Baghdad owes Iran USD 1.1 trillion as reparations of war: Iranian MP

[HannibalBarca]

First of all, pashtuns were part of Iran many centuries, also when they fought against safavid government. As an Iranian ethnic group, they even defeated ottomans and protected Iranian soil against ottoman attacks while they ruled parts of Iran.

As a Parab (arabized pakistani) from a 70 year old country, you should also read the text on the tomb of Ahmad Shah Durrani, the greatest Pashtun king:

The King of high rank, Ahmad Shah Durrani,
Was equal to Kisra in managing the affairs of his government.
In his time, from the awe of his glory and greatness,
The lioness nourished the stag with her milk.
From all sides in the ear of his enemies there arrived
A thousand reproofs from the tongue of his dagger.
The date of his departure for the house of mortality
Was the year of the Hijra 1186 (1772 A.D.).

No we aint claiming damage from saudi arabia for destroying sassanid empire as saudis are not going to claim money from Iranian-led Qarmatians for attacking mecca and stealing the black stone, occupying and doing things with the holy stone which I will not mention here. Neither will saudis claim damage from the ababil birds who did not show up to stop the qarmatians like they did to ethiopians by stoning them.

Neither are pakistanis asking arabs or mongolians money for attacking and occupying their territories. As we know Parabs (arabized pakistanis) always think that they are some flowers grown from seeds planted in soil by invasion of arabs and that they somehow were immune from attacks of foreigners or that they even were not natives and did not suffer at all from agression by invading forces like arabs and mongols. However since history is not equal to parabism (arabized pakistani revisionism of history) we read for example:

"In winter 1241 the Mongol force invaded the Indus valley and besieged Lahore. However, on December 30, 1241, the Mongols under Munggetu butchered the town before withdrawing from the Delhi Sultanate. At the same time the Great Khan Ögedei died (1241)."

Now putting trolling aside, this conflict happened recent in modern era and Iran has the right to pursue its claims which at least has a base.


600 billion dollars in 1988 and by now 1,1 trillion is not a real absurd calculation.

What is absurd... is to reclaim it now for political purposes... That will drive away, one among the few Iranian ally left in the region...
Why not asking for it, under Maliki rule? or even before him... That is just showing Iran Frustration and absurd answer toward Iraq... because of US sanctions... it's immature.

We all now this money will never be paid... Both sides knows it...

 

[Saif al-Arab]

First of all, pashtuns were part of Iran many centuries, also when they fought against safavid government. As an Iranian ethnic group, they even defeated ottomans and protected Iranian soil against ottoman attacks while they ruled parts of Iran.

As a Parab (arabized pakistani) from a 70 year old country, you should also read the text on the tomb of Ahmad Shah Durrani, the greatest Pashtun king:

The King of high rank, Ahmad Shah Durrani,
Was equal to Kisra in managing the affairs of his government.
In his time, from the awe of his glory and greatness,
The lioness nourished the stag with her milk.
From all sides in the ear of his enemies there arrived
A thousand reproofs from the tongue of his dagger.
The date of his departure for the house of mortality
Was the year of the Hijra 1186 (1772 A.D.).

No we aint claiming damage from saudi arabia for destroying sassanid empire as saudis are not going to claim money from Iranian-led Qarmatians for attacking mecca and stealing the black stone, occupying and doing things with it which I will not mention here. Neither will saudis claim damage from the ababil birds who did not show up to stop the qarmatians like they did to ethiopians by stoning them.

Neither are pakistanis asking arabs or mongolians money for attacking and occupying their territories. As we know Parabs (arabized pakistanis) always think that they are some flowers grown from seeds planted in soil by invasion of arabs and that they somehow were immune from attacks of foreigners or that they even were not natives and did not suffer at all from agression by invading forces like arabs and mongols. However since history is not equal to parabism (arabized pakistani revisionism of history) we read for example:

"In winter 1241 the Mongol force invaded the Indus valley and besieged Lahore. However, on December 30, 1241, the Mongols under Munggetu butchered the town before withdrawing from the Delhi Sultanate. At the same time the Great Khan Ögedei died (1241)."

Now putting trolling aside, this conflict happened recent in modern era and Iran has the right to pursue its claims which at least has a base.

Qarmatians (Arabized completely) were not Iranians nor did they damage much and were quickly dealt with. Their name is of Semitic (either Arabic or Aramaic origins).

Name

The origin of the name "Qarmatian" is uncertain.[3] According to some sources, the name derives from the surname of the sect's founder, Hamdan Qarmat.[4][5] The name qarmat probably comes from the Aramaic for "short-legged", "red-eyed" or "secret teacher".[6][7][8] Other sources, however, say that the name comes from the Arabic verb قرمط (qarmat), which means "to make the lines close together in writing" or "to walk with short steps".[2][9] The word "Qarmatian" can also refer to a type of Arabic script.[10]

The Qarāmiṭah in southern Iraq were also known as "the Greengrocers" (al-Baqliyyah) because of a preacher Abu Hatim, who, in 906 or 907, forbade animal slaughter as well as the eating of vegetables such as alliums. It is not clear if his teachings persisted.[11]​

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

The supposed founder birth date are not even known. The Iranian Encyclopedia (lol) claim him to be of Persian origin but there are zero proofs of this. The name does not indicate it either. Some supposed influences of Zoroastrianism can be explained by the small indigenous Zoroastrian communities in Eastern Arabia in old times. The same religion that was heavily influenced by Semitic religions as Iran was since its birth on all fronts and remains to this day.

You know what, if we assume that the Mullah's ruling Iran currently are really of genuine Arab descent, one can easily claim that they have done even more harm than Arabs ever did against Iran in all of history combined. But since most of them are likely fakes it is another "made in Iran" product like the Wilayat al-Faqih "Made in Iran" product and the "Islamic" Revolution "made in Iran" product.

Did you know that Pashtuns have up to 30% indigenous South Asian (Dravidian mostly) DNA on average? Rest is from the Arab world (mostly) (Neolithic DNA which originated in the Arab world and whose skeletons cluster with modern-day Arabs the most, including Saudi Arabians) and some inputs from Central Asia. Similarly with Tajiks who have a lot of Mongol/Turkic (actual Turkic DNA) DNA and admixture.

Pashtuns also destroyed the Turkic ruling dynasty that ruled modern-day Iran.

The 29 year (lasting) Hottaki Dynasty.

