What's new

Erdogan surrenders to Putin

I think this goes both ways. I don't see any changes from Iran's part as long as Khamenei is in power. MbS is merely a reaction to the status quo since 1979. I have always claimed that Iran, after toppling the Shah in 1979, instead of reaching out to its Arab neighbors and trying to find common solutions, was more busy trying to export the "Islamic Revolution".

A lot of it is due to internal Iranian politics as well. After the Shah was toppled (the most pro-US ruler in the region) the new regime (Mullah's) had to create an opposite political reality where everything Western was evil and bad and nations with cordial ties to the West, were automatically an enemy. Case in point the view of KSA/GCC from the Iranian Mullah's in power.

That and simple geopolitics and the fact that Iran is ruled by a theocracy that sees itself as the sole legitimate Islamic representative in the region and KSA until the reforms recently (ironically by MbS) was seen as the "Sunni equivalent" of Iran.

But in reality the proxy war/conflict is nonsense. Iran won't ever gain the upper hand in the Arab world, at most amongst fringe Shia Arab movements such as Hezbollah in tiny Southern Lebanon or Iraqi Shia militias allied to Tehran, and likewise KSA/Arabs have no territorial ambitions in Iran (KSA is bigger than Iran alone let alone the entire Arab world which is the size of Russia from the Atlantic to the Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean) so it is nothing more than a power struggle mixed with some imaginary fairytales of Arabs and Persians always being enemies (which was/is not the case at all - in fact for the fast majority of recorded history relations were normal).

I think this relationship (KSA-Iran) is the most misunderstood by both people in both KSA and Iran of any relationship. The countries are neighbors but the ignorance dominates the perceptions of both people. The more you dig into the ground realities, the more you realize the closeness and here I am not even talking about the Iranian Arabs.

A complicated matter much like Syria itself.
Iran is ruled by a theocracy? I mean I don't want to respond negatively to your comment, but Saudi Arabia is an absolute theocratic monarchy. It's one thing that Americans call Iran a theocracy, but it's a whole other thing that Saudi Arabia complains about Iran being a theocracy.

Our relations improved greatly during the presidency of Rafsanjani, even though Khamenei was the Supreme Leader at the time. Factually speaking, the reformists in Iran have always tried to have good relations with Saudi Arabia and they have a soft stance against the US and Europeans as well. So, it was expected that during the Rouhani administration, our ties with Saudi Arabia and our other Arab neighbors in general would improve as it was the case during Rafsanjani and Khatami. Rouhani tried to approach Saudi Arabia at first but Saudis did not show any interest. The only thing that was different this time was a semi-coup by a young, ambitious man who is trying to follow the same model that Shah envisaged for Iran in 1970s.

Now here is the situation in the Middle East: The Europeans and Americans detest Muslims and Middle Easterners in general. They view Iranians, Turks and Arabs similarly and the only reason that they are siding with one side against the other side is because their interests dictate that. They are creating chaos everywhere in our region, stunting the development of the region and provoking us against each other to keep the status quo. This is why Iranians and Arabs should unite. It is about nothing but common interests.
 
No bigger supporter of Kurdistan than erdogan himself who enabled Barzanistan. There has been no bigger anti-Kurd establishment than Iraq, everytime we dealt with the Kurdish terrorists a neighbor of ours tends to help them.
I care only for Turkey unlike others i am neither erdogan hater nor a fanboy when he does good thing I do congratulate when he makes big mistake I am criticizing him heavily...
Iran indeed worked with various kurdish separatist groups especially against Iraq during Iran-Iraq war
assad(Syria) worked with pkk so if you want to blame anyone then these two “neighbors” are guilty ones for Iraq’s situation
 
I care only for Turkey unlike others i am neither erdogan hater nor a fanboy when he does good thing I do congratulate when he makes big mistake I am criticizing him heavily...
Iran indeed worked with various kurdish separatist groups especially against Iraq during Iran-Iraq war
assad(Syria) worked with pkk so if you want to blame anyone then these two “neighbors” are guilty ones for Iraq’s situation

It went both ways. Saddam also supported Kurdish separatists in Iran.
Kurds have an unfortunate history of siding with the enemy against their state.
 
