Iran and Saudi Arabia reportedly agree to resume diplomatic ties and re-open embassies within two months

[El Sidd]

Good luck China

 

[Corruptistan]

Guys please ignore @Corruptistan and just report him as much as you can , he is one sided troll

Yes, I am such a troll that I am having a conversation with @Jango (moderator) over several pages where we are mostly in agreement.

Try to act your age rather than posts like that. Argue why you disagree with my supposed trolling, rather than one-liners that are good for nothing in a discussion.

Tell me where I am wrong. Educate me. I would give you credit for that rather than posts like that.

Maybe I was too harsh in my criticism of the Iranian regime (Mullahs in power) and if somebody was offended by that I can only apologize, although I think it is absurd, that I am supposed to apologize for personal opinions and my own personal experiences and interactions and what I have seen online for years. But anyway I just did, I wonder if those that insulted me, make numerous fake accusations against me etc. are going to apologize? I don't believe that, it does not matter and I do not care, but no need for me to state the obvious here.

 

[mike2000 is back]

As the Israeli-American-Jewish-Zionist-Half-German-Half Black Najd-Russian agent that I am, obviously untrue, only one-liners singing the praises of this agreement before any concrete results have emerged and blind faith/worship of the Iranian Mullah's who have never contributed to unrest anywhere in the Arab world nor meddled in internal Arab matters. No, that is only the work of the Western empire of evil.



Anyway luckily for KSA they have a great track record of shooting down Houthi missile and drones and one of the best air defenses in the world that keeps improving all the time and is very battle-hardened.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1406416055052943360

Latest addition as per the rumors will be South Korean and more Chinese systems.

But that is what I am writing, you are shaking hands, signing new agreements, peace deals, rapprochement,, and a few days later you or your partners are catching fishing boats full of weapons intended for the Houthis in Yemen.

Well, to be honest, it is hard for Iran to let go if its proxies and leverage it has over the unstable countries in the Arab world, especially ones that Saudi Arabia considers in its sphere of influence, since Saudis Arabia is still a leader of the Arab world and even more so the centre of Islam globally and KSA has the financial clout to back it up and support its allies. So Saudi Arabia automatically has alot of influence without even having to try too much.
By contrast Iran has to appeal using its own Shia muslims influence to gain some influence and leverage over those countries. This is necessary for Iran to extend her own influence in the region. Else it wil be very hard for them to do so. And to be honest, Iran is already too deeply involved with these shia/militant/rebel groups to suddenly detached itself from them, especially after trying hard to build up these proxiesfir decades. Its difficult for me to see them to so. So, that's why i don't think this agreement will change anything. I think the only difference it will make is that it MIGHT make Iran support its proxies much more secretly compared to now where they have been doing so openly(even attacking Saudi oil facilities directly with drones). So I expect them to be more discreet going forward. So can't blame Iran much as well, afterall they have to also keep protecting and furthering their own influence in the region.

 

[Corruptistan]

Well, to be honest, it is hard for Iran to let go if its proxies and leverage it has over the countries in the Arab world, especially ones that Saudi Arabia considers in its sphere of influence, since Saudis Arabia is still a leader of the Arab world and even more so the centre of Islam globally and KSA has rhe financial clout to back it up and support its allies. So Saudi Arabia automatically has alot of influence without even having to try too much.
By contrast Iran has to appeal to its own Shia muslims influence to gain some influence and leverage over those countries. This is necessary for Iran to extend her own influence in the region. Else it wil be very hard for them to do so. And to be honest, Iran is already too deeply involved with these shia/militant/rebel groups to suddenly detached itself . Its difficult for me to see them to so. So i dont think this agreement will change anything. I think the only difference it will make is make Iran support its proxies much more secretly compared to now where they have been doing so openly(even attacking Saudi oil facilities directly with drones). So I expext them to be more discreet going forward. So can't blame Iran much as well, afterall they have to also keep protecting and furthering their on influence in the region.

I have been saying this for ages, if Arabs fixed their internal problems, say a notoriously badly-ruled Yemen (waste of potential) was not engaging in silly internal conflicts, no outsiders, let alone at most a regional power like Iran (non-Arab at that too thus naturally much less connection and influence) could have used local unrest to create further unrest by supporting groups/proxies whatever. I blame Arab regimes and Arab societies for allowing that, not only when it comes to Iranian influence but other foreign harmful one. I guess this is the problem when you are 20 + independent states all with their own policies, agendas, internal fights/competition etc. Easier for 1 foreign party to cause further divisions and use opportunities such as unrest/instability to gain influence.