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



Several half-hearted attempts to subdue the rebellious city having failed, the Persian Government despatched Khusraw Khán, nephew of the late Gurgín Khán, with an army of 30,000 men to effect its subjugation, but in spite of an initial success, which led the Afgháns to offer to surrender on terms, his uncompromising attitude impelled them to make a fresh desperate effort, resulting in the complete defeat of the Persian army (of whom only some 700 escaped) and the death of their general. Two years later, in A.D. 1713, another Persian army commanded by Rustam Khán was also defeated by the rebels, who thus secured possession of the whole Loy Kandahar region.[8]

— Edward G. Browne, 1924

The Hotak dynasty was a troubled and violent one from the very start as internecine conflict made it difficult to establish permanent control. The dynasty lived under great turmoil due to bloody succession feuds that made their hold on power tenuous, and after the massacre of thousands of civilians in Isfahan – including more than three thousand religious scholars, nobles, and members of the Safavid family – the Hotak dynasty was eventually removed from power in Persia.[12] On the other hand, the Afghans had also been suppressed by the Iranian Safavid government represented by its governor Gurgin Khan before their uprising in 1709.[6]​

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

Safavid Barbarians were destroyed by their own favorite pastime (massacres).

Some real "brotherly" love right there.

Yes, instead he should be praising Iranian invasions of Pakistan and occupations and turn into a Farsiparast.

IVC (mostly of a Dravidian/indigenous stock) were Iranians of course even though no Iranians existed until millennia later.

What is absurd... is to reclaim it now for political purposes... That will drive away, one among the few Iranian ally left in the region...
Why not asking for it, under Maliki rule? or even before him... That is just showing Iran Frustration and absurd answer toward Iraq... because of US sanctions... it's immature.

We all now this money will never be paid... Both sides knows it...

It's great for the Mullah lot to voice such unrealistic/laughable topics in order to draw attention away from the sanctions and general failures. Common tactic. The Iraqi answer will be a slipper.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

I can understand Iranian officials being shocked/angry at the news that Abadi complies with these sanctions. But in all fairness; what could very well be America's backlash on Iraq if Iraq was to bypass these sanctions? Think of the possibilities.

- The F-16's that haven't been delivered yet would not be delivered or perhaps to to Barzanistan. The remaining F-16's we wouldn't be able to get spare parts and ordnance for anymore.
- We lose the upper hand over the Kurds whom America will support against us, Iran won't help in that situation.
- We might even get internal clashes between the army and the PMF if the US manages to convince the army to take actions themselves against the gov/PMU. (Who knows what relations they've built after working together closely for so many years), that would be a dangerous situation.

If not many others. Although these are not UN sanctions so we shouldn't have to abide by them, the biggest obstacle IMO is the KRG in the north which America would prop up against us. In 2015 their congress was considering a bill to bypass Baghdad and deal with the KRG directly. All of that should be taken into consideration as national interests are a priority over Iran making some more temporary revenue from exports.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s comments that his country would abide by US sanctions has taken Iranian media by surprise.

"As a matter of principle we are against sanctions in the region," Abadi said at a press conference Aug. 8. "Blockade and sanctions destroy societies and weaken regimes." He added that they are a "strategic mistake" but that Iraq "will abide by them."

Given Iran's immediate and unconditional support for Iraq after the rise of the Islamic State (IS) terrorist group in northern Iraq in 2014, compared with that of the delayed and conditional support of the United States, Iranian media and social media users were very critical of Abadi's support of US sanctions. One official even mentioned memories of the Iran-Iraq War.

Iranian parliamentarian Mahmoud Sadeghi, who is an outspoken official, particularly on Twitter, tweeted, "The Iraqi government, according to Article 6 of Resolution 598 [which ended the Iran-Iraq War], owes the Iranian government 1.1 trillion dollars in reparations for the imposed war [Iran-Iraq War]. The Iranian government, given the restrictions on the people of Iraq, has postponed its demands on these reparations. Now, the prime minister of Iraq, instead of paying up, will cooperate against oppressive sanctions against the people of Iran."

An article in Russian-funded Sputnik by Emad Abshenas wrote that Abadi, who is still trying to form a government after the Iraqi elections in May, made double-sided comments both criticizing the sanctions and abiding by them in order to attract maximum approval from Iraq's parliament. Abshenas wrote that during Iraqi elections officials attempt to portray themselves as being bipartisan and independent and there is no country better suited than Iran for officials to use in order to achieve this end, either through indirect criticism or with friendly gestures toward Saudi Arabia, Iran's regional foe. Abshenas noted that Abadi visited Saudi Arabia before visiting Iran, despite the closer relations between Tehran and Baghdad.

Abshenas said that Iranians, unlike the Americans, do not incessantly remind the Iraqis of Iranian contributions in the fight against IS, nor of Iran's support for Abadi's rise to the position of prime minister The article suggested that Abadi may not only turn his back on Iran but could also one day turn against Iran.

A number of domestic Iranian media outlets also covered Iraqi criticism of Abadi's decision to cooperate with US sanctions, particularly comments by Iraqi groups who are politically aligned with Iran.

In an article for IR Diplomacy, analyst Mohammad Sadeghi al-Hashemi wrote that Iran "has always been honorable with respect to Iraq." He asked how Abadi could make such a decision knowing that sanctions will lead to "hunger, poverty, sickness and deprivation." He continued that Abadi's support of US sanctions has "no benefit for the people of Iraq."

Hashemi concluded that Abadi's statement that Iraq will abide by US sanctions indicates that he is seeking Washington's approval for the formation of his government after the elections. He questioned why Iraq should stand alone to support these sanctions when Russia, Europe, China, Pakistan and India have all expressed opposition to them.

Seyyed Hashem al-Mousavi, a spokesman for Kataib Hezbollah, a Shiite paramilitary group that receives Iranian support, asked, "Since when has the Iraqi nation become part of the project to sanction other nations?" Referring to the group's fight against the Islamic State, he said, "We have given blood for the consolidation of the country and we will not allow anyone to encroach upon our independence."

Echoing similar comments made by Hashemi, Mousavi said, "This is not a [United Nations] Security Council decision that we must submit to." He added, "Two-thirds of the world is standing with Iran."

Referring to Iran's support in the fight against IS and Iranian advisers killed in Iraq by the terrorist group, Mousavi said, "It is not clear who is advising you? Is the reward for goodness not goodness that you cooperate with Iran's enemies? How will you answer the people of Iran after they supported us with all of their existence? How will you answer the families of their martyrs?"



Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...m-abadi-reactions-pmu-isis.html#ixzz5NjQnTBQs

 

[SALMAN F]

A slipper would be better as an insult in the Iraqi context.

Iraqis will know what I am talking about here.

Jewish Illuminati Wahhabi Hanbali Salafi House of Saud Freemason Mullahism Zionist Capitalist Secret Dajjal Agent Rothschild Reptilian Pagan.

This is the best one

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Anyway I recommend reading the works of the great Professor Ali Al-Wardi and everything will be clear about the role of a certain entity to the east and Mullahism in general.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Al-Wardi

Read the book وعاظ السلاطين (The Sultan's Preachers)





Every Iraqi and Arab should be reading his works in school or at home when growing up.

This is the best one

It's been freaking 10 years. Still remember watching this as a child and catching my father laugh hilariously when seeing it.

I can understand Iranian officials being shocked/angry at the news that Abadi complies with these sanctions. But in all fairness; what could very well be America's backlash on Iraq if Iraq was to bypass these sanctions? Think of the possibilities.