What you need to be doing is removing Syrian PKK from your border instead of talking about Russia or Iran. Those Syrian PKK while in peace time will be constantly militarizing and building up arms to support problems in Turkey with International Support from U.S and a few others like France/Germany.
Pkk is threat also for Syria Iran and Iraq
Instead of iranian backing for peace spring operation in october 2019 they issued anti turkish statement...
 
@camelguy @Antaréss @Syrian Lion (only Syrian user that I recall on PDF) and the few other Arab users around (Syria is an internal Arab conflict with outsiders obviously involved but it remains an internal matter at its core and thus needs Syrian and Arab solutions to be truly solved - thus I am only interested in the opinions of fellow Arabs)
The other people don't see us. The nations around you, they all are stamp collectors. They'll never get the grasp of how your world looks like. Therefore, you have to use blood even for attaining minor things. Being put in hard situations is a constant for Muslim Arabs till the end. That's all.
 
It went both ways. Saddam also supported Kurdish separatists in Iran.
Now we should focus on present
It’s clear to everyone that only Turkey is capable launching military operation against pkk and their western backers yet neither iran iraq nor syria(assad) are supportive even though all of these states would greatly benefit if kurdish separatism is given heavy blow
 
You have a lot of cooked up 'analysis's' you do on this forum for sake of Iran and its allies, and each one unsurprisingly conforms to Iran's interests in the region.

In this case, since you are well known pro-regime and Iran and Shia militias, you are doing another one of your 'analysis' where we can easily decipher that you seek for Iran and regime to get everything they want in Syria and trying at same time to confuse Turks that you care about them or worry about their interests.

So you tell them there security concern is justified, and then cook up another false theory you think some Turks will fall for, that the world seeks to pit them against war with Russia and you are such a kind hearted person along with your regime and Iranian regime that you want to help Turkey, just by them withdrawing from Idlib and letting Assad dynasty continue to rule in Syria.

Then your regime you worship(Iranian regime) starts another quest somewhere else in region, such as Houthi's in Yemen, and after Houthi's take over large swarms of Yemen, you suddenly acknowledge Saudi's security needs, and that you will satisfy them with end to attacks as long as they accept your continued campaign of conquest.

Tomorrow we may see you guys begin new chapter by trying to conquer another country in region, then after 5-6 years of fitnah your generosity will show itself up again in which you will offer another great 'deal' with another one of your 'analysis's'.

Fight the real enemy such as hosting Israeli embassy?

@BHarwana you should study russian-turkish history and make new analysis because the current one is not really connected to the reality on the ground
Turkey was forced into temporary (fake) alliance with russia due to west treacherous alliance with pkk terrorists but here’s another hint for you:the same pkk isn’t even recognized as terrorist organization by russia they have since 1992 “office” in moscow
In other news turks are enemies with russians the hate is still strong between them so a turkish-russian long term strategic alliance is nothing but a pipe dream promoted by people with lack of knowledge about the MENA/Caucus/Central asia/balkans region(s)


So every one wants Turkey to do its dirty work and kill their enemies lol. Cause Erdogan is aggressive this should not be mistaken as he will fight everyone's war. Why should Erdogan fight Russia what is the reason for that?

Is USA giving Turkey missile shield. Is Europe doing an air campaign for Turkey. If no one gives anything then why should he fight their war?

Iranians are snakes but why are all of Arabs getting cossy with Assad now?

@Falcon29 can you explain that to me? You cannot cause they bring in religious devide when it suites them then they bring in ethnic Arab unity when it suites them.


We all are bias at one point or another. I praise Erdogan decision to agree to ceasefire.
 