I mean there is a reason why Iran has zero influence in non-unstable Arab countries, say like Morocco, KSA, Egypt, Algeria, GCC, Jordan and what not. You get the memo.

I agree, Iran (Mullah's) have done well since 1979 by replacing Inward looking and limited Iranian nationalism and adopting pan-Islamism with a Shia cloak (trying to create a picture of a Shia guardian) and create loyal Iranian proxies in the region. Easier when there are no Shia competitors after all. The only other Shia majority country (Azerbaijan) is a post-communistic small country ruled by a secular dictator with zero interest in Shia pan-Islamism. Not the case among the Sunni majority countries, there you have several regional leaders from as far as Indonesia (in their sphere of influence), Pakistan, Bangladesh and what not, all with different agendas.

I mean they are not stupid, you don't rule for 43 years if you are that. Neither the House of Saud and their, what, 300 year old track record by now?

Anyway we will have to se what will happen, I am personally quite curious although not overly optimistic based on history and what I have seen in recent times.

The opportunities in a KSA-Iran (genuine partnership) are frankly enormous, nobody can deny that, therefore I am not going to do it either..

 

[Mustang125]

In my eyes, there is a Saudi/Arab shill lol I could care less for Iranians or saudis but don’t lie to yourself atleast. Just to reiterate one thing, Hazrat Salman was a sahaba of Iranian origin and some arabs during the Holy prophets (PBUH) time used to dislike him because of him not being Arab. Guess what? He turned out to be one of the greatest Sahabas for the Holy prophet(PBUH). So islam does not
Look at race or ethnicity for being a good Muslim. So GTFOH here with this bullshit and stop lying to yourself while being shah se ziada shah ke wafadaar. You guys ain’t fooling anybody.

In my eyes, there is a Saudi/Arab shill lol I could care less for Iranians or saudis but don’t lie to yourself atleast. Just to reiterate one thing, Hazrat Salman was a sahaba of Iranian origin and some arabs during the Holy prophets (PBUH) time used to dislike him because of him not being Arab. Guess what? He turned out to be one of the greatest Sahabas for the Holy prophet(PBUH). So islam does not
Look at race or ethnicity for being a good Muslim. So GTFOH here with this bullshit and stop lying to yourself while being shah se ziada shah ke wafadaar. You guys ain’t fooling anybody.

I am a Shia of the holy prophet and imam Ali and proudly I am. I have seen so much hate for Shias that some member said we are worse then Jews. Lol. Guess what you forget that we are MUSLIMS. So what if there is a disagreement on the successor ship of the prophet (PBHUH)? I don’t bitch at anybody for saying the person who I think should be first is 4th lol. If this is the case with PDF and this blatant abuse continues then I will not think twice before leaving this platform. Allah (SWT) sab ko hidayat de.

 

[ThunderCat]

You are either incredibly naive or just an Iranian shill, probably both.

I cannot state for sure if he is German. I've never encountered him before. But I have seen Iranians posing as Germans on white nationalist forums. One was posting as an Englishman.

I got nothing against Iranian people, except certain kinds. The regime is one of those that I hate. Likewise for Saudis.

I hate the Wahabbi monarchy and their barbaric laws. But the Iranian regime does not make things easier.

 

[mike2000 is back]

I agree, Iran (Mullah's) have done well since 1979 by replacing Inward looking and limited Iranian nationalism and adopting pan-Islamism with a Shia cloak (trying to create a picture of a Shia guardian) and create loyal Iranian proxies in the region.

Agree completely on this one. Iran during the Shah period was much more limited and inward looking. Since nationalist Iran of the shah era didnt have any persian takers regionally, so they couldn't use that to influence Arab states(who are all fervent islamic by nature). So the Islamic revolution of 1979 and the mullah hijacking the revolution actually helped shaped Iran's foreign policy to be much more aggresssive in expansion and exporting their version of Islam and influence thereafter. The shah by contrast never really engaged in such endeavours, I guess that was the reason why there wasnt much sectarian issues and fight for influence with KSA and other Arab countries in the region back then, if anything there was no issues between both sides.
In terms of gaining influence, leverage and proxies over neighbouring states in the region i will say the Mullahs have done a far better than the shah nationalistic Iran. So it depends on which angle we look at it. Some will argue that the Islamic revolution and rise of the Mullahs was the start of instability, wars and sectarian conflicts of influence in the region as well, depends on which angle we look at it.