- The F-16's that haven't been delivered yet would not be delivered or perhaps to to Barzanistan. The remaining F-16's we wouldn't be able to get spare parts and ordnance for anymore.
- We lose the upper hand over the Kurds whom America will support against us, Iran won't help in that situation.
- We might even get internal clashes between the army and the PMF if the US manages to convince the army to take actions themselves against the gov/PMU. (Who knows what relations they've built after working together closely for so many years), that would be a dangerous situation.

If not many others. Although these are not UN sanctions so we shouldn't have to abide by them, the biggest obstacle IMO is the KRG in the north which America would prop up against us. In 2015 their congress was considering a bill to bypass Baghdad and deal with the KRG directly. All of that should be taken into consideration as national interests are a priority over Iran making some more temporary revenue from exports.

Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s comments that his country would abide by US sanctions has taken Iranian media by surprise.

"As a matter of principle we are against sanctions in the region," Abadi said at a press conference Aug. 8. "Blockade and sanctions destroy societies and weaken regimes." He added that they are a "strategic mistake" but that Iraq "will abide by them."

Given Iran's immediate and unconditional support for Iraq after the rise of the Islamic State (IS) terrorist group in northern Iraq in 2014, compared with that of the delayed and conditional support of the United States, Iranian media and social media users were very critical of Abadi's support of US sanctions. One official even mentioned memories of the Iran-Iraq War.

Iranian parliamentarian Mahmoud Sadeghi, who is an outspoken official, particularly on Twitter, tweeted, "The Iraqi government, according to Article 6 of Resolution 598 [which ended the Iran-Iraq War], owes the Iranian government 1.1 trillion dollars in reparations for the imposed war [Iran-Iraq War]. The Iranian government, given the restrictions on the people of Iraq, has postponed its demands on these reparations. Now, the prime minister of Iraq, instead of paying up, will cooperate against oppressive sanctions against the people of Iran."

An article in Russian-funded Sputnik by Emad Abshenas wrote that Abadi, who is still trying to form a government after the Iraqi elections in May, made double-sided comments both criticizing the sanctions and abiding by them in order to attract maximum approval from Iraq's parliament. Abshenas wrote that during Iraqi elections officials attempt to portray themselves as being bipartisan and independent and there is no country better suited than Iran for officials to use in order to achieve this end, either through indirect criticism or with friendly gestures toward Saudi Arabia, Iran's regional foe. Abshenas noted that Abadi visited Saudi Arabia before visiting Iran, despite the closer relations between Tehran and Baghdad.

Abshenas said that Iranians, unlike the Americans, do not incessantly remind the Iraqis of Iranian contributions in the fight against IS, nor of Iran's support for Abadi's rise to the position of prime minister The article suggested that Abadi may not only turn his back on Iran but could also one day turn against Iran.

A number of domestic Iranian media outlets also covered Iraqi criticism of Abadi's decision to cooperate with US sanctions, particularly comments by Iraqi groups who are politically aligned with Iran.

In an article for IR Diplomacy, analyst Mohammad Sadeghi al-Hashemi wrote that Iran "has always been honorable with respect to Iraq." He asked how Abadi could make such a decision knowing that sanctions will lead to "hunger, poverty, sickness and deprivation." He continued that Abadi's support of US sanctions has "no benefit for the people of Iraq."

Hashemi concluded that Abadi's statement that Iraq will abide by US sanctions indicates that he is seeking Washington's approval for the formation of his government after the elections. He questioned why Iraq should stand alone to support these sanctions when Russia, Europe, China, Pakistan and India have all expressed opposition to them.

Seyyed Hashem al-Mousavi, a spokesman for Kataib Hezbollah, a Shiite paramilitary group that receives Iranian support, asked, "Since when has the Iraqi nation become part of the project to sanction other nations?" Referring to the group's fight against the Islamic State, he said, "We have given blood for the consolidation of the country and we will not allow anyone to encroach upon our independence."

Echoing similar comments made by Hashemi, Mousavi said, "This is not a [United Nations] Security Council decision that we must submit to." He added, "Two-thirds of the world is standing with Iran."

Referring to Iran's support in the fight against IS and Iranian advisers killed in Iraq by the terrorist group, Mousavi said, "It is not clear who is advising you? Is the reward for goodness not goodness that you cooperate with Iran's enemies? How will you answer the people of Iran after they supported us with all of their existence? How will you answer the families of their martyrs?"



Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...m-abadi-reactions-pmu-isis.html#ixzz5NjQnTBQs

Those Mullah "militias" should be disbanded and the people willing to fight for the Iraqi state and not some retarded Mullah warlord who receives orders from hostile foreign regimes (failed at that too) should be incorporated into the existing army. If Iraq wants to create a second army (copying the Republican Army model) it is better to create a similar model that will serve the Iraqi state at all times regardless of regime ruling and ideology.

If not, might as well turn Iraq into an "Islamic Republic" based on the Iranian model where some Mullah's (Ayatollah's) have all the religious and political power and their life security is their militia (IRGC) which is corrupt to the core (like the Iraqi political Mullah parties) and control all the industry in the country. Sounds familiar.

Saddam Hussein is missed in comparison

.

 

[Hamza913]

First of all, pashtuns were part of Iran many centuries, also when they fought against safavid government. As an Iranian ethnic group, they even defeated ottomans and protected Iranian soil against ottoman attacks while they ruled parts of Iran.

As a Parab (arabized pakistani) from a 70 year old country, you should also read the text on the tomb of Ahmad Shah Durrani, the greatest Pashtun king:

The King of high rank, Ahmad Shah Durrani,
Was equal to Kisra in managing the affairs of his government.
In his time, from the awe of his glory and greatness,
The lioness nourished the stag with her milk.
From all sides in the ear of his enemies there arrived
A thousand reproofs from the tongue of his dagger.
The date of his departure for the house of mortality
Was the year of the Hijra 1186 (1772 A.D.).

No we aint claiming damage from saudi arabia for destroying sassanid empire as saudis are not going to claim money from Iranian-led Qarmatians for attacking mecca and stealing the black stone, occupying and doing things with the holy stone which I will not mention here. Neither will saudis claim damage from the ababil birds who did not show up to stop the qarmatians like they did to ethiopians by stoning them.

Neither are pakistanis asking arabs or mongolians money for attacking and occupying their territories. As we know Parabs (arabized pakistanis) always think that they are some flowers grown from seeds planted in soil by invasion of arabs and that they somehow were immune from attacks of foreigners or that they even were not natives and did not suffer at all from agression by invading forces like arabs and mongols. However since history is not equal to parabism (arabized pakistani revisionism of history) we read for example:

"In winter 1241 the Mongol force invaded the Indus valley and besieged Lahore. However, on December 30, 1241, the Mongols under Munggetu butchered the town before withdrawing from the Delhi Sultanate. At the same time the Great Khan Ögedei died (1241)."

Now putting trolling aside, this conflict happened recent in modern era and Iran has the right to pursue its claims which at least has a base.

