Former commander of IRGC : KSA behavior is like Iraq behavior before attacking Iran

[haman10]

If I say, IRGC is statement is word of god than probably I qualify for noble prize!
BTW, views of some doctor:
Targeting the holiest place is their agenda
http://www.arabnews.com/node/1120381

You will never qualify for a beauty pageant prize, that's what matters.

Honey I'm a doctor. A real doctor and i tell you, you need help sweety.

Seek it

 

[veg]

Lol so the West is the one pushing you to war with Iran? The West is also the one pushing you to fight For your Interests in Yemen? The West is also the one to push you to go against the muslim brotherhood and support the Egyptian government right?
The West is also the one pushing you to engage in sectarian proxy war with Iran in the region?

I am afraid YES.

Perhaps not DIRECTLY, but sure indirectly.

For example, instead of condemning all these steps (removing Brotherhood Government in Egypt, war in Yemen, killing Saudi Shia leader ....) America is either quite, or simply supporting Saudia.

Even if US is not directly PUSHING sectarian war with Iran, but still it is quietly supporting Saudia for this.

You are putting importance to the word "PUSHING". Instead of that you have to see the things in terms of "Condemning" or "Supporting".

 

[veg]

For your first point, I don't think creating a sectarian government in Iraq was the U S and U.K government intention. Our intention was to stabilise the country after we evicted Saddam. It's true that we made some very very silly decisions by totally dismantling the Baathist regime/government of Saddam. It was the worse thing we could do. I think we should have maintained the regime(even though it was led by minority Sunnis) since they knew how to keep the people in check by coercion,force, fear or brutality. As much as I despise such methods, I do think that sometimes in some countries it's necessary to keep the country united and to maintain peace and stability(however shallow that might be. ). So yes we made a mistake on this point.
However, many will also say we did good by dismantling the baathist regime altogether, and giving power to the Shias who are the majority in the country(democracy they say).So depends on who you ask. For the Shias they got the best deal and are happy with our actions against Saddam and his regime others are not that happy since they got the bad end of the deal. Lol. At the end of the day you can't make everyone happy, but you can't blame us for the sectarian nature of the Shias government led by Maliki we democratically installed after Saddam. Just like you can't blame Iran or Russia for Assad's brutal action against his own people.

For US, it should have been the policy to never ever support Saddam. They should have followed the Secular Morals which they teach in their own country.

But unfortunately US supported Saddam throughout the war against Iran.

US also supported Saddam when he bombed the Kurds in Halabcha (Chemical Bomb, killing 5000 citizens in one night). Not even a single word was uttered by US against that bombing at that time.

US also created Taliban in 1994 (along with Pakistani ISI and Saudi Money) in order to establish extremist Sunni government in Kabul against the Shia Iran.

Was US wanted to do a favour to Iran by removing Saddam? I don't think so. It was the internal rift between Saddam and Gulf countries and then US and then alqaida which let US to remove Saddam Hussain.

US never thought that Iran could ever be so strong after the long war, in order to make any Strong shia block.

But Iran proved otherwise. The bells started ringing in Washington when Hizbullah gave the toughest fight to Israel in 2006 war. And Iran started making rapid progress in the sciences.


////
Lol I'm always honest to my best ability.
////
Hope then you admit the reality of US as has been pointed out above.

///
You are not happy we toppled your biggest enemy/nemesis and stumbling block in the region? . Without our invasion of Iraq and toppling of Saddam, Iran wouldn't be able to exert such influence and further it's Shiite supremacy proxy war with KSA in the region like it does today. That's another fact.
///

If US had the true Morals, then it would have always condemned and criticized the Kingdom of Saudia which was totally against the Democracy.
But no, US plays the card of democracy only against weak countries. For Saudia it opened all the gates for weapons etc.


///
Israel has had its state on and off throughout history in the region. Before there was even anything like Great Britain. I don't see why they don't deserve a state any more than you deserve one.
///
If Israelies wanted a state, then they could have got it within US, or they were offered Uganda.

But Israelies rejected it and went for Palestine.

So even if Israelies deserved a state, then Palestinians also deserved their state. Israelies got no Right to their own state by displacing millions of Palestinians.

Only reason that Israelies rejected Uganda and other Options, and went for Palestine was "Religion" which told them to go for the sacred land.

In modern world, religion should not play such big role. Muslims are also so much against Israel no only while they were wrong, but Religious reasons are also behind that. If it were any poor Muslim land (with no sacredness) then they would have easily forgotten that.

So you wanted us to intervene in Syria and topple Assad for his brutal slaughter of his own people, but I know people from the middle East and how they like blaming all their ills on the West. Even if we did that and things turned sour you people will also be the first to blame us for the situation the country would have found itself with post Assad. So blame the West if they intervene blame them if they don't. We intervened in Iraq and you are blaming us for the country's and region situation, now you are blaming us for not intervening in Syria? How does that work?

People will criticize you while:

(1) You said Assad was as dictator, you condemned Assad.
But you never said Saudia and other Gulf rulers were also the dictators. You never comdemned them. You always had super relationships with them.
These are the Double Standards of yours which people criticize.

(2) You brought Taliban in power in order to counter Iran.
People criticize these double standards.

(3) You didn't said that Saddam was a dictator during 8 years war and you kept on supporting Saddam in one way or another. Due to this people criticize you.

If you have displayed the true Secular Morals right from the beginning, then things would have been in much better shape.

Extremist Muslim elements used your double standards and eventually Secularism and Secular forces in the region had to pay for your double standards and they lost the war against the extremist Muslims.

 

[Malik Alashter]

Al Malki's one was an 8th century type of sectarian madness, which caused the merger of Iraqi Ba'ath with Al Qaida resulting eventually in ISIS. I know what the Iraqi Ba'ath's slaughterhouse governance model is. Trust me, ISIS is just covered with Iraqi Ba'ath's finger prints all over its flag and actions.

One day this Almaliky will be a nation hero it is never was his fault the guy worked upon the constitution but he couldn't fight baathist and AQ while they were hiding behind sectarian tags he couldn't get rid of them while they have big support from the US itself and its satellites in the region!!!!!
a week ago the US politicians were talking aout harmonization between iraqis in making government in Baghdad

Niether the US nor the Saudis want any strong central government in Iraq they want the same type we have now this is the type that Alamaliki never wanted that's whay they worked hard to replace him with Al abadi.

 

[raptor22]

congratulations, you can.. don't forget to takeoff your turban before climbing the stage.

Could you please tell us what would Iran earn from blowing up or targeting the holiest places amongst all Muslims?

 

[Stryker1982]

Could you please tell us what would Iran earn from blowing up or targeting the holiest places amongst all Muslims?

He's just an idiot, just ignore him.

 

[haman10]

congratulations, you can.. don't forget to takeoff your turban before climbing the stage.

A wahhabi scum calling an Iranian, "terrorist".

well i guess there is first time for everything.

@waz @Manticore

reported for posting the picture of Holy ka'ba.

 

[Saho]

Iraq in the early 1980s was a military state, there were years of mandatory conscription under Saddam and they were a regional power in the Arab world. Course, they had the confidence to attack Iran.

Saudis on the other hand are not militarized and they are overly-reliant on Western militaries who are protecting the Gulf from external threats.

So, Salman is nowhere near Saddam.