 

[etylo]

Exactly which is why I found his post (as a Chinese) very strange. The petrodollar is just a small sidetone in comparison.

Even more absurd when the same US and China are the two biggest trade partners in the entire world.

We are not even talking about a fight of ideology here. Compare it to the almost non-existent ties between the US/West and USSR.

The Chinese (at least many of them) want to replace the US as the main sheriff but they don't have the courage (so far) to actually attempt to change status quo. Normal as they are still behind the US militarily speaking. Nor do I honestly believe that the Chinese will ever have the same global outreach as the US culturally and linguistically or even in terms of military bases and potential allies (that matter).

I am saying this as a pro-China person overall.

No, Chinese dont want to be world sheriff, you got it all wrong as in some other things about China in your comments, you obviously have a bias against China.

 

[mike2000 is back]

I have been saying this for ages, if Arabs fixed their internal problems, say a notoriously badly-ruled Yemen (waste of potential) was not engaging in silly internal conflicts, no outsiders, let alone at most a regional power like Iran (non-Arab at that too thus naturally much less connection and influence) could have used local unrest to create further unrest by supporting groups/proxies whatever. I blame Arab regimes and Arab societies for allowing that, not only when it comes to Iranian influence but other foreign harmful one. I guess this is the problem when you are 20 + independent states all with their own policies, agendas, internal fights/competition etc. Easier for 1 foreign party to cause further divisions and use opportunities such as unrest/instability to gain

Of course, i think thats common sense. Lol its normal that Iran has been able to permeate/influence only unstable Arab states and those countries who are unstable or weak central government in the region (Like Afghanistan and even Pakistan to a lesser extent) unlike other stable Arab countries where they barely have any footing/influence.
Its normal since instability and a weak government creates a vaccum for foriegn powers to easily get involved and to create their own interests groups and even proxies. Its not only Iran in unstable Arab and neighbouring states, it's also the case for any other region or country. Instability and weak central government means others will easily exploit that for their own interests. Can't blame Iran for that. Can only blame those incompetent Arab, middle Eastern and south Asian countries.
Just look at how foriegn powers(UK, France, Germany, Russia , Japan etc) where involved in carving out China in their own sphere of influence when the Qing government was weak, corrupt and facing uprisings/instability and later collapsed. That's how reality works

 

[Corruptistan]

No, Chinese dont want to be world sheriff, you got it all wrong as in some other things.

That is your opinion. Nor did I write anything about China wanting to be the world sheriff. In fact the opposite due to the insular culture (historically too China was mostly an insular looking entity mostly limited to the East Asian sphere of influence) of Chinese and negligent Chinese cultural impact outside of the immediate neighborhood (East Asia) compared to the global Western outreach. For instance the entire so-called "New world" (North and South America) is a Western creation by large. That is also why we two are communicating in English and not Mandarin.

As for China wanting to equal or overtake the US in terms of military, economic power and political clout, you must be either extremely naive to think otherwise or a rare Chinese nationalist.

As for them being able to be what the US has been since WW2, I doubt that for the reasons that I stated above.

 

[Corruptistan]

Of course, i think thats common sense. Lol its normal that Iran has been able to permeate/influence only unstable Arab states and those countries who are unstable in the region (Lile Afghanistan and even Pakistan to a lesser extent) unlike ither stable Arab countries where they barely have any footing/influence.
Its normal since instability and a weak government creates a vaccum for foriegn powers to easily get involved and to create their own interests groups and even proxies. Its not only Iran in unstable Arab and neighbouring states, it's also the case for any other region or country. Instability and weak central government mezns others will easily exploit that for their own interests. Can't blame Iran for that. Can only blame those incompetent Arab, middle Eastern and south Asian countries.
Just look at how foriegn powers where involved in carving out China in sphère of influence when the Qing government was weak, corrupt and facing uprisings/instability and later collapsed. That's how reality works

Fully agree. Same thing the Westerners/Russia did against Iran prior to the Arabs. See the territorial differences.