I agree, more many centuries dynasties from Iran like the Achaemenids, Parthians, and Sassanids were the representatives of almost all Iranic people, from Baku to Peshawar, and beyond that. You even had Punjabis willingly serve Xerxes during his invasion of Greece.

However, once the Safavids came about, things changed drastically. They wanted to convert as many people as possible to the Shia faith, and when people refused they often got slaughtered or became second class citizens. People from the empire who were not Shia did not like them at all, with a few exceptions of course.

How exactly am I Arabised? I don't speak Arabic nor do I wear Arab clothing. If you're going to bring up Islam, you would do well to know that it is a religion for all of mankind, not just the Arabs. Some of the greatest figures in Islam were not just non-Arabs, but also Persian. I recently made a thread about one of them (Al Biruni).

Durrani was a great ruler no doubt, and a lion of Islam who even challenged the Chinese for oppressing Muslims in Xinjiang. Comparing him to that joke Kisra who had his empire crushed by nomads from Arabia is disgraceful, but in all fairness, Kisra had no chance since Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful) was against him, and Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful) is the best of rulers.

Why not? They hurt you far more than Saddam did, and at that point the Khilafah had spread to include Iraq too. You'd be killing two birds with one stone if you asked for reparations for the Islamic conquest of Iran. Not to mention the Saudis are loaded so you can even bump up the fee.

Ababeel birds were not needed, the Khilafah was more than enough to cripple the Qarmatians.

Of course we won't, we aren't idiots like you who moan about everything and go begging to our enemies for reparations.

Sorry, but the only Pakistanis who think they have Arab ancestry are people like the Qureshis, Syeds, Ansaris, etc. Wanna know why? Because their tribes come from Arabia you damn idiot!

As for the rest of us, we just recognise that we have ancestry from the Islamic conquerors who migrated to the region, because we do:

Even Muslims from Hindustan are descended from them:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3163234

"The study showed that the Muslim Gujjars differ significantly from their counterpart, the Hindu Gujjars"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20067368

"we observed a certain degree of genetic contribution from Iran to both Muslim populations"

The Mongols also invaded Pakistan, but as frontier provinces of the Delhi Sultanate, we formed a large component of Sultanate contingents sent to deal with the Mongols, and we succeeded in preventing them from making further inroads as well as kicking them out of the region.

No, Iran doesn't have any reasonable grounds to demand such outrageously large reparations. You guys also killed plenty of Iraqis too you know, and as a result are in no position to demand reparations just because they killed more of you.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Qarmatians (Arabized completely) were not Iranians nor did they damage much and were quickly dealt with. Their name is of Semitic (either Arabic or Aramaic origins).

Name

The origin of the name "Qarmatian" is uncertain.[3] According to some sources, the name derives from the surname of the sect's founder, Hamdan Qarmat.[4][5] The name qarmat probably comes from the Aramaic for "short-legged", "red-eyed" or "secret teacher".[6][7][8] Other sources, however, say that the name comes from the Arabic verb قرمط (qarmat), which means "to make the lines close together in writing" or "to walk with short steps".[2][9] The word "Qarmatian" can also refer to a type of Arabic script.[10]

The Qarāmiṭah in southern Iraq were also known as "the Greengrocers" (al-Baqliyyah) because of a preacher Abu Hatim, who, in 906 or 907, forbade animal slaughter as well as the eating of vegetables such as alliums. It is not clear if his teachings persisted.[11]​

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

The supposed founder birth date are not even known. The Iranian Encyclopedia (lol) claim him to be of Persian origin but there are zero proofs of this. The name does not indicate it either. Some supposed influences of Zoroastrianism can be explained by the small indigenous Zoroastrian communities in Eastern Arabia in old times. The same religion that was heavily influenced by Semitic religions as Iran was since its birth on all fronts and remains to this day.

You know what, if we assume that the Mullah's ruling Iran currently are really of genuine Arab descent, one can easily claim that they have done even more harm than Arabs ever did against Iran in all of history combined. But since most of them are likely fakes it is another "made in Iran" product like the Wilayat al-Faqih "Made in Iran" product and the "Islamic" Revolution "made in Iran" product.

Did you know that Pashtuns have up to 30% indigenous South Asian (Dravidian mostly) DNA on average? Rest is from the Arab world (mostly) (Neolithic DNA which originated in the Arab world and whose skeletons cluster with modern-day Arabs the most, including Saudi Arabians) and some inputs from Central Asia. Similarly with Tajiks who have a lot of Mongol/Turkic (actual Turkic DNA) DNA and admixture.

Pashtuns also destroyed the Turkic ruling dynasty that ruled modern-day Iran.

The 29 year (lasting) Hottaki Dynasty.

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



Several half-hearted attempts to subdue the rebellious city having failed, the Persian Government despatched Khusraw Khán, nephew of the late Gurgín Khán, with an army of 30,000 men to effect its subjugation, but in spite of an initial success, which led the Afgháns to offer to surrender on terms, his uncompromising attitude impelled them to make a fresh desperate effort, resulting in the complete defeat of the Persian army (of whom only some 700 escaped) and the death of their general. Two years later, in A.D. 1713, another Persian army commanded by Rustam Khán was also defeated by the rebels, who thus secured possession of the whole Loy Kandahar region.[8]

— Edward G. Browne, 1924

The Hotak dynasty was a troubled and violent one from the very start as internecine conflict made it difficult to establish permanent control. The dynasty lived under great turmoil due to bloody succession feuds that made their hold on power tenuous, and after the massacre of thousands of civilians in Isfahan – including more than three thousand religious scholars, nobles, and members of the Safavid family – the Hotak dynasty was eventually removed from power in Persia.[12] On the other hand, the Afghans had also been suppressed by the Iranian Safavid government represented by its governor Gurgin Khan before their uprising in 1709.[6]​

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

Safavid Barbarians were destroyed by their own favorite pastime (massacres).

Some real "brotherly" love right there.

Yes, instead he should be praising Iranian invasions of Pakistan and occupations and turn into a Farsiparast.

IVC (mostly of a Dravidian/indigenous stock) were Iranians of course even though no Iranians existed until millennia later.

1. Abū-Saʿīd Ḥasan ibn Bahrām Jannābī (Persian: ابوسعید حسن بن بهرام جنّابی‎; Arabic: أبو سعيد حسن بن بهرام الجنابي‎) was the founder of the Qarmatian state in Al-Bahrayn, in the late 9th century CE. He was a Persian from Jannāba (Ganaveh, currently in Bushehr province).[1][2][3] The exact date of his birth is not known. He was born between 230 AH/845 CE, and 240 AH/855 and died in 300/913 or 301/913-14. In 900, he scored a major victory over an Abbasid army sent to subdue him, led by Al-'Abbas ibn 'Amr al-Ghanawi. He was succeeded by his son Abū-Tāhir Al-Jannābī.

