What's new

Armenia seeks long-range weapons against Turkey and Azerbaijan

it is possible for them to launch further attack in azerbaijan and capture more land, like israeli does :lol:

It is impossible in terms of militarily and politically as well. Besides, Turkey also do not let Armenia to attack on Azerbaijan. At current military capabilities of both country, I can just say that Azerbaijan military is way ahead of Armenians.


Azerbaijan 2010 military exercise...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is impossible in terms of militarily and politically as well. Besides, Turkey also do not let Armenia to attack on Azerbaijan. At current military capabilities of both country, I can just say that Azerbaijan military is way ahead of Armenians.


Azerbaijan 2010 military exercise...
YouTube - azerbaijan army military exercise 2010 / part 2

very nice brother cabatli...

I hope Azerbaijan can take their land again.....
 
Saying that one doesn't have a problem with neighbors because they themselves have a potent military force goes to say that countries without a potent military force are those that are in problems with their neighbours.

NO Ask syrians if they want hatay :) Syria has great relations with Turkey nowadays... the days Syria supported PKK is over after Turkey's war threat and they look like they no more claim any right on Hatay province
 
There is a Russian base at Gyumri in Armenia near Turkish border specifically for thwarting Turkish invasion. If Armenia attacks Turkey and Turkish response is proportional than Russia may not respond. But any all out Armenian-Turkish war may escalate into Russo-Turkish war. Turkey should invade near Nakhchivan and expand Azerbaijan-Turkish border than occupy the strip of land that separates Nakhchivan from Azerbaijan proper.

Turkey is a NATO ally, Russia wud have no choice but to back off
 
soon you will hear, Israel will supplied weapons to Greece and Armenia, which would be serious problems for Turkey.

It would be nice if Turkey and Pakistan are neighbors together that is enough powerful to destroy common enemy. :pakistan:

Dnt assume so Much, Israel Won't Go against Turkey. Turkey is an Important Allay of Israel In Region. I hope Israel will Soon Apologize for flotila Incident. And Pakistan , Has its own Problem let Pakistan Solve its Internal Problems Then we might think about our External Affair's.
And ya we backup our Turkish Brothers.
 
Turkey is a NATO ally, Russia wud have no choice but to back off

Any Turkish response from Armenian attack should be proportional. Turkey would definitely be able to destroy all Armenian military installations. Russia may not be spectators for long time if Turkey invades and occupy Armenia territory and link with Azerbaijan proper. NATO will have to use to restrain Russia.
 
Last edited:
NO Ask syrians if they want hatay :) Syria has great relations with Turkey nowadays... the days Syria supported PKK is over after Turkey's war threat and they look like they no more claim any right on Hatay province

I think Syria has changed much on a whole in terms of politics. Also, it wasn't Hatay alone, there were other segments which overlapped Iraq and some parts of Iran as well in the minds of some of their expansionists who used Pan-Arab sentiment albeit with a Syrian Ba'ath dimension to it.
 
Syria was interested in Hatay province because it had large Alawi population same as ruling Syrian dynasty. They wanted Hatay to increase their percentage of Alawi population in Syria. The ghulat sect of Alawi believe in trintiy of Muhammad-Ali-Salman Farsi they do not pray in mosque and have secret religious ceremonies. Hafiz al-Assad tried to bring this heterodox Shia sect closer to Ithna Asharia but not much was achieved.
 
What leads you to the conclusion that Iran wishes, secretly or overtly, or intends to be militarily involved in any conflict with Turkey, and that too to support/ defend Russia and Armenia?

the first part of your response is flawed, as I did not conclude anything or suggest anything. Turkey is taking Iran's side with regards to a nuclear deal with Brazil --so why would Iran go hostile against Turkiye?

I was suggesting, however, that Iran would probably side with Armenia (otherwise keep neutral) if there were to be hostilities between Armenia and a country like Azerbayjan

(forget Turkiye, Armenia is in no shape or form able to have any strategic or military advantage against them)

At present, both nations are working together against PJAK/PKK.

i'm very well aware; and I wish them best of luck to eradicate the groups

In fact, mutual relations have improved over what they were previously.

my father and his family lived in Iran during Shahi times; he told me that Iranians used to call the Turks ''Tork-e-Khar'' and look down on them as backwards people.