Same reason why the Brits supported the existence of all those smaller GCC states when the House of Saud were about to conquer them all. Same with Transjordan (later Jordan). We all remember the Ikhwan Raids and one of the first uses of the British Air Force abroad.

That and broken British promises after the successful Arab Revolt. There are so many examples of similar stories across the world.

Internal weakness are mostly often taken advantage of by regional adversaries, the normal modus operandi of national states and humans since time immortal.

It is after all a dog-eat-dog world.

 

[etylo]

That is your opinion. Nor did I write anything about China wanting to be the world sheriff. In fact the opposite due to the insular culture (historically too China was mostly an insular looking entity mostly limited to the East Asian sphere of influence) of Chinese and negligent Chinese cultural impact outside of the immediate neighborhood (East Asia) compared to the global Western outreach. For instance the entire so-called "New world" (North and South America) is a Western creation by large. That is also why we too are communicating in English and not Mandarin.

As for China wanting to equal or overtake the US in terms of military, economic power and political clout, you must be either extremely naive to think otherwise or a rare Chinese nationalist.

As for them being able to be what the US has been since WW2, I doubt that for the reasons that I stated above.

Its only you think China wants to outpace US in military and world politics as the new world hegemon, at least not in the near distant future, maybe never will. Its your own words that "Chinese want to be the main sherrif", go read your previous post. And when did I say the modern world is not created and dominated by the West, but by China ? Dont talk nonsense.

Your words:

The Chinese (at least many of them) want to replace the US as the main sheriff but they don't have the courage (so far) to actually attempt to change status quo

 

[Corruptistan]

Its only you think China wants to outpace US in military and world politics as the new world hegemon, at least not in the near distant future, probably never will. Its your own words that "Chinese want to be the main sherrif", go read your previous post. And when did I say the modern world is not created and dominated by the West, but by China ? Dont talk nonsense.

Your words:

The Chinese (at least many of them) want to replace the US as the main sheriff but they don't have the courage (so far) to actually attempt to change status quo

I never wrote anywhere, in this thread or elsewhere, that China wants to replace the US as the global policeman or sherif or whatever you call it. I wrote that some CHINESE people want that to be the case. Learn the difference between what individual Chinese nationalists online are saying or writing and China as a country/government/regime.

Firstly it is not in the nature of the Chinese civilization for the reasons that I stated and secondly China is incapable of having such a wide reach as the US for the reasons that I also wrote. This is my opinion at least.

As far as me thinking that China wants to overtake the military, economic and political influence of the US, is not necessarily the same thing as me thinking that China wants to be or can be the global sheriff.

You can be the largest economy of the world and the strongest military power on paper and being insular by large rather than seeking global dominance like the US has sought since WW2.

Who wrote that you are thinking anything about the West? You are the one that is putting words in my mouth that I have not uttered.

 

[Corruptistan]

I cannot state for sure if he is German. I've never encountered him before. But I have seen Iranians posing as Germans on white nationalist forums. One was posting as an Englishman.

I got nothing against Iranian people, except certain kinds. The regime is one of those that I hate. Likewise for Saudis.

I hate the Wahabbi monarchy and their barbaric laws. But the Iranian regime does not make things easier.

You know what is the problem with this forum? Every criticism of Iran (read Iranian Mullah policies nobody is ever blaming the average Iranian or Iran as an historical entity or nation state) is given 100 different labels by the same horde of Mullah trolls who are more Mullah than the Supreme Ayatollah. Almost all of them are exclusively based in the West as well. You cannot make it up.

KSA has far better/less conservative laws than Iran, especially nowadays. Not even close.

Even a Christian Assyrian Iranian admits it openly in videos such as this one:

KSA (rulers) are a far more sane entity than Iran since 1979 which is also why Iran is the pariah state (in comparison) to KSA. Living standards, infrastructure etc. also lightyears apart from each other.

I will admit one thing though, Iranian propaganda is 100 times more effective than KSA one.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

This is interesting, the American administrations are wanting to isolate iran and create a division between Iran and gulf countries whereas the Chinese trying to bring them together.

Ofcourse, this is a clear win for Iran. Why a win for Iran: Iran is sanctioned and under pressure and by accepting the Chinese mediation Iran hit two (or three) birds with one stone:
1. Restarting ties with some Arab countries
2. Reducing US Influence
3. Lastly maybe agreed on background: expanding banking, trade ties with China, Trade agreements with the region, becoming member of BRICS.