Last edited:
Now we should focus on present
It’s clear to everyone that only Turkey is capable launching military operation against pkk and their western backers yet neither iran iraq nor syria(assad) are supportive even though all of these states would greatly benefit if kurdish separatism is give heavy blow
We have hit KDP headquarters and guerillas hiding in Iraqi Kurdistan on numerous occasions in the last 2 years.
Iran's priority in Syria is to ensure that Syria's territorial integrity will remain intact under Assad. Other than that, Iran has no objection to Turkey's fight against Kurdish separatism and even encourages it.
 
Iran is ruled by a theocracy? I mean I don't want to respond negatively to your comment, but Saudi Arabia is an absolute theocratic monarchy. It's one thing that Americans call Iran a theocracy, but it's a whole other thing that Saudi Arabia complains about Iran being a theocracy.

Our relations improved greatly during the presidency of Rafsanjani, even though Khamenei was the Supreme Leader at the time. Factually speaking, the reformists in Iran have always tried to have good relations with Saudi Arabia and they have a soft stance against the US and Europeans as well. So, it was expected that during the Rouhani administration, our ties with Saudi Arabia and our other Arab neighbors in general would improve as it was the case during Rafsanjani and Khatami. Rouhani tried to approach Saudi Arabia at first but Saudis did not show any interest. The only thing that was different this time was a semi-coup by a young, ambitious man who is trying to follow the same model that Shah envisaged for Iran in 1970s.

Now here is the situation in the Middle East: The Europeans and Americans detest Muslims and Middle Easterners in general. They view Iranians, Turks and Arabs similarly and the only reason that they are siding with one side against the other side is because their interests dictate that. They are creating chaos everywhere in our region, stunting the development of the region and provoking us against each other to keep the status quo. This is why Iranians and Arabs should unite. It is about nothing but common interests.

KSA is not a theocracy. It is a monarchy. There is a huge difference. The clergy in KSA, while historically having a significant say, ironically as a reaction to the Iranian Islamic Revolution next door in, 1979 (read about the Sahwa movement) are reduced to mere religious figures nowadays. The last word was always with the King and the Allegiance Council.

What I find really strange though is why the so-called hardliners in Iran are not pro-KSA? If I am not wrong a lot of them are Iranian Arabs and those who are not claim to be Sadah (descendants of Prophet Muhammad (saws) so naturally they should have a huge affinity to KSA (Arabia the land and people not regime in power). Both regimes (especially prior to MbS) were the most religiously-motivated regimes in the region.

Problem is a geopolitical/political one. I am saying to you that if KSA had not had cordial relations with the West (USA by large) since WW2, Iran's closest ally in the region would have been KSA.

You forgot the regional proxy war in the region prior to Rouhani and MbS. You can't expect KSA to be trusting a regime that they have been fighting in the region since the Arab Spring and basically since 2003 (Iraq) to somehow gain trust overnight.

I don't think that MbS is stupid enough to follow the Shah model nor is the comparison accurate. For starters, the average Saudi Arabian lives a much, much better life (on every front be it educational, social, HDMI index, now with more social freedoms - most idiotic laws have been removed and KSA is hosting pop concerts, international sports tournaments and everything that you can think of - something unthinkable prior to MbS) while we all know the situation of the common Iranian under the Shah. Also times have changed. Youth of today are totally different from youth in the late 1970's. It is much harder to fool people with religious rhetoric than in the past and have in mind that a large section of the Saudi Arabian population (2/3 of our population is below 30 years) had a huge resentment towards the status quo prior to MbS which explains why the vast majority of locals, me included, are hugely in favor of MbS's reforms and why all the scaremongering of a revolution against "liberalization" emerging in KSA being just that.

I disagree with the blank statement of population x or y hating population x or y. Some of the greatest Arabist, Persianist (don't know the name of your equivalent of Arabist in English) have been Westerners and historically ties have not always been bad. There is a lot of shared history between Southern Europe and the Arab world/Middle East. We are neighbors after all. Viewing nation, people x or y as a perpetual enemy is wrong. I have nothing against the 10.000's of Western tourists that have been arriving to KSA lately (last few weeks) and mostly only speaking well of it and the people and doing a big service for KSA and the people by posting their experiences on YouTube and online. Material being viewed by millions of people and helped bridge the gap between ordinary people and destroying false narratives. Or the Westerners living in KSA and contributing to KSA.