This comes from different sources. Iranica is by the way very respected, strong and neutral source. Yarshater is the editor-in-chief, and managing editor is Ahmad Ashraf. The editorial board includes Nicholas Sims-Williams, Christopher J. Brunner, Mohsen Ashtiany, Manuchehr Kasheff, and over 40 Consulting Editors from major international institutions doing research in Iranian Studies. A growing number (over 1,300 in 2016) of scholars worldwide have contributed articles to Encyclopædia Iranica.

2. I don't care pashtuns or tajiks having dna from different places. There is no nation with 100% equal amount of dna from equal sources. The same among arabs or germanic europeans or slavs.

3. Safavids were not Turkic, but Iranic. They descent from Firuz-Shah Zarrin-Kolah, A Kurd from Sanjar.

4. Thousands civials being killed was part of wars in those days (thousands shia clerics which I don't mind by the way). A relatively low number, compared to ancient wars and killings of civilians by the way. Compare it to brotherly arab wars nowadays (syria, yemen, Iraq), thousands being killed is a joke compared to how arab brothers kill each other, let alone cousins (jews and arabs). Inter ethnic wars have always existed (scythians against persians, arab tribes/dynasties against each other like umayads against abbasids etc).

Safavids had to use force to revive Iran, else Iran as a country would not exist today.

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

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Those Mullah "militias" should be disbanded and the people willing to fight for the Iraqi state and not some retarded Mullah warlord who receives orders from hostile foreign regimes (failed at that too) should be incorporated into the existing army. If Iraq wants to create a second army (copying the Republican Army model) it is better to create a similar model that will serve the Iraqi state at all times regardless of regime ruling and ideology.

If not, might as well turn Iraq into an "Islamic Republic" based on the Iranian model where some Mullah's (Ayatollah's) have all the religious and political power and their life security is their militia (IRGC) which is corrupt to the core (like the Iraqi political Mullah parties) and control all the industry in the country. Sounds familiar.

As far as the IRI supporters public narrative goes we ought to accept the 15+ Hezbollah factions and be thankful to become the 2nd Lebanon. Even the people in the south are done with the Hezbollahis as seen in the recent protests, no one needs that shit.

Though let me add, the ISIS rats are still around which means these militia's aren't priority either. It will be a long slow process

 

[Saif al-Arab]

1. Abū-Saʿīd Ḥasan ibn Bahrām Jannābī (Persian: ابوسعید حسن بن بهرام جنّابی‎; Arabic: أبو سعيد حسن بن بهرام الجنابي‎) was the founder of the Qarmatian state in Al-Bahrayn, in the late 9th century CE. He was a Persian from Jannāba (Ganaveh, currently in Bushehr province).[1][2][3] The exact date of his birth is not known. He was born between 230 AH/845 CE, and 240 AH/855 and died in 300/913 or 301/913-14. In 900, he scored a major victory over an Abbasid army sent to subdue him, led by Al-'Abbas ibn 'Amr al-Ghanawi. He was succeeded by his son Abū-Tāhir Al-Jannābī.

This comes from different sources. Iranica is by the way very respected, strong and neutral source. Yarshater is the editor-in-chief, and managing editor is Ahmad Ashraf. The editorial board includes Nicholas Sims-Williams, Christopher J. Brunner, Mohsen Ashtiany, Manuchehr Kasheff, and over 40 Consulting Editors from major international institutions doing research in Iranian Studies. A growing number (over 1,300 in 2016) of scholars worldwide have contributed articles to Encyclopædia Iranica.

2. I don't care pashtuns or tajiks having dna from different places. There is no nation with 100% equal amount of dna from equal sources. The same among arabs or germanic europeans or slavs.

3. Safavids were not Turkic, but Iranic. They descent from Firuz-Shah Zarrin-Kolah, A Kurd from Sanjar.

4. Thousands civials being killed was part of wars in those days (thousands shia clerics which I don't mind by the way). A relatively low number, compared to ancient wars and killings of civilians by the way. Compare it to brotherly arab wars nowadays (syria, yemen, Iraq), thousands being killed is a joke compared to how arab brothers kill each other, let alone cousins (jews and arabs). Inter ethnic wars have always existed (scythians against persians, arab tribes/dynasties against each other like umayads against abbasids etc).

Safavids had to use force to revive Iran, else Iran as a country would not exist today.

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

As I told, a Wikipedia page quoting some Iranian Encyclopedia (only source) which is so vague that the founders birth year and birthplace is unknown.

There is no proof of this guy being a Persian and in any case he would have been completely Arabized anyway and later Qarmatians (insignificant dynasty by large outside of Eastern Arabia) were not his direct descendants but 100% Arabs.

Well, depends who you ask. They claimed Arab descent themselves and intermarried with Kurds, Caucasians (mostly), Turkic people, Arabs regularly etc.

You do know that Kurds themselves (genetically), half of their ancestry is Semitic. Kurds (the notion Kurd) was invented by Arabs. The name too. It was a name given to nomads/mountain nomads in the Zagros regions. Many Kurdish tribal confederations are of Arab or Armenian origins. We are not talking about pure Arabian tribes here that can trace their ancestry down at least 50 generations and do not intermarry much with foreigners if at all.

Anyway I am sure that a Persian from Fars province cluster much closer with an Iraqi Arab or Saudi Arabian from the Eastern Province next door than he does with a Tajik (Mongol looking) 2000 (almost) km away. Actual DNA proves this to since Iranians cluster closely with Middle Eastern Arabs and Caucasian people. Closer than any other people in the region/larger region.

Not as bad as Afghanistan which has been going on for 40 years.

Or Europeans killing 100 millions of each other just in WW1 and WW2 or hundred years long wars in Germany etc. In fact Iranian speaking peoples tended to fight much more with each other than Semitic peoples did. If we look at this historically.

Sure, yet pre-Shia Twelver dominance (created under basis of massacres, contrary to how Iranians became Muslims to begin with) led to Iranian cultural output (aside from some monuments) being negligible compared to prior times although most of the Persian scholars originated in what is today Tajikistan/Afghanistan/Khorasan.

Speaking about the Safavids, we had some Azeri user not long ago who posted sources that showed that Safavid elites mother tongue was Turkic initially.

Anyway let us not forget that Safavids were Arabparasts since they owed their religious authority (fundament of their rule) to the many 1000's of Arabs (Shias) that they imported from Eastern Arabia, Iraq and Lebanon and who played a crucial role in Safavid society. Safavids in fact created the dominating Shia Mullah class in Iran that exists to this very day and which gave rise to the Islamic Republic.

The same Arabs translated Ahadith and most Islamic and scientific works (almost all written in Arabic) to Persian under the Safavids as well.

Arab Shia Ulama

After the conquest, Ismail began transforming the religious landscape of Iran by imposing Twelver Shiism on the populace. Since most of the population embraced Sunni Islam and since an educated version of Shiism was scarce in Iran at the time, Ismail imported a new Shia Ulama corps from traditional Shiite centers of the Arabic speaking lands, largely from Jabal Amil (of Southern Lebanon), Mount Lebanon, Syria, Eastern Arabia and Southern Iraq in order to create a state clergy.[37][38][39][40]Ismail offered them land and money in return for loyalty. These scholars taught the doctrine of Twelver Shiism and made it accessible to the population and energetically encouraged conversion to Shiism.[34][41][42][43] To emphasize how scarce Twelver Shiism was then to be found in Iran, a chronicler tells us that only one Shia text could be found in Ismail's capital Tabriz.[44] Thus it is questionable whether Ismail and his followers could have succeeded in forcing a whole people to adopt a new faith without the support of the Arab Shiite scholars.[36] The rulers of Safavid Persia also invited these foreign Shiite religious scholars to their court in order to provide legitimacy for their own rule over Persia.[45]

Abbas I of Persia, during his reign, also imported more Arab Shia Ulama to Iran, built religious institutions for them, including many Madrasahs (religious schools) and successfully persuaded them to participate in the government, which they had shunned in the past (following the Hidden imam doctrine).[46]
​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam#Arab_Shia_Ulama

​

The same Iranian Arabs were also the first bastion against the Iraqi invasion and fought incredibly heroically so actually you have to thank Arabs once again although you clearly hate Arabs and want them dead although I might be wrong here.

Iranian Arabs are not given enough credit by certain chauvinistic and deluded Iranians and are neglected and the regions they inhabit despite those regions being the economic lifeline of Iran (oil and gas). That's bad. Meanwhile people of Iranian origin in the GCC or Iranian expats (largest group in the world after the one in the US) are enjoying the nightlife of the UAE and the good life in GCC states.

LOL.

I sense that you try to pretend that all the failures of Iran are somehow related to Arabs, lol, despite Iran ALWAYS (since the creation 2700 years ago) having looked Westward (to this very day I see you not obsessing about Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan but the Western direction mostly) mostly and been heavily influenced by Arabs and the ancestors of Arabs which is undeniable. I think that you can even read about those influences in the Iranic Encyclopedia.

That's strange as you have most in common (linguistically) with Tajiks yet I have never seen a single Iranian user talk about that country here but they all talk about Yemen, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, KSA, UAE, Qatar, Oman and the list is endless. Arabphobia. Even the word "Arabparast" Arab-worshipper. No similar word in Arabic language about Iranians lol.

As far as the IRI supporters public narrative goes we ought to accept the 15+ Hezbollah factions and be thankful to become the 2nd Lebanon. Even the people in the south are done with the Hezbollahis as seen in the recent protests, no one needs that shit.

Though let me add, the ISIS rats are still around which means these militia's aren't priority either. It will be a long slow process

Yes, Iraq should be destroyed similarly (social fabric) like Lebanon was and parallel societies and groups of power (militias) should be imitated. All answering to foreign powers. The Lebanese political system was already copied by Iraq back in 2003. All that is needed is giving Southern Lebanon autonomy (equivalent of Barzanistan) which already exists de facto.

They too need to have "sectarian quotas". Prime Minister Sunni. President Maronite (Christian). Parliament Speaker (Shia). Great system.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

I agree, more many centuries dynasties from Iran like the Achaemenids, Parthians, and Sassanids were the representatives of almost all Iranic people, from Baku to Peshawar, and beyond that. You even had Punjabis willingly serve Xerxes during his invasion of Greece.

However, once the Safavids came about, things changed drastically. They wanted to convert as many people as possible to the Shia faith, and when people refused they often got slaughtered or became second class citizens. People from the empire who were not Shia did not like them at all, with a few exceptions of course.

How exactly am I Arabised? I don't speak Arabic nor do I wear Arab clothing. If you're going to bring up Islam, you would do well to know that it is a religion for all of mankind, not just the Arabs. Some of the greatest figures in Islam were not just non-Arabs, but also Persian. I recently made a thread about one of them (Al Biruni).

Durrani was a great ruler no doubt, and a lion of Islam who even challenged the Chinese for oppressing Muslims in Xinjiang. Comparing him to that joke Kisra who had his empire crushed by nomads from Arabia is disgraceful, but in all fairness, Kisra had no chance since Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful) was against him, and Allah (The Most Gracious and The Most Merciful) is the best of rulers.

Why not? They hurt you far more than Saddam did, and at that point the Khilafah had spread to include Iraq too. You'd be killing two birds with one stone if you asked for reparations for the Islamic conquest of Iran. Not to mention the Saudis are loaded so you can even bump up the fee.

Ababeel birds were not needed, the Khilafah was more than enough to cripple the Qarmatians.

Of course we won't, we aren't idiots like you who moan about everything and go begging to our enemies for reparations.

Sorry, but the only Pakistanis who think they have Arab ancestry are people like the Qureshis, Syeds, Ansaris, etc. Wanna know why? Because their tribes come from Arabia you damn idiot!

As for the rest of us, we just recognise that we have ancestry from the Islamic conquerors who migrated to the region, because we do:

Even Muslims from Hindustan are descended from them:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3163234

"The study showed that the Muslim Gujjars differ significantly from their counterpart, the Hindu Gujjars"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20067368

"we observed a certain degree of genetic contribution from Iran to both Muslim populations"

The Mongols also invaded Pakistan, but as frontier provinces of the Delhi Sultanate, we formed a large component of Sultanate contingents sent to deal with the Mongols, and we succeeded in preventing them from making further inroads as well as kicking them out of the region.

No, Iran doesn't have any reasonable grounds to demand such outrageously large reparations. You guys also killed plenty of Iraqis too you know, and as a result are in no position to demand reparations just because they killed more of you.

Yes safavids saved Iran from suicide attacks and terrorism that happens today in Afghanistan and some places in Pakistan. They used harsh methods, even against native Iranians who were not sunnis, but in the long term they united Iran and revived Iran as a country.

You're arabized as telling history from a revisionist point of view/islamic point of view. It does not matter that you don't speak arabic or don't wear arab clothes.

Yes, great Durrani on his grave mentions kisra ("a joke" according to you) as example and a "majusi sassanid fireworshipper" from arab/muslim point of view. Kisra was not even alive when arabs attacked Iran.

Iran was heavily weakened by 30 years of war against Roman empire and changed 14 kings in 3 years just before being attacked by arabs. Iran was in a state of civil war when arabs attacked, the king of sassanids yazdegerd was 8 years old. Also the Parthians were making troubles/competing against sassanid persians about power. In normal circumstances sassanids were strong against arabs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapur_II's_Arab_campaign

Ababeel is a fake news bird, that's why persian led Qarmatians were not stopped from sacking mecca:
n 930, he led the Qarmatians' most notorious attack when he pillaged Mecca and desecrated Islam's most sacred sites. Unable to gain entry to the city initially, Abū Tāhir called upon the right of all Muslims to enter the city and gave his oath that he came in peace. Once inside the city walls the Qarmatian army set about massacring the pilgrims, taunting them with verses of the Koran as they did so. The bodies of the pilgrims were left to rot in the streets or thrown down the Well of Zamzam. The Kaaba was looted, with Abū Tāhir taking personal possession of the Black Stone and bringing it back to Al-Hasa.

