I will respond to your deliberate twisting of my words and large posts when I have time to read it.
Be patient for now.
Today, does İran have ties with Serbia? Did Iran vote AGAINST Kosovo? If yes, then an apology is in order.
Your propaganda has failed to convince anyone except those who already believed it.
Calling someone a troll is not going to help your cause and next time you will be reported.
That's all way out of place.
Deliberate twisting of words? And what do you call this:
Their main points:
1. Turk are evil
I never claimed this. Here you put words into other people's mouths.
You qualified as "propaganda" a post of mine in which I countered another user's contentions with documented references to established historic events such as the Iranian-Portuguese and Iranian-Russian wars:
No use reading the long-winded propaganda posts.
By contrast, the aforegone commentary which included several glaring and unsubstantiated historic inaccuracies was praised by you as a "great post":
There is really no point rationally arguing with Most Torks....they are too ignorant of facts and lack any logic.... The Torks want to claim the glory of Ottomans, but want to ignore that fact that the Ottomans hated Torks and openly called them dumb donkies. Now this Turd is saying that the...
defence.pk
Now, dismissing accurate citing of elementary historic fact as "propaganda" (that dismissal was repeated a second time in the relevant quote reproduced above) and praising evident factual errors as "great posting" with no regard whatsoever for the presented evidence, can pretty much be considered to be falling under the definition of trolling. Report this if you believe it violates forum rules.
You can hardly use unfairly dismissive vocabulary and when criticized for it, plead semantic ambiguity or claim that you were referring to some other content.
Furthermore you have been challenged to provide evidence for several claims you kept repeating, such as that:
- Iran has a special relationship with Serbia against Muslims. Knowing that Iran was the staunchest supporter of Bosnian Muslims against Serbian forces, this accusation formulated the way you do appears manipulative. When shown evidence of Iranian implication in favor of Bosnians from a variety of sources (including non-Iranian ones), your reaction was to say "I'm not interested in Iranian propaganda":
Well, I just showed you material which tends to document that the number of Azaris loyal to Iran and to the Islamic Republic is significantly greater than the amount of ethnicist Azaris. This means that should some conflict of interests arise between Iran and the Republic of Azarbaijan (and you...
defence.pk
My previous post to you in that thread had been the following (entirely focused on Bosnia):
Your cult regime will do anything to spread twelver cultism and at same time they invite and beg Russians to come bomb and murder Syrians in Syria. Or beg Americans to bomb Iraqis in Fallujah and Mosul. And recently sending their proxies to murder journalists and activists in Iraq. No one cares...
defence.pk
When Bosnian users entered the fray and debunked accusations against Iran, you operated a reversal and for the first time claimed that it wasn't the Bosnian civil war you had in mind. Yet,
considering the above two links, that claim can't be considered as valid. For those two links show how you reacted to evidence of Iranian involvement in the Bosnian civil war by labeling that evidence as "Iranian propaganda".
- That Iran was not backing Aran during the early phase of the 1990's Karabakh war.
- That Iran is currently lending support to Armenia's war effort.
- That president Assad of Syria has publicly declared himself to be an atheist.
Whenever you were challenged to provide evidence for these claims, you dodged the requests and later on reiterated the same accusations with twice the intensity elsewhere, possibly in an attempt to provoke.
I'd advise to rethink this method.
Iranians(including regime supporters) and Israelis(including Likud supporters) do not want to fight each other.
They are already at war against each other.
are instead competing in the region over influence along with Turkey
These aren't mutually exclusive propositions. I would replace "instead" with "simultaneously" here.
you might as well give up on trying to convince people on PDF that there is a existential struggle between Iran and Israel. Because there isn't.
There clearly is. I don't understand the insistence on denying it.
The whole we are more anti-Israel than you thing in the ME is mostly used to one up each other in the competition for influence between the states in the region.
In certain cases it might be so, when talking about Iran it isn't though. It reflects reality.
Tell me about the instances Iran and Israel have clashed with each other?
Any instances where the USA and the USSR clashed with one another?
They will do no more than check each other and are in not some kind of existential struggle against one other which is what I'm arguing. You regime likes to propagate that notion for populist propaganda reasons.
So the US and the USSR did no more than check each other, as evidenced by the fact that their forces virtually never clashed in a direct manner, but always through proxies and secondary means (intelligence operations, sabotage, economic warfare, psy-ops, propaganda, diplomacy etc)?
They were not engaged in some kind of an existential struggle against each other, notwithstanding the absence of direct exchanges of fire between their two militaries?
Their Cold War did not result in one side being totally wiped off the political map?
Did claims about the existential nature of their mutual enmity amount to regime propaganda on either side?
Your sanctions are mostly for your own nuclear program.
A suitable pretext for the zionist-controlled US regime to sanction Iran for resisting their hegemony.
Going by the sole technical criteria invoked to sanction Iran under the nuclear pretext, many others (like South Korea and...) ought to have been subjected to a similar sanctions regime, but they weren't.
Your country is not the only one sanctioned for support of what they deem 'terrorist organizations'. Libya, Iraq(under Saddam), Syria, and Sudan are some examples and they are not to be considered in an 'existential struggle' with Israel.
Well, those are interesting examples. Because one by one, these nations
were actually subjected to war, destroyed and balkanized as per Isra"el"i injunction, at the hands of Tel Aviv's American and European henchmen in conjunction with their regional allies. That's pretty much the outcome of an existential type of enmity by Tel Aviv against each one of these nation-states.
The governments of these countries used to be demonized at one point or another by Isra"el"i officials and by zionist-dominated mainstream media, much like the Islamic Republic of Iran is being demonized by the same entities. However in Iran's case, the demonization has been much more massive, consistent, intensive and continual since 1979. That is another indicator of what their plan for Iran is. Iran being a far bigger piece than the aforementioned ones however, it's just that they're having a much harder time reaching their goals.