I agree with the unity just for the sake of that benefiting both Arabs and Iranians. However for such a thing to occur we would need regime changes or huge changes on the ground (our own WW2) to change once and for all. WW2 gave rise to European unity, the EU and the current mostly peaceful status quo in Europe. It has hugely benefitted an otherwise perpetually bloody continent (Europe). 100 million Europeans perished in WW1 and WW2 due to politics alone and that was the harsh lesson that they needed. Hopefully we will not need something similar. For us Arabs, the case of Syria alone should have taught a thing or two to our regimes and people. Let us see if any lessons will be learned from this....

Of course i want justice for all those persecuted syrians regardless of their origin/religion i want real government for syrians that will provide them decent future
It’s obvious that assad cannot lead syria in the future even if he manages to capture all of syria(impossible because his main backers have other priorities and certainly won’t waste resources for such complex military campaign)
I just wanted to point out how fellow arab states are literally digging the grave for other arab states by supporting certain ethnic separatism they think this will hurt Turkey or Iran but eventually the real victims are Syria and Iraq
Imagine how the situation would have been better for syrians if arabs from deir ez zor desert were allowed to cooperate with turkish-backed SNA but unfortunately they are told to work(forced by US and Saudi Arabia) with pkk terrorists

Not aware of KSA or any Arab country supporting any imaginary PKK in Syria but I know for a fact that Erdogan has been the biggest supporter of Barzanistan in KRG.

Using such logic, we can say that Erdogan is only interested in Syria due to him wanting to annex Northern Syria, put some pro-MB Syrian leadership in power that would later "sell" Syria to Turkey so Turkish companies could rebuild Syria (money for Turkey) and for Syria to gain access in the Arab world and gain soft power.

KSA has indeed very close people to people relations with the people of Eastern Syria (all of Syria in fact) and long held support to our cousins in Eastern Syria (Syrian Arabs) has little to do with some Kurds who mostly only live near the border regions of Turkey.

First time I hear about the Egypt part but in any case given the hostility between Erdogan-ruled Turkey and some Arab regimes (Egypt at the helm - can't blame them given what occurred), both entities will try to work against each other. Turkey is doing the same let us not kid ourselves. It should not be necessary but that is the reality with shitty regimes around.
 
j1mAcK.png

Red: Regions directly under TAF and NSA control
Burgundy: came under TAF responsibility, but de facto control at HTS for now
Green: Under Pkk/Pyd and CENTCOM control
Light green: Under Pkk/Pyd control and Russian responsibility.


Before 2016, Daesh in southeastern Anatolia, Al Muhaberat in Hatay, Pkk on the other hand, caused hundreds of citizens to lose their lives with bomb attacks across the country.

There was no safe space for refugees in Syria. Along the 911 kilometer border line: In addition to the Daesh and Pkk invasion, terrorist gangs such as Mihraç Ural surrounded the country from the south of Hatay to Hakkari.

So what happened in 4 years? Firstly TAF cleared the NATO gladio within. Then saved more than 15% of Syria from the clashes or air strikes with 4 major military operations. Daesh's entire cells and operation capability in TR were destroyed in 4 years. PKK's presence in TR was reduced to inefective level in borders. Thousands of member who did not go to Syria/Iraq were neutralized. Many others were neutralized by cross-border operations. And Assad has no capacity to do intelligence operations in Turkey anymore.

There are points where we have conflicts with Russia and the USA, but we have never closed the channel of dialogue and It will continue as long as it is appropriate to Turkey's requests... Turkey consistently repeating its 3 request over years. The main strategy in the field after 2016 is in line with these demands. After all of that, I can definitely say that it will continue with determination. Turkey's national security doctrine is now moving with the principle of the destruction of threats in its source.

Here, i see some comments are written with a preliminary acceptance as if the Syrian issue ended on March 5th.
 
