Bahrain agrees to a military base for Britain's Royal Navy

[al-Hasani]

Well though i agree with some of your points bro, i disagree with others. I didnt say it benefits just the U.K, you obviously didn't read my posts well my good friend Hasani. I said that it is indeed good for our interests/influence in the region, and that if the Bahrain leadership has agreed to our military presence in their country, then it must also be because they have come to a conclusion that it obviously serves their own interests as well, not just ours.
Secondly, i dont understand what you mean by 'the way i talk about other peoples from non western countries'. You are the first person to say that on here. Ususally most members on here will agree with me that its instead the opposite, i just tend to say things the way they are, and im even the one who have been calling others to stop mocking other developing/porr countries effort/strive for self sufficiency/development/improvement in living standards etc. So i really dont understand what you mean by this statement. You say im anti muslim/dont like muslims?That couldnt be more further from the truth, the only people i resent/hate(like many members on here, muslim included) are muslim extremists/jihadists/radical preachers and their militants/terrorists groups who have give a bad name to islam and justify their evil deeds/atrocities on islam. You obviously didnt get my point bros.

Thirdly, your claim of me not wanting/being against KSA and other gulf states helping Bahrain to crush their 'unrest' is far fetched my man. If you are for Saudi Arabia helping crush the 'unrest' in Bahrain, then you should also be supporting Assadd helping crush the 'unrest' in Syria as well. You cant be in favou/justify one while being vehemently against the other bros. Im against both, since they are both dictatorships(Bahrain monarchy even worse), but then again im not sure they should both be toppled since the alternative to them might be even worse as its been proved by the case in Syria.Moreover, Saudi Arabia dictatorship/monarchy should be the last to lecture others about freedom/democracy as it has done in Syria and imposing order in Bahrain bro. Its aa huge joke for them to be doing that, its not even funny anymore, since theSaudi regime(which you yourself arent a fan of) is one of the most dictatorial in the region in the region to be honest. However, there again, im not really clamouring for their down fall, since i dont think the alternative to them will be any better.lol

Also, you havent obviously followed my comments on here, im the first to criticize U.S /U.K foreign policy in the region when they are indeed wrong, you yourself can ask other members on here who have been following my posts and they can attest to that. So its not like i justify any U.S/western actions in the region.

Finally thanks for admiring my longgg posts(you also write long ones, though i beat you to it.lol), when i start its hard for me to stop Anyway its good exchanging point of views with you respectfully my friend. Banzai.

It would be very strange if a single person agreed with everything that another person wrote or believed in. It is no different on a forum and I have absolutely no problem with that. In fact I prefer disagreements and appreciate people if they can challenge me and my opinions unless I prefer if that is done in a friendly and constructive tone. I really do not have much of a diplomatic tone about me when that is not the case. Of course I do not behave like this in real life although I see myself as a direct person in reality as well. Of course depending on the occasion and context.

Well, I do apologize if I misunderstood that part of your post then. To me it just came across oddly. Of course we can conclude that Britain is interested in this naval base otherwise it would have not become a reality.

Well, you are not yet at Markus' level but I see traits of that. You are a intelligent person so and much elder than me (I still have a few years to go apeshit before it becomes to embarrassing) so take it as a friendly advice.

Ok, then that is not a problem. Trust me, I don't like them. ISIS for instance and similar groups have given nothing good to us other than more bad publicity, more divisions, more meddling and more killings and destruction. Aside from the rise of possibly another generation or at least a significant part of that generation in countries like Syria and Iraq engulfed in such a ideology. They are nothing more than criminals that are using Islam to further their ambitions of power, territory etc. So they are not that different from other similar Muslim and non-Muslim groups and ideologies throughout history.

I actually formulated myself wrongly initially. It was not really "crushed". Actually the events in Bahrain have been greatly exaggerated in terms of casualties and wounded. I do sympathize with the Bahrainis on some of their demands (outside of those that want to exchange a absolute monarchy with a absolute theocracy) but so far (in 4 years of unrest almost) the casualties have been less than 100 people. Of course that's 100 too many but you can understand the non-seriousness of comparing The King of Bahrain with Al-Assad in comparison. I hope that you as well are able to make this distinction. So when you write "worse" this is where in my eyes you are being dishonest or biased. You really should talk with local Bahrainis or Pakistanis based in Bahrain here. I have had the honor to discuss that conflict with Pakistanis living in Bahrain. Of both Sunni and Shia backgrounds.

There is no lecturing. Other than calls to stop massacring their population. You can say a lot about the regime but so far they are yet to mass-murder their population. The most they do is handling long prison sentences to political opponents (which I am very much against but can't do anything about it even if I wanted) or in the worst, worst case scenario execution. Al-Assad is on a a entirely different level and do not get blinded by his secularism nonsense. Saddam was also secular. North Korea is also secular. China etc. etc. In fact many dictatorships are that on paper. What does it matter anyway when the situation is appealing (overall). Nothing my friend.

Indeed I have to admit that I do recall you criticizing your government in some of their dealings in the ME and elsewhere which is appreciated.



You are a good competitor but are you sure? You have not seen my long posts yet. Just joking. As long as they have something interesting to tell or the person you are discussing with is willing to read them there is no problem.

Do not mistake my low-tolerance level for unmotivated insults against Arabs and my hope for greater Arab cooperation as racial superiority. Also this is pretty much also a contradictory statement as Arabs, even in KSA, come from all backgrounds including my own family. Afro-Arab, South-East Asian, Turkic, Persian/Lur (yes, they exist), European (yes, they exist too) and various of other peoples. Practically you have people from the entire Muslim world in Hijaz as this region of the Muslim world has been the biggest pilgrimage site for 1400 years and until not long ago this was the "New York" of the East. I suggest that you read literature about this topic. Thousands of pilgrims from across the world (back then it was a once in a life-time journey) ended up settling in Hijaz.

Of course I forgot the people of South Asian origin. In fact many people are probably unaware of their origin as back then nationalism was non-existent or very low and people only cared about religion. That was your prime identity. The borders were also totally different and the various regions of the ME were also part of various caliphates, kingdoms, sheikdoms, sultanates, emirates etc. that constantly changed borders, absorbed new people. Let alone population movements etc. I do not expect everyone to know this but I am saying it to you now so it is your choice whether you want to investigate this yourself or remain ignorant.

If you look at ME history from a context of the current borders that have been in existence for under 100 years (in most countries if not all) then you have made a cardinal mistake.

In fact this goes for most of Europe too. If not even more so.

You should really stop trolling. If you continue (even after having normal discussions with you one day you begin again the next) I will have to ignore you. Which there is no reason for as you are a good person I feel. So far I am horrible at ignoring nonsense posts so please stop.

 

[mike2000]

It would be very strange if a single person agreed with everything that another person wrote or believed in. It is no different on a forum and I have absolutely no problem with that. In fact I prefer disagreements and appreciate people if they can challenge me and my opinions unless I prefer if that is done in a friendly and constructive tone. I really do not have much of a diplomatic tone about me when that is not the case. Of course I do not behave like this in real life although I see myself as a direct person in reality as well. Of course depending on the occasion and context.

Well, I do apologize if I misunderstood that part of your post then. To me it just came across oddly. Of course we can conclude that Britain is interested in this naval base otherwise it would have not become a reality.

Well, you are not yet at Markus' level but I see traits of that. You are a intelligent person so and much elder than me (I still have a few years to go apeshit before it becomes to embarrassing) so take it as a friendly advice.

Ok, then that is not a problem. Trust me, I don't like them. ISIS for instance and similar groups have given nothing good to us other than more bad publicity, more divisions, more meddling and more killings and destruction. Aside from the rise of possibly another generation or at least a significant part of that generation in countries like Syria and Iraq engulfed in such a ideology. They are nothing more than criminals that are using Islam to further their ambitions of power, territory etc. So they are not that different from other similar Muslim and non-Muslim groups and ideologies throughout history.

I actually formulated myself wrongly initially. It was not really "crushed". Actually the events in Bahrain have been greatly exaggerated in terms of casualties and wounded. I do sympathize with the Bahrainis on some of their demands (outside of those that want to exchange a absolute monarchy with a absolute theocracy) but so far (in 4 years of unrest almost) the casualties have been less than 100 people. Of course that's 100 too many but you can understand the non-seriousness of comparing The King of Bahrain with Al-Assad in comparison. I hope that you as well are able to make this distinction. So when you write "worse" this is where in my eyes you are being dishonest or biased. You really should talk with local Bahrainis or Pakistanis based in Bahrain here. I have had the honor to discuss that conflict with Pakistanis living in Bahrain. Of both Sunni and Shia backgrounds.

There is no lecturing. Other than calls to stop massacring their population. You can say a lot about the regime but so far they are yet to mass-murder their population. The most they do is handling long prison sentences to political opponents (which I am very much against but can't do anything about it even if I wanted) or in the worst, worst case scenario execution. Al-Assad is on a a entirely different level and do not get blinded by his secularism nonsense. Saddam was also secular. North Korea is also secular. China etc. etc. In fact many dictatorships are that on paper. What does it matter anyway when the situation is appealing (overall). Nothing my friend.

Indeed I have to admit that I do recall you criticizing your government in some of their dealings in the ME and elsewhere which is appreciated.



You are a good competitor but are you sure? You have not seen my long posts yet. Just joking. As long as they have something interesting to tell or the person you are discussing with is willing to read them there is no problem.



Do not mistake my low-tolerance level for unmotivated insults against Arabs and my hope for greater Arab cooperation as racial superiority. Also this is pretty much also a contradictory statement as Arabs, even in KSA, come from all backgrounds including my own family. Afro-Arab, South-East Asian, Turkic, Persian/Lur (yes, they exist), European (yes, they exist too) and various of other peoples. Practically you have people from the entire Muslim world in Hijaz as this region of the Muslim world has been the biggest pilgrimage site for 1400 years and until not long ago this was the "New York" of the East. I suggest that you read literature about this topic. Thousands of pilgrims from across the world (back then it was a once in a life-time journey) ended up settling in Hijaz.

Of course I forgot the people of South Asian origin. In fact many people are probably unaware of their origin as back then nationalism was non-existent or very low and people only cared about religion. That was your prime identity. The borders were also totally different and the various regions of the ME were also part of various caliphates, kingdoms, sheikdoms, sultanates, emirates etc. that constantly changed borders, absorbed new people. Let alone population movements etc. I do not expect everyone to know this but I am saying it to you now so it is your choice whether you want to investigate this yourself or remain ignorant.

If you look at ME history from a context of the current borders that have been in existence for under 100 years (in most countries if not all) then you have made a cardinal mistake.

In fact this goes for most of Europe too. If not even more so.

You should really stop trolling.

Well i agree with most of your posts this time and but i still disagree with some.
Syria case isnt much different from Bahrain. the only difference is that Bahrain had more support in suppressing its 'unrest' than Syria. The only country who romotely supported the opposition in Bahrain was Iran. meanwhile in Syrias case several world powers like the U.S, U.K, FRANCE, EUROPE, TURKEY, SAUDI ARABIA, QATAR, GULF STATES, etc all supported/support the oppositionand provided them with training,arms, logistics, weapons and a propanganda chanel/voice(i.e our media in the west), while Syria government/regime had just Iran and Russia support. So thats what made the syrian case worse than Bahrains. Without foreign support/involvement, Syria wouldnt be in chaos it is today and wouldnt be much different from Bahrain. So saying Assad is more dictatorial than the Bahraini monarchy is indeed wrong, they are both dictatorial regimes, only that bahrain got wayyyyy more international support and regional help to crush its opposition and have a blank check from our media. A monarchy with no sham elections at all isnt much different from a secular regime with sham elections my man.

 

[jamahir]

Of course I forgot the people of South Asian origin. In fact many people are probably unaware of their origin as back then nationalism was non-existent or very low and people only cared about religion. That was your identity.

south asia ( excluding iran ) running from afghanistan to bangladesh has had conquerors, emperors and settlers from almost every race and culture... aryans, kurds/assyrians/babylonians ( indus valley ), alexander's greeks, abyssinians ( janjira muslim kingdom ), portuguese, pre-islam arabs ( christians and jews ), arabs of umayyad empire ( under muhammad bin qasim ), various iranic tribes, british, dutch, turkics ( mughals ), turks, east asians ( settling in the north-east of india ), romans...

i am muslim, socialist and don't care about my ancestry... i am because of me... that should be your credo.

one of my heroes is hazrat tipu sultan, tiger of mysore... he was perhaps the most transnational historic leaders of south asia... the british east india company feared him... and we know what the british thought of the house of saud.

sometimes you bring anger in me, al-hasani... you have been asked by another member just yesterday to not become lost in insulting ethnicities... please.

 

[al-Hasani]

Well i agree with most of your posts this time and but i still disagree with some.
Syria case isnt much different from Bahrain. the only difference is that Bahrain had more support in suppressing its 'unrest' than Syria. The only country who romotely supported the opposition in Bahrain was Iran. meanwhile in Syrias case several world powers like the U.S, U.K, FRANCE, EUROPE, TURKEY, SAUDI ARABIA, QATAR, GULF STATES, etc all supported/support the oppositionand provided them with training,arms, logistics, weapons and a propanganda chanel/voice(i.e our media in the west), while Syria government/regime had just Iran and Russia support. So thats what made the syrian case worse than Bahrains. Without foreign support/involvement, Syria wouldnt be in chaos it is today and wouldnt be much different from Bahrain. So saying Assad is more dictatorial than the Bahraini monarchy is indeed wrong, they are both dictatorial regimes, only that bahrain got wayyyyy more international support and regional help to crush its opposition and have a blank check from our media. A monarchy with no sham elections at all isnt much different from a secular regime with sham elections my man.

I have to disagree here mate. The ME is flooded by arms. A country like KSA is full of weapons. Almost every family are in possession of weapons. You don't need much to start a armed uprising. The problem with Syria is that it was a poor, isolated and oppressing country. Bahrain is no democracy but much better on this front. It's nothing like you imagine. People from the entire world are living there.

Just? The Syrian regime is backed by Russia, Iran and China and other states. The support of those countries that you have mentioned has been a joke. What have we supported the Syrian opposition with of hard weapons? Almost nothing. Our policies have failed. We should have stopped Al-Assad before the extremists hijacked the revolution by large. The bombing raids are solely aimed at ISIS which we helped create by keeping Al-Assad alive and by the failures in Iraq.

I wrote that Al-Assad has much, much, much more blood on his hands than the Bahraini King. There cannot be any comparison on this apartment bro.

Syria is and was a one-party state. Bahrain is not.

You should really read this.

Politics of Bahrain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Let me once again state that I do not consider any ME country as a Western democracy. But we cannot mix apples and pears here.

@jamahir

You should stop writing nonsense now and read what I am writing and not what you imagine that is being written. Thanks.

 

[mike2000]

I have to disagree here mate. The ME is flooded by arms. A country like KSA is full of weapons. Almost every family are in possession of weapons. You don't need much to start a armed uprising. The problem with Syria is that it was a poor, isolated and oppressing country. Bahrain is no democracy but much better on this front. It's nothing like you imagine. People from the entire world are living there.

Just? The Syrian regime is backed by Russia, Iran and China and other states. The support of those countries that you have mentioned has been a joke. What have we supported the Syrian opposition with of hard weapons? Almost nothing. Our policies have failed. We should have stopped Al-Assad before the extremists hijacked the revolution by large. The bombing raids are solely aimed at ISIS which we helped create by keeping Al-Assad alive and by the failures in Iraq.

I wrote that Al-Assad has much, much, much more blood on his hands than the Bahraini King. There cannot be any comparison on this apartment bro.

Syria is and was a one-party state. Bahrain is not.

You should really read this.

Politics of Bahrain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nope i still disagree.
You said we have not supported the Syrian opposition with hard weapons, that we gave them almost nothing? loool I dont even know where to begin with to disprove this statement, since i will agree even the most anti Assa member on here will disagree with this statement. The Syrian opposition received alot of support from foreign powers, be it training, logistics, weapons supplies, ammunitions, refuge/base(in Tuirkey), diplomatic and media support(from our media) and many more which i cant even begin to go through. Of course Assad should have much more blood in his hands than the Bahraini dictatorial monarchy, simply because for one the Bahraini dictaorship has much more bigger support from us in the west/U.S/Saudi arabia, gulf states etc than Syria has, also because the foreign support the syrian 'rebels/free syrian army alias jihadists' received from abroad is very significant, and syria is now fighting a civil war, not an uprising my friend. If we(our governemnts in the west/U.S/israel, gulf states) had supported the oppsotion in Bahrain to topple the monarchy, then believe me Bahrain will look no diffrent than Syria today, and the Bahrain dictatorial monarchy will also have much more blood on its hands since they will have been fighting a different battle altogether( a geo-political war), not simply unarmed protesters.

Bahrain is indeed lucky that it hosts the U.S sixth fleet in the region, and its a stable ally of ours in the region, if it was in the opposite camp, then believe me, things will have been very different for it than it is today. Their uprising will have been much more different.

 

[Echo_419]

hiihiihihihihihihiihihih......dont always blame uncle sam. Others coutnries too have themselves to blame. Afterall, in geo politics its every country/everone for himself bros. If you cant help yourself, dont expect us to help you. Its up to you to know how to protect your own interests.

You are right the strong exploit the weak that's how world works
& I am happy that I am meeting a Brit like you earlier ones like @Abingboy & others were either Gentlemen like you or constantly calling West imperialist & how should their country be freed from US

You're right @Echo_419 , and if i seemed brash in my response, then i apologize for that.



Mike-san, this reminds me of the B.F Skinner's works regarding moral determinism and external-internal reciprocity. Is man a product of his own character, or is his character a product of his own environment , and if so, does the character influence environment in any way? Something to ponder on.

No worries mate