, however not all are like this where I live the Northeastern US(NYC) and in Toronto Canada most are decent people not all are religious some are but they still respect Pakistanis in general, some actually seeked refuge in Pakistan in the 80s when Iraq was at war with Iran as well.

The ones in Los Angeles are very much like this feefeejoon grifters basically



You hit the bullseye despite some regional interests that vary between Iran and Russia the two countries and Iran being anti-Soviet in the 80s they are very close its blessing for Moscow that Iran is isolated and its one the few key allies they got in the region strong enough to stand on its feet unlike Syria.



Could be if the regime changed


Yes I agree most Turks still in general respect Pakistanis a lot more in the west than Secular Iranians



The opposite would occur actually with a pro western Iran, Pakistan would be easily be the next target in the US drive to increase influence in its sphere

A lot of in depth analysis.. well done Osman.

 

[dani92]

There is a western backed regime change process rapidly unfolding in Iran in the forms of targeted assassinations and color revolution. Our ties with Iran have been far from being on the same page since birth in 1947. Iran's foreign policies involving Afghanistan and India have not been in line with ours as these two neighbors in the east and west are the most strategically crucial factor for the very survival of the state of Pakistan.
The big question is if the Islamic regime falls in Iran and it is replaced by a pro West secular regime, how it is going to impact our strategic interests. Are we going to see an Iranian Modi in our western frontier?

The shah was always on Pakistan side from Baluchistan to Kashmir.

 

[Old School]

Friends, the secular Persians are mortal enemies of Islam. We can effectively deal with the current Ayatullahs but we will never be able to deal the secular Persians who believe that they can build their empire through producing bastards and eating porks sitting on the laps of the West. Young millenial Pakistanis have no idea how filthy these secular pro West Persians are.

The shah was always on Pakistan side from Baluchistan to Kashmir.

SHAH was a very different person in a different time. He was similar to Jinnah. That is why Americans dumped him in the end when he woke up and stated nationalizing the oil fields. They even did not give him medical treatments on US soil. Today's Persian secular nationalists are a bunch of perverts. Islamists under Ayatullah are far better than them to deal with.

 

[Yankee-stani]

The shah was always on Pakistan side from Baluchistan to Kashmir.

Prior to 1971 yes but after the 1971 debacle of Pakistan suffering from losing East Pakistan he saw Pakistan as a liability and had plans of annexing Baluchistan from Pakistan and became neutral towards the Kashmir conflict

Friends, the secular Persians are mortal enemies of Islam. We can effectively deal with the current Ayatullahs but we will never be able to deal the secular Persians who believe that they can build their empire through producing bastards and eating porks sitting on the laps of the West. Young millenial Pakistanis have no idea how filthy these secular pro West Persians are.


SHAH was a very different person in a different time. He was similar to Jinnah. That is why Americans dumped him in the end when he woke up and stated nationalizing the oil fields. They even did not give him medical treatments on US soil. Today's Persian secular nationalists are a bunch of perverts. Islamists under Ayatullah are far better than them to deal with.

I agree the problem many of these burger middle class folks in Pakistan see Iran is not from a sectarian religious view from the looks of it the political sectarianism has been pushed aside from the younger generation of Pakistanis but two examples I note opposition towards Iran is the typical Iran is bad cause of human right other is ohh they are ally of India cause of one port deal they dont look at the intricacies of geopolitics behind the scenes besides you cant compare the Shah era and say voila the next regime would be the same and pro Pakistan very shallow thinking

 

[jamal18]

@OsmanAli98 Love the info, dude, but you've got to learn to use sentences. The odd full stop would not go amiss.

 

[Old School]

Prior to 1971 yes but after the 1971 debacle of Pakistan suffering from losing East Pakistan he saw Pakistan as a liability and had plans of annexing Baluchistan from Pakistan and became neutral towards the Kashmir conflict



I agree the problem many of these burger middle class folks in Pakistan see Iran is not from a sectarian religious view from the looks of it the political sectarianism has been pushed aside from the younger generation of Pakistanis but two examples I note opposition towards Iran is the typical Iran is bad cause of human right other is ohh they are ally of India cause of one port deal they dont look at the intricacies of geopolitics behind the scenes besides you cant compare the Shah era and say voila the next regime would be the same and pro Pakistan very shallow thinking

It is true that Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia etc adopted western liberalism. However, their people are no way anti Islam. These Pro west Persian seculars are anti Islam to their bone marrows. It will become a Israel-hindutva-fascist epicenter by big multitude. Mark my words.

 

[maximuswarrior]

That was a cold war situation. The world has changed lot since then. Even USA left Shah high and dry in the end. A pro West Iran is more likely to be pro India than it is now.

Definitely a threat. The US think tanks even propose overthrowing the regime in Iran to bypass Pak supply routes. It is a US wetdream to use Iranian supply routes into Afghanistan.

 

[dani92]

Prior to 1971 yes but after the 1971 debacle of Pakistan suffering from losing East Pakistan he saw Pakistan as a liability and had plans of annexing Baluchistan from Pakistan and became neutral towards the Kashmir conflict



I agree the problem many of these burger middle class folks in Pakistan see Iran is not from a sectarian religious view from the looks of it the political sectarianism has been pushed aside from the younger generation of Pakistanis but two examples I note opposition towards Iran is the typical Iran is bad cause of human right other is ohh they are ally of India cause of one port deal they dont look at the intricacies of geopolitics behind the scenes besides you cant compare the Shah era and say voila the next regime would be the same and pro Pakistan very shallow thinking

From what I know after Pakistan lost Bangladesh he condemned India because he was afraid that the problem will reach Baluchistan if Pakistan falls and divided.

 

[maximuswarrior]

Friends, the secular Persians are mortal enemies of Islam. We can effectively deal with the current Ayatullahs but we will never be able to deal the secular Persians who believe that they can build their empire through producing bastards and eating porks sitting on the laps of the West. Young millenial Pakistanis have no idea how filthy these secular pro West Persians are.


SHAH was a very different person in a different time. He was similar to Jinnah. That is why Americans dumped him in the end when he woke up and stated nationalizing the oil fields. They even did not give him medical treatments on US soil. Today's Persian secular nationalists are a bunch of perverts. Islamists under Ayatullah are far better than them to deal with.

The Persian nationalists are scum. Most definitely. More loyal to West than Shah himself. This is a very special and unique breed. I have known quite a few.

 

[dani92]

Friends, the secular Persians are mortal enemies of Islam. We can effectively deal with the current Ayatullahs but we will never be able to deal the secular Persians who believe that they can build their empire through producing bastards and eating porks sitting on the laps of the West. Young millenial Pakistanis have no idea how filthy these secular pro West Persians are.


SHAH was a very different person in a different time. He was similar to Jinnah. That is why Americans dumped him in the end when he woke up and stated nationalizing the oil fields. They even did not give him medical treatments on US soil. Today's Persian secular nationalists are a bunch of perverts. Islamists under Ayatullah are far better than them to deal with.

I agree secular Iranian nationalists are delusional like the turanians and Islamists but not all of them are imperialists. As for Islam it’s gonna be wiped out from Iran since Iranians are converting to Christianity or atheism some of them are irreligious but they are cultural Zoroastrians.