It is good that now relations are improved, population wise; demographics wise and size wise they are quite similar in many ways --even though Turkiye is not run by mullahs

Irrespective of military capabilities of both nations and so forth, the Iranian initiative simply isn't present. This is true regardless of Iran's internal ethnic demographics. Iranian Kurds are thought generally to be those who display the greatest resentment for Turkey, but even amongst Iranians Kurds, this remains a minority at it's zenith-- in which case, they hold anti-Iran sentiments at par (for instance PJAK).

any rebel/secessionist group should not be given a voice; if they resort to violence, action must be taken. Otherwise, you have to deal with them on civilian level and reach political settlement of some kind; military is not always solution to all problems


I am guessing however that this is based entirely on Iran's diplomatic relations with Armenia, but therein again, I fail to see how that correlates as a negation of Turkey. Anyways I await your explanation.

forget Turkiye; why doesn't Iran play a role in promoting the handover of Armenian-occupied lands back to the Azerbayjan?

as you are aware, i am referring to nagorno-karabakh

Anyways I await your explanation
 
are there more Alevis in Hatay or further central in Sivas

There is difference between Alevis and Alawis. Both are called by same name since Ottoman termed all extremist Shia sects as Alawis/Alevis without investigating their subtle differences. The Alevis of Turkey have more traditional pre-Islamic Turkic shamanistic beliefs. They include dance in their religious ceremonies which resembles Turkmen tribal dances. They were Islamized by extremist sects so they never had orthodox Muslim beliefs. The Alawis of Syria are followers of Nusary who mixed extremist Druze and Ismaili beliefs with Christianity.
 
Syria was interested in Hatay province because it had large Alawi population same as ruling Syrian dynasty. They wanted Hatay to increase their percentage of Alawi population in Syria. The ghulat sect of Alawi believe in trintiy of Muhammad-Ali-Salman Farsi they do not pray in mosque and have secret religious ceremonies. Hafiz al-Assad tried to bring this heterodox Shia sect closer to Ithna Asharia but not much was achieved.

One cannot comment much on Alawi beliefs and practices. There are numerous notions about them, many truthful, most not. The small community is well-knit and rather secretive in that religious texts are not public and available to certain individuals within the community alone. Also, we are steering off-topic now.
 
thanks for the heads up sir; i had no idea.

I am aware that Alevis do ''prayer'' at cem-evi (pronounced Jem-Evi) --women and men sit in a circle and have songs/dance type rituals. They don't fast or do a lot of what ''standard Muslims'' do, they idolize Imam Ali A.S./Imam Hussein A.S.

interesting faith....they are more ''progressive'' and mystical than Sufis, though Sufism still falls under branch of Islam

that said, i am no religious scholar so i may not be in authority to speak on these matters
 
the first part of your response is flawed, as I did not conclude anything or suggest anything. Turkey is taking Iran's side with regards to a nuclear deal with Brazil --so why would Iran go hostile against Turkiye?

The response isn't flawed actually. You said, that in the worst case scenario, Iran on the opposite end as well. I asked you why you would suggest or conclude as such alone.

I was suggesting, however, that Iran would probably side with Armenia (otherwise keep neutral) if there were to be hostilities between Armenia and a country like Azerbayjan

Between the two, Iran would rather chose to remain neutral. Diplomatic overtures with Armenia are present, but they don't substantiate a covert alliance. Moreover, such absurd actions would find ill-sentiment within Iran as well. If you look at Iran's history, it hasn't had the intent for military adventures in quiet some time-- Iran-Iraq war doesn't contradict this for Iran wasn't the instigator.

(forget Turkiye, Armenia is in no shape or form able to have any strategic or military advantage against them)

Armenian military capabilities do not put them in an offensive setting against Azerbaijan, let alone Turkey, to my reasoning rather they are better catered to provide a defensive footing. The Azerbaijani military has forged itself anew since the previous major confrontation with Armenia and has presently more resources available to it in comparison with their counterpart. That being said, I also don't believe the Azerbaijani military is in a position to overwhelm Armenian defenses entirely by independent action as well. God forbid, if another open conflict breaks out between the two, it would be devastating for both populations because, realistically speaking, the lines between victors and losers would be very blurred at best. I'll not unnecessarily bring in third countries as that would most certainly tip the very fragile balance between the two. What could at best shorten such a futile military engagement, would be the non involvement of third countries.

my father and his family lived in Iran during Shahi times; he told me that Iranians used to call the Turks ''Tork-e-Khar'' and look down on them as backwards people.