You moan every year for receiving food aid from USA, why are you mad about Iran claiming justified war reparations?

And about those Pakistanis thinking of having arab ancestry, first of all they are a small part of pakistani population. Secondly majority of them are locals who only think/imagine arab ancestry. The different genetics is mostly because of having more Iranian/western influence which is logic because Pakistan had always more contact with Iranian nations than India. Ad to that that when Iran and Pakistan became muslim their contact increased while Hindus did not have much contact with muslims. The major paternal lineages represented by Y chromosomes are haplogroups R1a1, R2, H, L and J2. No j1c3d which would prove arab ancestry.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

You moan every year for receiving food aid from USA, why are you mad about Iran claiming justified war reparations?

First thing is no one will accept to pay you that or any reparations for that matter. 2nd is you will push Iraq towards the GCC which is a bad idea for you.

 

[Saif al-Arab]

Yes safavids saved Iran from suicide attacks and terrorism that happens today in Afghanistan and some places in Pakistan. They used harsh methods, even against native Iranians who were not sunnis, but in the long term they united Iran and revived Iran as a country.

You're arabized as telling history from a revisionist point of view/islamic point of view. It does not matter that you don't speak arabic or don't wear arab clothes.

Yes, great Durrani on his grave mentions kisra ("a joke" according to you) as example and a "majusi sassanid fireworshipper" from arab/muslim point of view. Kisra was not even alive when arabs attacked Iran.

Iran was heavily weakened by 30 years of war against Roman empire and changed 14 kings in 3 years just before being attacked by arabs. Iran was in a state of civil war when arabs attacked, the king of sassanids yazdegerd was 8 years old. Also the Parthians were making troubles/competing against sassanid persians about power. In normal circumstances sassanids were strong against arabs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapur_II's_Arab_campaign

Ababeel is a fake news bird, that's why persian led Qarmatians were not stopped from sacking mecca:
n 930, he led the Qarmatians' most notorious attack when he pillaged Mecca and desecrated Islam's most sacred sites. Unable to gain entry to the city initially, Abū Tāhir called upon the right of all Muslims to enter the city and gave his oath that he came in peace. Once inside the city walls the Qarmatian army set about massacring the pilgrims, taunting them with verses of the Koran as they did so. The bodies of the pilgrims were left to rot in the streets or thrown down the Well of Zamzam. The Kaaba was looted, with Abū Tāhir taking personal possession of the Black Stone and bringing it back to Al-Hasa.

You moan every year for receiving food aid from USA, why are you mad about Iran claiming justified war reparations?

And about those Pakistanis thinking of having arab ancestry, first of all they are a small part of pakistani population. Secondly majority of them are locals who only think/imagine arab ancestry. The different genetics is mostly because of having more Iranian/western influence which is logic because Pakistan had always more contact with Iranian nations than India. Ad to that that when Iran and Pakistan became muslim their contact increased while Hindus did not have much contact with muslims. The major paternal lineages represented by Y chromosomes are haplogroups R1a1, R2, H, L and J2. No j1c3d which would prove arab ancestry.

Suicide attacks have nothing to do with Islamic sects. It was invented by communists and first used by Shia Muslims of all Muslims.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_attack#Islam

Used harsh methods. LOL, they committed massacres in all main Iranian cities and imported 10.000's of Arabs and other foreigners as replacements.

Yes, and Arabs were in a state of wars and divided into kingdoms ranging from Iraq and Syria to Yemen in the south. Those kingdoms were allies at once point with Byzantines or Persians and otherwise hostile.

The only reason you even became relevant in history was due to wars in Mesopotamia, Northern Arabia and Sham prior to the emergence of the Persians in history. We can play that game easily just 1300 years prior.

Qarmatians were not Persians (once again) and there is no proof of this incident actually occurring on the other hand we have proves of 1000's of fire temples no longer existing in Iran or anywhere else.

"Western influence" = DNA from Neolithic settlers born and breed in the Arab world and the direct ancestors of modern-day Arabs that cluster most with the first Neolithic peoples of the world and their mummies.

20-25% of all Arabs belong to the R haplogroup (even in KSA). Haplogroups do not belong to ethnic groups as they predate all living ethnic groups by 10.000's of years. And not only that most of those haplgroups originate in the Arab world.

Which ironically was the region first inhabited by humans outside of Africa which is why the prehistory of Arabia and Egypt in particular is second to none.



Many of the maternal haplogroups are from Arabia originally too.

Another thing, long before any Iran or Iranians existed, the IVC had close ties with civilizations in Arabia (Dilmun and Megan) and Southern Iraq (Sumer) and no doubt the IVC was influenced by those civilizations that they traded much with.

The Indus Civilization and Dilmun, the Sumerian Paradise Land

https://www.penn.museum/sites/exped...zation-and-dilmun-the-sumerian-paradise-land/

Penn University is a world-renowned University.

First thing is no one will accept to pay you that or any reparations for that matter. 2nd is you will push Iraq towards the GCC which is a bad idea for you.

I can just imagine it. Basrawis waging wars against Saudi Arabians (for the first time in history) on behalf of Iran. Will never happen.

Does people do not understand that when Shia Saudi Arabians visit Najaf and Karbala they are the most warmly welcomed people not only bound in religion but history, ancestral, tribal, cultural, linguistic etc. ties. A simple google search will help. All of Karbala and Najaf is inhabited by people with close ties to KSA. Sheiks visit each other regularly in Southern Iraq that transcend religion completely and sect. Just like clans and tribes in Iraq due (Sunni and Shia divide does not exist).

Shias.

1.6 million views.

It is fantasy imagination.

This never happened in history either. From the time of Sumer to Dilmun there were no hostility. In fact Arabs of Southern, Western modern-day Iraq and Northern Arabia fought side by side with the Assyrians against the Persian invaders (when they first appeared in history 2700 years ago) 2700 years ago.

Prior to that Babylonian kings. Even many Babylonian kings escaped to Northern Arabia (modern-day Northern KSA) and some lived and died there in ancient cities such as Tayma.

The ancient Tayma stone (found in KSA and now in Louvre Museum) describes this.

https://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/tayma-stone

All of Northern Arabia was part of Babylonian/Semitic empires centered around Iraq. Even the Sumerians controlled lands in modern-day Northeastern KSA. Even in the Ubaid period before that even.

Largest Semitic/Mesopotamian sculptures and Sumerian ones too have been found in KSA as well.

Example.

The Worshiping Servant statue (2500 BC), above one metre in height, the statue is much taller than any possible Mesopotamian or Harappan models[34]

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

@SALMAN F

 

[Saddam Hussein]

I'm not talking about the people, but simply that Iran would push Iraq away with such claims. Counter-productive to the network they've built up since 2003. Though this is nothing big and not the first time.

Back to 2003, the IRI demanded $100 billion USD.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3329671.stm

Abdul Aziz al-Hakim said further discussion was needed to decide what if anything Iraq would pay itself.
Iran claims $100bn in reparations for the brutal eight-year war that claimed about one million lives.

Then in 2010

http://www.iraq-businessnews.com/2010/08/26/iran-to-claim-1-trillion-war-reparations-from-iraq/

Ali Alaq, the chief secretary of the Iraqi council of ministers told the Arabic Al-Sabah daily on Tuesday that if the Iranian authorities demanded compensation from the Iraqis for war damages, “which is an illogical request”, Iraq could also appeal for compensation from Iran.

He underlined that the Iraqi government needs to review its foreign policy in order to define a policy for compensation claims for damages the country incurred, is suffering, or may endure in the future.

 

[Hamza913]

Yes safavids saved Iran from suicide attacks and terrorism that happens today in Afghanistan and some places in Pakistan. They used harsh methods, even against native Iranians who were not sunnis, but in the long term they united Iran and revived Iran as a country.

You're arabized as telling history from a revisionist point of view/islamic point of view. It does not matter that you don't speak arabic or don't wear arab clothes.

Yes, great Durrani on his grave mentions kisra ("a joke" according to you) as example and a "majusi sassanid fireworshipper" from arab/muslim point of view. Kisra was not even alive when arabs attacked Iran.

Iran was heavily weakened by 30 years of war against Roman empire and changed 14 kings in 3 years just before being attacked by arabs. Iran was in a state of civil war when arabs attacked, the king of sassanids yazdegerd was 8 years old. Also the Parthians were making troubles/competing against sassanid persians about power. In normal circumstances sassanids were strong against arabs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapur_II's_Arab_campaign

Ababeel is a fake news bird, that's why persian led Qarmatians were not stopped from sacking mecca:
n 930, he led the Qarmatians' most notorious attack when he pillaged Mecca and desecrated Islam's most sacred sites. Unable to gain entry to the city initially, Abū Tāhir called upon the right of all Muslims to enter the city and gave his oath that he came in peace. Once inside the city walls the Qarmatian army set about massacring the pilgrims, taunting them with verses of the Koran as they did so. The bodies of the pilgrims were left to rot in the streets or thrown down the Well of Zamzam. The Kaaba was looted, with Abū Tāhir taking personal possession of the Black Stone and bringing it back to Al-Hasa.

You moan every year for receiving food aid from USA, why are you mad about Iran claiming justified war reparations?

And about those Pakistanis thinking of having arab ancestry, first of all they are a small part of pakistani population. Secondly majority of them are locals who only think/imagine arab ancestry. The different genetics is mostly because of having more Iranian/western influence which is logic because Pakistan had always more contact with Iranian nations than India. Ad to that that when Iran and Pakistan became muslim their contact increased while Hindus did not have much contact with muslims. The major paternal lineages represented by Y chromosomes are haplogroups R1a1, R2, H, L and J2. No j1c3d which would prove arab ancestry.

The Safavids did no such thing lol, Iran would be exactly the same as it is today without the Safavids, the only major difference would be that Iran would not be Shia. It was the Qajar dynasty that made Iran what it is today.

Obviously I'm going to tell history from an Islamic point of view, I'm a Muslim.

Right, pathetic Kisra got overthrown by his own son. How sad.

Excuses excuses! Iran was still conquered and irreversibly changed.

Whatever, the Qarmatians still got curb-stomped by the Khilafah, and that's nothing compared to what happened to Iran during Islamic invasions.

Lmao we don't get "food aid" from the US or any kind of aid anymore, and when we did get aid it was simply because we earned it for letting them use our supply lines (but in my opinion we should have just told the Yanks to jog on).

I never said they weren't a minority or a majority, I just said they exist, and they do:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2859343/

"It is interesting that the sub-Saharan African- and Arabian-specific L0a2a2 and R01 lineages were found only in Dawoodi Bohras (TN and GUJ), whereas these lineages were generally absent in Indian non-Muslims, although a related L0a2a2 lineage has been detected previously among the Sindhi population of Pakistan"

I think it would be fair to say that southern Pakistanis would have minute amounts of Arab ancestry, as proven by the map given earlier showing that southern Pakistanis have African lineages in them (this is present among virtually all Arabs), and because southern Pakistan is pretty close to Arabia.

I agree, the ancestry we have from the Islamic conquerors comes primarily from Turks/Persians.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

As I told, a Wikipedia page quoting some Iranian Encyclopedia (only source) which is so vague that the founders birth year and birthplace is unknown.

There is no proof of this guy being a Persian and in any case he would have been completely Arabized anyway and later Qarmatians (insignificant dynasty by large outside of Eastern Arabia) were not his direct descendants but 100% Arabs.

Well, depends who you ask. They claimed Arab descent themselves and intermarried with Kurds, Caucasians (mostly), Turkic people, Arabs regularly etc.

Sure, yet pre-Shia Twelver dominance (created under basis of massacres, contrary to how Iranians became Muslims to begin with) led to Iranian cultural output (aside from some monuments) being negligible compared to prior times although most of the Persian scholars originated in what is today Tajikistan/Afghanistan/Khorasan.

Speaking about the Safavids, we had some Azeri user not long ago who posted sources that showed that Safavid elites mother tongue was Turkic initially.

Anyway let us not forget that Safavids were Arabparasts since they owed their religious authority (fundament of their rule) to the many 1000's of Arabs (Shias) that they imported from Eastern Arabia, Iraq and Lebanon and who played a crucial role in Safavid society. Safavids in fact created the dominating Shia Mullah class in Iran that exists to this very day and which gave rise to the Islamic Republic.

​

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_conversion_of_Iran_to_Shia_Islam#Arab_Shia_Ulama

​

Way off topic and using capital letters.

The guys name (Bahram), his birthplace (Genaveh) and research by respected sources such as Iranica proyve his ancestor of Qarmatian "kings" were Iranian (persian). The claims are denounced by researchers and were added later to the biography of safavids when they grabbed power. Before that their ancestry didnt go back further than Kurd. Kurds are Iranian ethnic group, whatever and whoever they mixed with, just like as arabs are considered arab, even if they mixed with some foreigners. "Some azeri user" is not a credible source for me. And whatever they spoke (even if they spoke mongolian) they were Iranic dynasty.

Yes safavids like wine drinker Shah Ismail used shia-arabparasti to build up his empire against sunni ottomans.

First thing is no one will accept to pay you that or any reparations for that matter. 2nd is you will push Iraq towards the GCC which is a bad idea for you.

It does not matter which direction iraq goes. We've already experienced Iraq in its most extreme form (1980-1988), when it served as a gcc proxy against Iran. We'll wait and see how Iraq works with USA in following the sanctions against Iran. I believe if it makes wrong choices against it neighbour, in near future there will be another ISIS and then Iran will not deliver any assistance. Then maybe gcc which tries to defeat some hungry houthi farmers will assist you and that only if they suddenly fall in love with preventing the knife reaching shia necks.