KSA is not a theocracy. It is a monarchy. There is a huge difference. The clergy in KSA, while historically having a significant say, ironically as a reaction to the Iranian Islamic Revolution next door in, 1979 (read about the Sahwa movement) are reduced to mere religious figures nowadays. The last word was always with the King and the Allegiance Council.

What I find really strange though is why the so-called hardliners in Iran are not pro-KSA? If I am not wrong a lot of them are Iranian Arabs and those who are not claim to be Sadah (descendants of Prophet Muhammad (saws) so naturally they should have a huge affinity to KSA (Arabia the land and people not regime in power). Both regimes (especially prior to MbS) were the most religiously-motivated regimes in the region.

Problem is a geopolitical/political one. I am saying to you that if KSA had not had cordial relations with the West (USA by large) since WW2, Iran's closest ally in the region would have been KSA.

You forgot the regional proxy war in the region prior to Rouhani and MbS. You can't expect KSA to be trusting a regime that they have been fighting in the region since the Arab Spring and basically since 2003 (Iraq) to somehow gain trust overnight.

I don't think that MbS is stupid enough to follow the Shah model nor is the comparison accurate. For starters, the average Saudi Arabian lives a much, much better life (on every front be it educational, social, HDMI index, now with more social freedoms - most idiotic laws have been removed and KSA is hosting pop concerts, international sports tournaments and everything that you can think of - something unthinkable prior to MbS) while we all know the situation of the common Iranian under the Shah. Also times have changed. Youth of today are totally different from youth in the late 1970's. It is much harder to fool people with religious rhetoric than in the past and have in mind that a large section of the Saudi Arabian population (2/3 of our population is below 30 years) had a huge resentment towards the status quo prior to MbS which explains why the vast majority of locals, me included, are hugely in favor of MbS's reforms and why all the scaremongering of a revolution against "liberalization" emerging in KSA being just that.

I disagree with the blank statement of population x or y hating population x or y. Some of the greatest Arabist, Persianist (don't know the name of your equivalent of Arabist in English) have been Westerners and historically ties have not always been bad. There is a lot of shared history between Southern Europe and the Arab world/Middle East. We are neighbors after all. Viewing nation, people x or y as a perpetual enemy is wrong. I have nothing against the 10.000's of Western tourists that have been arriving to KSA lately (last few weeks) and mostly only speaking well of it and the people and doing a big service for KSA and the people by posting their experiences on YouTube and online. Material being viewed by millions of people and helped bridge the gap between ordinary people and destroying false narratives. Or the Westerners living in KSA and contributing to KSA.

I agree with the unity just for the sake of that benefiting both Arabs and Iranians. However for such a thing to occur we would need regime changes or huge changes on the ground (our own WW2) to change once and for all. WW2 gave rise to European unity, the EU and the current mostly peaceful status quo in Europe. It has hugely benefitted an otherwise perpetually bloody continent (Europe). 100 million Europeans perished in WW1 and WW2 due to politics alone and that was the harsh lesson that they needed. Hopefully we will not need something similar. For us Arabs, the case of Syria alone should have taught a thing or two to our regimes and people. Let us see if any lessons will be learned from this....

Saudi Arabia enforces sharia laws on her citizens. The Saudi family boasts about being the Custodian of the Holy Mosques or something like that. The Saudi family has invested billions of dollars in spreading Wahhabism. That's a de facto theocracy in my opinion.

Yes, you are mistaken. Iranian Arabs are like 2% of the population and they have minimal influence or power in Iran.

You are admitting to the cordial relations between Saudi Arabia and Western countries. The very ones that are looting the resources of this region and create chaos. How do you expect Iran to trust Saudi Arabia in the first place?

Believe me, the shah of Iran was smarter than MBS. Just few days ago, a report was circulating on the internet about how MBS gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to an American rapper as an apology for being mistreated at the airport. I don't remember the details, but I assume it was Lil Wayne if I'm not mistaken. As for the standards of living of an average Iranian under the ruling of Shah, the situation of Iranians during the last 5 years of the Shah was indeed better than the living standards of Saudi Arabia at the time. Iran was becoming industrialized very fast and was experiencing an incredibly fast economic growth.