When you say Iranians, please note that you are only referring to a certain group of Iranians and the seriousness of these puns varies. Anyways, the above is at par with how people in Pakistan, when often in anger or in humour, call a specific ethnic of their countrymen "akhrot." It is also similar to how Iranians are labeled "Ajam tememi" in some Arab countries. The point is, such generalizations are meaningless in effect as you know well. Also, how was the above note in any way relevant or important to this thread?

forget Turkiye; why doesn't Iran play a role in promoting the handover of Armenian-occupied lands back to the Azerbayjan?

as you are aware, i am referring to nagorno-karabakh

Anyways I await your explanation

Iran's clearly doesn't support the Armenian territorial stance and neither does it appreciate Azerbaijan's position above it. The only borders accepted by Iran of the two states are those that are internationally accepted and Tehran has stated this very clearly. Armenia occupies approximately 16% of what is internationally recognized as Azerbaijan's territory. Iran has been mediating in the past as well. What Iran can do effectively between the two is limited. That being said, between the two involved parties, neither side is as compromising as the other. The result is continuous deadlock. I fail to see military action bringing a solution in any case. Lastly, some of Aliyev's past statements have been found to be very offensive by Iranians, especially Iranian Azeris like myself. These at best damage trust/relations.

EDIT: Side note: AbuZolfaghar, just curious, why do you insist of spelling Turkey as "Turkiye" (in which case the spelling is still wrong in Turkish; lacks the ü)? I know you do it purposely because in other places you have spelled it the English way. You often do the same for Azerbaijan ("Azərbaycan"). Arguably, in this way you should also always write Germany as Deutschland, Austria as Osterriech, and Iran as ایران whenever conversing in English. Anyways, whatever pleases you mate...
 
Last edited:
The response isn't flawed actually. You said, that in the worst case scenario, Iran on the opposite end as well. I asked you why you would suggest or conclude as such alone.

Re-read my last post


Armenian military capabilities do not put them in an offensive setting against Azerbaijan, let alone Turkey, to my reasoning rather they are better catered to provide a defensive footing. The Azerbaijani military has forged itself anew since the previous major confrontation with Armenia and has presently more resources available to it in comparison with their counterpart. That being said, I also don't believe the Azerbaijani military is in a position to overwhelm Armenian defenses entirely by independent action as well. God forbid, if another open conflict breaks out between the two, it would be devastating for both populations because, realistically speaking, the lines between victors and losers would be very blurred at best. I'll not unnecessarily bring in third countries as that would most certainly tip the very fragile balance between the two. What could at best shorten such a futile military engagement, would be the non involvement of third countries.
I’m not sure if Russia or Turkiye would sit idly


When you say Iranians, please note that you are only referring to a certain group of Iranians and the seriousness of these puns varies. Anyways, the above is at par with how people in Pakistan, when often in anger or in humour, call a specific ethnic of their countrymen "akhrot." It is also similar to how Iranians are labeled "Ajam tememi" in some Arab countries. The point is, such generalizations are meaningless in effect as you know well. Also, how was the above note in any way relevant or important to this thread?


Ajam tememi??? :lol:


Iran's clearly doesn't support the Armenian territorial stance and neither does it appreciate Azerbaijan's position above it. The only borders accepted by Iran of the two states are those that are internationally accepted and Tehran has stated this very clearly. Armenia occupies approximately 16% of what is internationally recognized as Azerbaijan's territory. Iran has been mediating in the past as well. What Iran can do effectively between the two is limited. That being said, between the two involved parties, neither side is as compromising as the other. The result is continuous deadlock. I fail to see military action bringing a solution in any case. Lastly, some of Aliyev's past statements have been found to be very offensive by Iranians, especially Iranian Azeris like myself. These at best damage trust/relations.

I guess Iran doesn’t have the leverage to broker talks between the two, nor do other countries for that matter. Hopefully it can be solved without further violence


EDIT: Side note: AbuZolfaghar, just curious, why do you insist of spelling Turkey as "Turkiye" (in which case the spelling is still wrong in Turkish; lacks the ü)? I know you do it purposely because in other places you have spelled it the English way. You often do the same for Azerbaijan ("Azərbaycan"). Arguably, in this way you should also always write Germany as Deutschland, Austria as Osterriech, and Iran as ایران whenever conversing in English. Anyways, whatever pleases you mate...

I lived in Turkiye for some period; just curious why you spelled my name as ‘’Zolfaghar’’ ??

Incidentally, spelling of countries is not an important component of this thread or discussion.

Tashakor.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom