Inside The Hearts And Minds Of Arab Youth - Arab Youth Survey

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

You're right: I forgot about the independent sheikdoms of the Gulf and Yemen. I was thinking only about those areas that shared borders with Iran.

Fair enough. Let me correct you further. It was not only sheikdoms but kingdoms, sultanates, emirates, imamates as well. From Morocco in the West to Oman in the East.

Another thing, did you forget that the Arabian Peninsula is technically a neighbor of Iran with only a small shallow sea separating us? Did you forget that Eastern Arabia and Southern Iran are closely connected on many fronts? That many people migrated from one place to the other? Do you realize that the GCC along with Iraq are the only Arab countries who share aspects with Iranians? Do you think that people in the Maghreb, Egypt, Levant etc. do? They do not.

The only Arab country who borders Iran directly is Iraq and even half of the border or so is mainly inhabited by Kurds who live on both sides of the border in Iraq and Iran. Along the Southern Iraqi-Iranian border mostly Lurs live but also Iranian Arabs and Persians.

I am telling you that modern-day Arab-Iran hostilities are a thing that only really started in 1979. Those are historical facts. I do not by any means hate Iranians (regardless of their ethnicity) but I do not like their regime policies. PDF is not a natural place because there is too much trolling and fake nationalism which makes people hostile to each other. This is not how people behave in real life. No need for us to kill each other. Do you wish that we do that?

 

[Solomon2]

Fair enough. Let me correct you further. It was not only sheikdoms but kingdoms, sultanates, emirates, imamates as well. From Morocco in the West to Oman in the East.

Truly, I may not do justice by failing to distinguish these and lumping them all into the "sheikdoms" classification.

Another thing, did you forget that the Arabian Peninsula is technically a neighbor of Iran with only a small shallow sea separating us? Did you forget that Eastern Arabia and Southern Iran are closely connected on many fronts? That many people migrated from one place to the other?

No. Nor do I forget that for hundreds of years it has been Western navies who have kept the Persian Gulf an international waterway and effective political border, rather than a flashpoint of conflict.

I am telling you that modern-day Arab-Iran hostilities are a thing that only really started in 1979. Those are historical facts.

I agree with you that Arab-Iran hostilities have been of a fundamentally different character since 1979. The Shah and Ba'athists played at conflict but the mullahs always meant to stoke it. I met their leaders when they were students. They boasted of their plans. They seek a regional hegemony that the Arab leaders do not.

I do not by any means hate Iranians (regardless of their ethnicity) but I do not like their regime policies. PDF is not a natural place because there is too much trolling -

I have the same feelings, cousin. I had an Iranian neighbor who denounced the mullahs. He was assassinated and the culprit fled to Iran to serve the mullahs there - apparently in the English-language propaganda service. Perhaps some of hirelings hang out here.

...and fake nationalism which makes people hostile to each other.

Nationalism is the self-ruling expression of peoplehood and as such does not have to embrace xenophobic hostility. That's aggression-embracing politics, not nationalism.

No need for us to kill each other. Do you wish that we do that?

No.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

Truly, I may not do justice by failing to distinguish these and lumping them all into the "sheikdoms" classification.

No. Nor do I forget that for hundreds of years it has been Western navies who have kept the Persian Gulf an international waterway and effective political border, rather than a flashpoint of conflict.

I agree with you that Arab-Iran hostilities have been of a fundamentally different character since 1979. The Shah and Ba'athists played at conflict but the mullahs always meant to stoke it. I met their leaders when they were students. They boasted of their plans. They seek a regional hegemony that the Arab leaders do not.

I have the same feelings, cousin. I had an Iranian neighbor who denounced the mullahs. He was assassinated and the culprit fled to Iran to serve the mullahs there - apparently in the English-language propaganda service. Perhaps some of hirelings hang out here.

Nationalism is the self-ruling expression of peoplehood and as such does not have to embrace xenophobic hostility. That's aggression-embracing politics, not nationalism.

No.

I like to be as historically correct as possible.

That region of the Middle East was dominated by local navies for millennia until the Portuguese fleet emerged in the 17th century but they were often defeated by Omanis who were the dominant naval power of the region for centuries alongside the Portuguese. British and US involvement (active) in the Gulf region is actually only about 100 years old.

One cannot deny that Arab-Iranian hostiles, since the Arab Conquest of Iran almost 1400 years ago, have not amounted to many conflicts let alone major wars. I can only think of the recent Iraq-Iran war which happened after 1979. Can you help me with other major examples? This is why I made a distinction between relations prior to 1979 and after.

"I met their leaders when they were students. They boasted of their plans. They seek a regional hegemony that the Arab leaders do not."

Can you please elaborate on that sentence? Who did you precisely met and where was this? In the US? What were Iranian Mullah's and anti-Shah opponents doing in the US? Did the Shah send Iranians abroad to study as well back then? It's well before my time on this earth, hence why I am asking.

Do you know why Arab regimes do not seek a hegemony like Iranian and to a smaller degree Turkish regimes? Let me help you with the answer.

Can you notice the size of Arab lands compared to the size of Iran and Turkey? We have too much lands and too many nation states hence all the nonsense conflicts among ourselves. What happens in the Near East does not impact half of the Arabs living outside of the Near East only emotionally. They have their own challenges in their region.

That's a sad story. Ordinary people from country x or y are not representatives of their regimes. It's like saying that there are no good Arabs, Iranians, Jews or Americans because of those countries respective policies.

Unfortuantely most if not all forms of MENA nationalism have a strong xenophobic element no matter how much anyone from the region denies this.

That's good to hear neither do I want to see Palestinians (Arabs as a whole included) and Israelis to kill each other.

 

[Solomon2]

I like to be as historically correct as possible...one cannot deny that Arab-Iranian hostiles, since the Arab Conquest of Iran almost 1400 years ago, have not amounted to many conflicts let alone major wars. I can only think of the recent Iraq-Iran war which happened after 1979. Can you help me with other major examples?

What do you call, "major", exactly?

"I met their leaders when they were students. They boasted of their plans. They seek a regional hegemony that the Arab leaders do not."

Can you please elaborate on that sentence? Who did you precisely met and where was this? In the US? What were Iranian Mullah's and anti-Shah opponents doing in the US?

We were students and used to ride the Metrobus together, me from school and them to their demonstrations, mostly at the Islamic Center in D.C.. They talked. They were studying Nazi fascism and Soviet Communism not to liberate themselves and their people but for tips on cowing them and dominating the region. Since they've succeeded in almost every plan they boasted - the stalemate with Saddam proving to be a mere minor setback - they must possess supreme confidence by now in their abilities.

Did the Shah send Iranians abroad to study as well back then? It's well before my time on this earth, hence why I am asking.

Yes, though I don't doubt some of them were kids of rich parents. I recall they would drive expensive imported cars, park them illegally, and upon receiving tickets denounce America as capitalist-imperialist aggressors over whom they would triumph,etc. etc.

Do you know why Arab regimes do not seek a hegemony like Iranian and to a smaller degree Turkish regimes?...We have too much lands and too many nation states hence all the nonsense conflicts among ourselves.

The pan-Arab unitary state dream was something fostered by the Brits, perhaps more than the Arabs themselves. It has not served its adherents well.

That's a sad story. Ordinary people from country x or y are not representatives of their regimes

My neighbor was the Shah's press officer at the Iranian embassy.

Unfortuantely most if not all forms of MENA nationalism have a strong xenophobic element no matter how much anyone from the region denies this.

It's a tough region. Yet the 20+% of Israelis that are Arab can grow and prosper, while the surrounding Arab states (and Pakistan) cannot tolerate even the idea of prosperous, happy, and growing Jewish communities within. (Iran, by contrast, tolerates the existence of a sizable Jewish community.)

That's good to hear neither do I want to see Palestinians (Arabs as a whole included) and Israelis to kill each other.

Then the question boils down to what can be done to prevent that. Since the Israelis, by demonstration, are not murderously aggressive, the issue is how to discourage their Arab neighbors from behaving as such. Would the Gazans have suffered over 1,000 casualties in 2014 if Hamas hadn't been intent upon bombarding Israelis with rockets? Surely not. So the best way to assure peace is to reduce both anti-Zionists' means to undertake murderous aggressions as well as their desires to do so.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

What do you call, "major", exactly?

We were students and used to ride the Metrobus together, me from school and them to their demonstrations, mostly at the Islamic Center in D.C.. They talked. They were studying Nazi fascism and Soviet Communism not to liberate themselves and their people but for tips on cowing them and dominating the region. Since they've succeeded in almost every plan they boasted - the stalemate with Saddam proving to be a mere minor setback - they must possess supreme confidence by now in their abilities.

Yes, though I don't doubt some of them were kids of rich parents. I recall they would drive expensive imported cars, park them illegally, and upon receiving tickets denounce America as capitalist-imperialist aggressors over whom they would triumph,etc. etc.

The pan-Arab unitary state dream was something fostered by the Brits, perhaps more than the Arabs themselves. It has not served its adherents well.

My neighbor was the Shah's press officer at the Iranian embassy.

It's a tough region. Yet the 20+% of Israelis that are Arab can grow and prosper, while the surrounding Arab states (and Pakistan) cannot tolerate even the idea of prosperous, happy, and growing Jewish communities within. (Iran, by contrast, tolerates the existence of a sizable Jewish community.)

Then the question boils down to what can be done to prevent that. Since the Israelis, by demonstration, are not murderously aggressive, the issue is how to discourage their Arab neighbors from behaving as such. Would the Gazans have suffered over 1,000 casualties in 2014 if Hamas hadn't been intent upon bombarding Israelis with rockets? Surely not. So the best way to assure peace is to reduce both anti-Zionists' means to undertake murderous aggressions as well as their desires to do so.

Wars or conflicts of significance. There have been very few in the past 1400 years. The exception being the recent Iraq-Iran war.

Solomon2, we have our political differences and I disagree with your agenda here when it comes to Israel, so don't take this personally (I am never personal on the internet, it's just ridiculous) but what you are telling me sounds too good to believe. How can they be studying Nazism and Communism? Where there such courses at American universities in the 1970's? Was the Shah really wasting money on that kind of education or did they go on their own? How could openly-hostile anti-Western people do what they did in the "Land of the Brave" moreover at American universities during the height of the Cold War?

I am very well-versed about the ideology of the Iranian Mullah's (Willayat al-Faqih) and I have read material about it in Arabic and I am familiar with religious Shia channels who support their ideology. I understand their nature perfectly. Just like I do with any regime that is in power in the Arab world/MENA/Middle East region and wider Muslim world. You do not need to read 100's of books you just have to study how the majority in a given country behave like and their dominating political discourse to understand them. It's not really that difficult. A shame that Western decision makers, even to this day, exemplified by the Obama administration, are so woeful on this front.

The Arab world has existed for 1400 years and will continue to exist until the end of times. There is no need for a political unification. This is a unrealistic prospect that I doubt would be a good thing. At least currently given the regimes and ground reality

Jewish communities in the Arab world were the most prosperous alongside those found in Poland prior to Israel's establishment in 1948. The reason for the events that followed are obvious to us both so I find it pointless to repeat myself. Do I regret the events. Of course. Do I believe that most Jews do as well? I know this to be a fact.

What should the Palestinians do to deserve their own state according to yourself? Lastly what are the faults of Israeli policies vis-á-vis Palestinians or do you even recognize any faults at all? It frankly does not seem to be the case and that makes peace extremely difficult. I think that you realize this yourself.

Of course the Israelis are not openly resisting or being overly aggressive (comparing it with the situation of the Gazans makes not sense at all) as they have not lost anything but gained everything (almost). Thus a comparison makes no sense. It's like blaming some Poles during WW2 of being aggressive against the Nazis and Soviets respectively. Of course a direct comparison is similarly wrong but you get the point.

Your counterpart @500 for instance, who is a well-informed individual, does openly support a Palestinian state and admits that Israeli policy makers have committed mistakes. He is also against Israeli settlements in the West Bank that continue to be built.

Can you see where I am going?

 

[Serpentine]

We were students and used to ride the Metrobus together, me from school and them to their demonstrations, mostly at the Islamic Center in D.C.. They talked. They were studying Nazi fascism and Soviet Communism not to liberate themselves and their people but for tips on cowing them and dominating the region. Since they've succeeded in almost every plan they boasted - the stalemate with Saddam proving to be a mere minor setback - they must possess supreme confidence by now in their abilities.

@Bilad al-Haramayn I think you are smart enough to feel the smell of those pure nonsense from miles away. Because a self declared Zionist on a forum telling something so ridiculous (meeting with Iranian 'leaders' in U.S as if they were there) makes too much sense...Not.

@Solomon2 Why don't you name some of those 'leaders' you used to ride the metro bus with? You know, I'm very interested to know their names.

Btw, guess what? I used to ride with former U.S presidents, they were studying plans for a devilish 'new world order' to dominate the globe. The funny part? My story seems more like the truth.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

@Bilad al-Haramayn I think you are smart enough to feel the smell of those pure nonsense from miles away. Because a self declared Zionist on a forum telling something so ridiculous (meeting with Iranian 'leaders' in U.S as if they were there) makes too much sense...Not.

@Solomon2 Why don't you name some of those 'leaders' you used to ride the metro bus with? You know, I'm very interested to know their names.

Btw, guess what? I used to ride with former U.S presidents, they were studying plans for a devilish 'new world order' to dominate the globe. The funny part? My story seems more like the truth.

Well, as you can see by my reaction, I was immediately suspicious but I don't want to be too rude when I am having an exchange with a much older person.

Anyway since you are here, will you agree with me, that Arab-Iranian hostilities (which generally are blown out of proportion and history is often distorted on both sides when they are discussed) were nowhere near as bad (if bad at all) prior to 1979?

You were from Bushehr Province if I am not wrong? From my information about that province and by judging by geography alone, that region of Iran had close ties with Arabs living in nearby Southern Iraq and Eastern Arabia. I am sure that there have been mutual influences when it comes to cuisine, music, language, trade ties and human interactions in the form of mutual settlements. I know from the few Iranians that I know in the GCC and West (yes, I do have Iranians friends and colleagues), some are from Southern Iran, that the common ties are much greater than both sides want to admit.

 

[Solomon2]

Wars or conflicts of significance. There have been very few in the past 1400 years. The exception being the recent Iraq-Iran war.

Sunni-Shia split? I suppose Timur doesn't count...

...what you are telling me sounds too good to believe. How can they be studying Nazism and Communism? Where there such courses at American universities in the 1970's?

What is "good to believe" about it? Of course Nazism and Communism are subjects in American universities. The emphasis is usually about how terrible the results are.

Was the Shah really wasting money on that kind of education or did they go on their own?

Or they were here on scholarships, I guess.

How could openly-hostile anti-Western people do what they did in the "Land of the Brave" moreover at American universities during the height of the Cold War?

The 1970s were not "the height of the Cold War" domestically. I don't think we were afflicted by either the madness of 1950s McCarthyism or today's "political correctness".

I am very well-versed about the ideology of the Iranian Mullah's (Willayat al-Faqih) and I have read material about it in Arabic and I am familiar with religious Shia channels who support their ideology. I understand their nature perfectly.

They never talked about that stuff. (When I asked one how he could be sure to succeed rather than their subjects rising up to toss them out he just laughed rather than explain their ideology.)

You do not need to read 100's of books you just have to study how the majority in a given country behave like and their dominating political discourse to understand them. It's not really that difficult. A shame that Western decision makers, even to this day, exemplified by the Obama administration, are so woeful on this front.

They are letting their political ideology blind them to the facts. Broadly speaking, they can be classified as secular determinists who think all human reactions to given stimuli are fixed and don't depend on historical conditioning, so they don't bother to study as you do.

What should the Palestinians do to deserve their own state according to yourself?

Change their minds.

Lastly what are the faults of Israeli policies vis-á-vis Palestinians or do you even recognize any faults at all?

The Zionists are, perhaps, excessively merciful to their declared enemies. They are certainly too trusting of their declared friends.

...do you even recognize any faults at all? It frankly does not seem to be the case and that makes peace extremely difficult. I think that you realize this yourself.

The current Arab/Muslim ideological theme is peace upon the elimination of Israel and its Jews. That's a non-starter.

The Arab/Muslim dream of genocidal conquest has to die before there can be peace. It can't come soon enough: it has proved too late for the Syrians, for their state-supported decades-long Jew-hatred has turned upon itself and metastasized into cancerous self-destruction.

Why don't you name some of those 'leaders' you used to ride the metro bus with? You know, I'm very interested to know their names.

Didn't get names. One of them looked remarkably like a young Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but he was never in Washington. Why not you look up the bios of some of the Iranian revolutionaries yourself? Search for those who boast of being in D.C. in their attempts to wrest control of the Islamic Center from "Sunni domination". Those guys.

 

[Serpentine]

Anyway since you are here, will you agree with me, that Arab-Iranian hostilities (which generally are blown out of proportion and history is often distorted on both sides when they are discussed) were nowhere near as bad (if bad at all) prior to 1979?

You were from Bushehr Province if I am not wrong? From my information about that province and by judging by geography alone, that region of Iran had close ties with Arabs living in nearby Southern Iraq and Eastern Arabia. I am sure that there have been mutual influences when it comes to cuisine, music, language, trade ties and human interactions in the form of mutual settlements. I know from the few Iranians that I know in the GCC and West (yes, I do have Iranians friends and colleagues), some are from Southern Iran, that the common ties are much greater than both sides want to admit.

Indeed, things got much worse. Relations could and can be much better, which seems that's not on agenda at all. Yes I'm from Bushehr (born there, but originally from Khuzestan) and people there have naturally more interaction with their southern neighbors and there is also a sizable Arabic speaking population there which helps it even more.

 

[Bilad al-Haramayn]

Sunni-Shia split? I suppose Timur doesn't count...

What is "good to believe" about it? Of course Nazism and Communism are subjects in American universities. The emphasis is usually about how terrible the results are.

Or they were here on scholarships, I guess.

The 1970s were not "the height of the Cold War" domestically. I don't think we were afflicted by either the madness of 1950s McCarthyism or today's "political correctness".

They never talked about that stuff. (When I asked one how he could be sure to succeed rather than their subjects rising up to toss them out he just laughed rather than explain their ideology.)

They are letting their political ideology blind them to the facts. Broadly speaking, they can be classified as secular determinists who think all human reactions to given stimuli are fixed and don't depend on historical conditioning, so they don't bother to study as you do.

Change their minds.

The Zionists are, perhaps, excessively merciful to their declared enemies. They are certainly too trusting of their declared friends.

The current Arab/Muslim ideological theme is peace upon the elimination of Israel and its Jews. That's a non-starter.

The Arab/Muslim dream of genocidal conquest has to die before there can be peace. It can't come soon enough: it has proved too late for the Syrians, for their state-supported decades-long Jew-hatred has turned upon itself and metastasized into cancerous self-destruction.

Didn't get names. One of them looked remarkably like a young Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but he was never in Washington. Why not you look up the bios of some of the Iranian revolutionaries yourself? Search for those who boast of being in D.C. in their attempts to wrest control of the Islamic Center from "Sunni domination". Those guys.

With all due respect, I believe that you do not understand the fundamental nature of the Sunni-Shia split. Many non-Muslim observers do not so I do not blame you. Let me just say that I had nothing to do with Iranians or any other non-Arab people. It was an internal Arab political struggle, or rather fight for power, between two fractions within Islam. The core of the fight was about who should lead the Muslim community after the death of Prophet Muhammad (saws) in 632.

Iranians followed different sects within Sunni Islam (there was always a Shia minority though) in the majority from the Arab Muslim Conquest until the Safavid takeover almost 1000 years later. Shah Ismail I changed that though for mostly geopolitical reasons as the main foe of the Safavids back then were the Sunni-dominated Ottomans. In fact Shia Arab clergy from Southern Lebanon, Southern Iran and Eastern Arabia (to a smaller degree Yemen) helped change that.

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

Timur who was of Mongol paternal origin (Barlas tribe) was neither an Iranian nor an Arab so I don't think that he counts.

So they were students of political science? Of course I know that people study such subjects, I have studied in the US myself, but your initial post made it sound like they solely studied those two subjects which sounds absurd.

Ok. You are right it was not the height of the Cold War (don't know why I wrote it, however it sounded nice in that context) but it was nevertheless during the Cold War.

That might be the case. However I prefer to look at all factors rather than to dismiss some. One should always look at the wider picture because most issues here in life are quite complex.

Goes for both Palestinians and Israelis. For a status quo to change you need to change yourself. Are Zionists (Israeli nationalists) willing to do that? Nothing points to that being the case.

That's just ridiculous. So the only problem that you see is the decision makers being to merciless? So you would rather prefer Gaza to be annexed along with the West Bank and for any resistance, even peaceful social and political resistance, to be mercilessly combated?

Nasser died almost 50 years ago. Saddam's rule ended almost 15 years ago. Nobody, in any Arab country, is being taught to exterminate Jews. However yes, Zionism is looked at negatively and solidarity and support is given for the Palestinians and we interpret events much differently than the Zionists in Israel do. Most Arabs, outside of Palestinians and Southern Lebanese, have many, many other things to focus on and worry about than Israel nowadays. Believe me when I tell you this.

But if you want me to tell you that Israel and Israeli state policy is well-liked in the Arab world and that Arabs support your views then sure you will remain disappointed.

But know one thing, it was not the Arabs who committed Holocaust or hundreds of other pogroms and massacres. It were the same Europeans who now fully support you due to a sense of guilt. Germany is a perfect example of this. Palestinians and Arabs paid a price for something we had nothing to do with all while Jews lived better in the Arab world than anywhere else and more Jews lived among us than anywhere else excluding Eastern Europe. That's the greatest irony here.

To begin with I don't recall Arabs committing any ethnic genocide or large-scale massacres on any people in history. I am not counting wars here and expansionism which all people with an imperial past (Arabs, Iranians, Turks, Brits, French, Germans, Spaniards, Portuguese, Chinese etc.) engaged plenty in throughout history.

Indeed, things got much worse. Relations could and can be much better, which seems that's not on agenda at all. Yes I'm from Bushehr (born there, but originally from Khuzestan) and people there have naturally more interaction with their southern neighbors and there is also a sizable Arabic speaking population there which helps it even more.

It would be a very good thing for both parties and the overall region if things improved. It's fair to say that there is a need for that to occur.