I don't want to compare Shah to MBS and turn this into a d*ck measuring contest, but by early 1970s, Iran had functioning nuclear reactors, a car industry which was one of the largest in Asia and electronic industries that were huge by world standards. As of 2020, Saudi Arabia under MBS has none of them. Yet, the majority of things that MBS does are similar to what the Shah did during his last years of ruling. The Shah also had the approval of people in big cities. It was people in smaller cities that managed to topple him. I can tell you how similar these two people are if you want.

Islamophobia is a real issue. I don't like Muslims in general, but currently the atmosphere in Europe is exactly as I described it. Many of them hate people from the Middle East. It's a fact and the growing incidents of xenophobia in Europe against people from the Middle East or Muslims are real too. On the other hand, Europeans feel vulnerable against emerging countries like Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The European culture is declining and they know it well.

We have to be realistic. We can't wait for an ideal situation to take place before we put our differences aside. As neighbors, our differences will never be completely resolved. We just need to act based on priorities. At this moment, Western influence in our region is a much bigger issue that animosity between Arabs, Turks and Persians. And that's the reason why we should unite against them if we want the Middle East to stop being the way it is.
 
Saudi Arabia enforces sharia laws on her citizens. The Saudi family boasts about being the Custodian of the Holy Mosques or something like that. The Saudi family has invested billions of dollars in spreading Wahhabism. That's a de facto theocracy in my opinion.

Yes, you are mistaken. Iranian Arabs are like 2% of the population and they have minimal influence or power in Iran.

You are admitting to the cordial relations between Saudi Arabia and Western countries. The very ones that are looting the resources of this region and create chaos. How do you expect Iran to trust Saudi Arabia in the first place?

Believe me, the shah of Iran was smarter than MBS. Just few days ago, a report was circulating on the internet about how MBS gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to an American rapper as an apology for being mistreated at the airport. I don't remember the details, but I assume it was Lil Wayne if I'm not mistaken. As for the standards of living of an average Iranian under the ruling of Shah, the situation of Iranians during the last 5 years of the Shah was indeed better than the living standards of Saudi Arabia at the time. Iran was becoming industrialized very fast and was experiencing an incredibly fast economic growth.

I don't want to compare Shah to MBS and turn this into a d*ck measuring contest, but by early 1970s, Iran had functioning nuclear reactors, a car industry which was one of the largest in Asia and electronic industries that were huge by world standards. As of 2020, Saudi Arabia under MBS has none of them. Yet, the majority of things that MBS does are similar to what the Shah did during his last years of ruling. The Shah also had the approval of people in big cities. It was people in smaller cities that managed to topple him. I can tell you how similar these two people are if you want.

Islamophobia is a real issue. I don't like Muslims in general, but currently the atmosphere in Europe is exactly as I described it. Many of them hate people from the Middle East. It's a fact and the growing incidents of xenophobia in Europe against people from the Middle East or Muslims are real too. On the other hand, Europeans feel vulnerable against emerging countries like Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia. The European culture is declining and they know it well.

We have to be realistic. We can't wait for an ideal situation to take place before we put our differences aside. As neighbors, our differences will never be completely resolved. We just need to act based on priorities. At this moment, Western influence in our region is a much bigger issue that animosity between Arabs, Turks and Persians. And that's the reason why we should unite against them if we want the Middle East to stop being the way it is.

Sharia law is enforced to various degrees in most Muslim countries and Sharia law is probably more enforced in Iran (to the literal letter) nowadays. KSA is a fusion of Sharia and civil law. That does not somehow turn KSA into a theocracy ruled by an infallible Supreme Ayatollah with all due respect.

Custodian of Makkah and Madinah (Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques) is a title that originates from the Arab Fatimid dynasty. It merely entails that the king of KSA is the custodian of Makkah and Madinah which is the case.

There is no such thing called "Wahhabism".

KSA is a monarchy. The clergy, unlike in Iran, is not de facto ruling the country. That was my point.

Those numbers are estimates and all those clerics/Iranian leaders wearing black turbans are ethnically Arabs (paternally) unless they are lying about their origin. So obviously those people will have a natural affinity for Arabia. At least they should.

Like most countries in the region. NATO Turkey is at your doorstep. Pro-Israel Azerbaijan. Occupied Afghanistan. Historically pro-West Pakistan. Turkmenistan is a Russian vassal state ruled by an insane dictator. The US has great clout in Iraq after 2003. Iran itself was the closest Western ally in the region prior to 1979.

Why is Iranian worrying about which allies KSA has? Is Iran worried that China is our by far largest trade partner and that we have strategic relationships with China to the extent that they are helping build our indigenous ballistic missile defense force?

The Iranian regime has had very cordial ties with Oman, have you not? They are a Western ally.

You do realize that 99,9% of the reports about KSA in the Western sensationalist press is nonsense, right? If the Shah was so smart, he would still be ruling today.

I highly doubt that. Living standards in KSA have been ahead of Iran (clearly and by some distance) for the past many decades and I don't see that changing anytime soon. In any case we were comparing events today (2020) with how Iranians lived in the 1970's. Most Iranian villages did not have clean water etc. Something like that does not exist in KSA in 2020.

You don't realize that 80% of the Saudi Arabian population is urban. Contrary to the situation in Iran in the late 1970's. The rural population in KSA is of little to no significance politically. What matter is what occurs in the big cities in the North, South, West, Center and East.

The people you are talking about hate every non-European. Religion does not matter. The reality is that there are 10-15 million Arabs living in Europe and 4 million in the US. Outside of some small incidents here and there, the Arabs are part and parcel of those countries. I know this myself from first hand.

You want us to remove the West, while our people are dependent on Western tech, totally consumed in Western sports, movies, serials, technology, culture (by large across all regional countries), our brightest minds study in the West, have studied in the West or are dependent on Western knowledge etc.

That logic is no different to the Arabs or Iranians who have the view that the other party can never be trusted or never be a friend. I am not sure if you are aware of this.

What is needed is to be treated as an equal (by anyone, Westerner or non-Westerner, Westerners are not special) and that happens by developing on all fronts and growing as nations and people. Hostility for the sake of it will give nothing but turn us into failed states or sanctioned entities like your own country. You can reach self-sufficiency without such stunts or policies. We Arabs have experiences of such policies from close hand and they are not very successful.
 
Last edited:
On another side note- if this agreement can be implemented I dont think its a bad agreement. Even though I hate erdogan, our priority currently should be
1. secure our border, stop more refugeees
2. make a safe haven for refugees in Turkey send them back Syria
3. keep allied areas safe under TFSA and have a allied force on our borders
this agreement wont hold unless you do something about HTS
 
Sharia law is enforced to various degrees in most Muslim countries and Sharia is probably more enforced in Iran (to the literal letter) nowadays. That does not somehow turn KSA into a theocracy ruled by an infallible Supreme Ayatollah.

Custodian of Makkah and Madinah is a title that originates from the Arab Fatimid dynasty. It merely entails that the king of KSA is the custodian of Makkah and Madinah.

There is no such thing called "Wahhabism".

KSA is a monarchy. The clergy, unlike in Iran, is not the facto ruling the country. That was my point.

Those numbers are estimates and all those clerics/Iranian leaders wearing black turbans are ethnically Arabs (paternally) unless they are lying about their origin. So obviously those people will have a natural affinity for Arabia. At least they should.

Like most countries in the region. NATO Turkey is at your doorstep. Pro-Israel Azerbaijan. Occupied Afghanistan. Historically pro-West Pakistan. Turkmenistan is a Russian vassal state ruled by an insane dictator. The US has great clout in Iraq after 2003. Iran itself was the closest Western ally in the region prior to 1979.

Why is Iranian worrying about which allies KSA has? Is Iran worried that China is our by far largest trade partner and that we have strategic relationships with China to the extent that they are helping build our indigenous ballistic missile defense force?

The Iranian regime has had very cordial ties with Oman, have you not? They are a Western ally.

You do realize that 99,9% of the reports about KSA in the Western sensationalist press is nonsense, right? If the Shah was so smart, he would still be ruling today.

I highly doubt that. Living standards in KSA have been ahead of Iran (clearly and by some distance) for the past many decades and I don't see that changing anytime soon. In any case we were comparing events today (2020) with how Iranians lived in the 1970's. Most Iranian villages did not have clean water etc. Something like that does not exist in KSA in 2020.

You don't realize that 80% of the Saudi Arabian population is urban. Contrary to the situation in Iran in the late 1970's. The rural population in KSA is of little to no significance politically. What matter is what occurs in the big cities in the North, South, West, Center and East.

The people you are talking about hate every non-European. Religion does not matter. The reality is that there are 10-15 million Arabs living in Europe and 4 million in the US. Outside of some small incidents here and there, the Arabs are part and parcel of those countries. I know this myself from first hand.

You want us to remove the West, while our people are dependent on Western tech, totally consumed in Western sports, movies, serials, technology, culture (by large across all regional countries), our brightest minds study in the West, have studied in the West or are dependent on Western knowledge etc.

That logic is no different to the Arabs or Iranians who have the view that the other party can never be trusted or never be a friend. I am not sure if you are aware of this.

What is needed is to be treated as an equal (by anyone, Westerner or non-Westerner, Westerners are not special) and that happens by developing on all fronts and growing as nations and people. Hostility for the sake of it will give nothing but turn us into failed states or sanctioned entities like your own country. You can reach self-sufficiency without such stunts or policies. We Arabs have experiences of such policies from close hand and they are not very successful.

Saudi Arabia still beheads people in public. I can ensure you that no country comes close to Saudi Arabia when it comes to enforcing sharia laws.

You can deny it all you want, but Wahhabism and the Saudi royal family go hand in hand and many people equate Wahhabism with the Saudi family. As for Iran, Iran is a democracy with theocratic elements. The President does not have to be a cleric. The head of the parliament doesn't have to be from clergy either. The same goes to the Army and even the IRGC. None of the commanders of the IRGC are clerics. Even the Supreme Leader who has to be a cleric is indirectly elected by people through the Council of Experts. A council of Islamic clerics whose members are directly elected by people provincially.

They are not ethnically Arabs. They are linked to the Imams in some way. Just because a person was linked to the House of Muhammad 1400 years ago that doesn't make them ethnically Arab.

China is not involved in the chaos in the Middle East. They are focused on their own internal growth. The US supports Israel and has a history of interference in the region. Israel is a far bigger threat than Turkey. We have our differences with Turkey, but Turkey is a rational player and our countries have always found a way to overcome our differences and live in peace in modern history. Republic of Azerbaijan is not a threat to us. Iran and Turkey are rivals, but they do not threaten each other for strategic reasons and because they know that they both are capable of hurting each other.

Are you seriously comparing Iran in 1970s to Saudi Arabia in 2020? Is that a joke? Comparing 50 years ago to now?! lol Obviously, I was comparing Iran in 1970s to the Middle East and North Africa in 1970s. You can't compare the standards of living in 1970s to now even for the same country. Meanwhile, standards of living are time dependent. Iran in the last 5 years of the Shah enjoyed high standards of living which was growing extremely fast in all spheres and it surpassed regional standards greatly.

The Shah was a very smart person but he was overthrown because Iranians wanted independence from the Western influence in Iran. Something that the Shah could not afford. If Saudi Arabians one day want the same thing, I am sure that the Saudi family will be overthrown in a matter of weeks or months.

We do not want you to cut your ties with Western countries. We want you to stop following what they dictate and helping them advance their politics in the region. That's different. We want you to act independently based on what is good for all of us in the region, not what is good for them because you need them. And as your neighbor, that's a very reasonable request.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom