Iranian Chill Thread
- Thread starter SOHEIL
- Start date
SalarHaqq
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2019
- Messages
- 4,569
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
First, there is no evidence that Chinese travellers to Iran were infected with the Covid-19 virus.
Second, how exactly did "China" (as in "Chinese government") send anyone to Iran? The government is not to be confused with individual travellers. It would be totally absurd to suggest Beijing sought to spread the virus to Iran. China has no reason whatsoever for doing so.
By contrast, a German man was reportedly arrested after spitting around in Tehran Metro stations. That, if true, is far more suspicious than anything coming from China.
Third, patient zero in Qom, the first Iranian city to be affected was determined to be an Iranian trader returning from China and not a Chinese citizen.
Fourth, all of this cannot have any bearing on one's appreciation of Iran-China relations, since the coronavirus spread worldwide. It's not something specific to Iran at all, nor would Iran have been exempt had it had no relations with China at all. Viruses do not spread according to the depth of bilateral relations between governments. Please, let's not stoop to random ramblings replete with sinophobic prejudice in the manner of trumpist rednecks.
No such thing has happened. Striking mutually beneficial economic and security cooperation deals on equal standing does not constitute "blind" support. And support for what, exactly? The US regime and Isra"el" are Iran's main geopolitical adversaries, therefore enhanced cooperation with a major world power itself increasingly targetted by the US and with whom Iran has no particular conflict of interests is perfectly sound and logical.
That's because the liberal Rohani administration had a free hand to operate according to its own designs until the JCPoA miserably failed. Revolutionary factions never had a problem with establishing normal ties with China.
Baseless generic claim. One cannot see how such a thing is supposed to have occurred.
There is nothing to suggest such a development. The Iranian-Chinese draft agreement talked about these days does not in any way confer "vassal" status to Iran.
Relations between Iran and China are entirely incomparable with Pahlavi-era Iran-US relations, the latter representing an actual textbook case of political servitude.
- China has not been involved in creating key Iranian security agecies like the US, UK and Isra"el" had been before the Islamic Revolution. I must remind readers once again since this is of crucial importance: Tel Aviv, Washington and London set up the shah's powerful SAVAK intelligence service, each of whose bureaus was established under the supervision of one of the aforementioned foreign powers, while its personnel were trained from the outset by said powers. This is no trivial matter, as such a role granted to powers known for their imperialist policy comes with strings attached, namely decisive influence exerted by these imperialist entities over one's security apparatus no less. We'e never had any equivalent to this in the relationship between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the People's Republic of China.
- Neither is there any equivalent to the capitulation status agreed to by the shah, as a consequence of which every US citizen (and not just American diplomats and consular employees as is normally the case) enjoyed immunity from judicial prosecution on Iranian soil, regardless of whether or not they committed some criminal offense. The Islamic Republic never accepted and will never accept such humiliating terms, nor will it acquiesce to such abandonment of national sovereignty vis a vis any other state, be it China or whoever else.
- There is no Chinese equivalent to the 30,000-40,000 US military personnel stationed in Iran prior to the Islamic Revolution.
- There is no equivalent to Pahlavi Iran's total dependence on the west in the realm of weapons procurement. Back then Iran did not have any self-sufficient arms industry to speak of, now it does.
- Chinese companies are not granted privileges comparable to those enjoyed by western oil giants under the shah following the CIA-sponsored 1953 coup d'Etat, when said western companies were given rights in the distribution and sale of Iranian oil.
- Key sectors of Iran's economy are no longer owned by individuals linked to foreign regimes or to international oligarchic networks (like the Pasals, Yazdanis and Elghanians before the Islamic Revolution). No person linked to China has any influence on Iranian media.
- China has no hand in domestic Iranian politics nor is there an organized pro-Chinese lobby in Iran. No person linked to China is in charge of policy making. This is entirely different from the Pahlavi era, when a Court Minister like Assadollah Alam was a known British asset while a Prime Minister, Amir-Abbas Hoveida was connected to the zionist/globalist Haifan Bahai organization based in Isra"el".
Simply put, there is no comparison at all. And to label contemporary Iran a Chinese (or Russian, as anti-Iran media alternatively like to do as well) "vassal" could not be farther from the truth.
Another unsubstantiated blanket statement. One truly wonders what the poster is referring to, as one cannot think of any occasion where Iran put Chinese interests above its own.
This is a typical and major disinformation item spread by foreign-based Persian language media funded by powers hostile to Iran. It was amply debunked already by alert observers. In fact a simple survey of freely available flight information data will prove those reports plain wrong.
Then again, many will refrain from questioning news spread by western- and zionist-controlled media, choosing to believe their claims without having made the effort to verify by themselves, despite the fact that in many cases autonomous verification will quickly expose such manipulations of public opinion.
Watch this:
The fact of the matter is that very few countries stopped all flights to China altogether and certainly not for prolonged periods. Those who did, hardly gained anything from it in terms of coronavirus prevention.
Italy Banned Flights From China Before America - It Didn't Work
People tend not to realize what it means to interrupt every flight on such super-busy, economically vital routes.
Likewise, many do not realize how small the number of flights linking Iran to China actually was and is. Tehran's Imam Khomeini airport, the Iranian capital's international hub, was used by just under 9 million passengers a year in 2019. That is, to put it mildly, nothing in international comparison. For instance, some 90 million passengers a year were accomodated by Dubai's airport prior to the coronavirus crisis, the figure for London's Heathrow is 80 million (and that's not counting the other international airports of London), above 50 million for the new airport in Istanbul, no less than 25 million for an average European one like Brussels.
Correspondingly, flights from Iran to China were and are much fewer in numbers than flights between China and other countries comparable to Iran.
So while the BBC, VoA, Manoto and Saudi International were busy disinforming clueless Iranian viewers about how "evil mullahs" supposedly "refused to block flights from China, resulting in the spread of Covid-19 into Iran", the UK, the US, Saudi Arabia and EU countries themselves were hosting many more flights from China than Iranian airports ever did.
There's no genocide going on in Xinjiang. A relatively heavy handed approach involving detention of anyone with suspected sympathies for separatist and terrorist ideas or groups, yes, but no wholesome indiscriminate targetting of people due to their sole ethno-linguistic or religious affiliations. The sources claiming otherwise are the same ones who allege "deliberate mass murder of civilians" by the Syrian government etc.
I don't see any trend that would be a cause for concern when it comes to influence over one another. As detailed above (see beginning of post if interested).
Unlike China, the US regime is completely dominated by zionism. Unlike China, the US regime has been a masonic construct from the start and as such, it obeys masonic principles and pursues masonic goals.
These goals entail the establishment of a unified one-world government, which in turn implies the gradual dissolution of every nation including Iran into this new whole.
So if anyone is even remotely concerned about Iran, they can't advocate participation in a zio-American-led world order. Resistance against zio-American and global oligarchic designs is the only option, the only way forward if one does not wish to see Iran vanish from the pages of civilizational history and geography.
Forget about Palestinians for a second: this is about countering the designs of an entity invested by a globalist oligarchy whose relentlessly pursued goal is to dissolve not just Iran but every nation-state. It is an inevitable existential fight, not one of choice.
Then, what Palestinians are we referring to here? Palestinians constitute a plural polity like any other. It was the PLO, not every Palestinian per se, which sided with Saddam. And Iran responded to this by ceasing to offer the PLO her valuable assistance, assistance that later went to Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad instead.
As for the generalizations about this or that people "not being able to stand Palestinians", this not just a dubious kind of statement by its very nature, it is irrelevant to any serious geopolitical discussion.
Iranians don't have it that much worse than others on the material level, and generally speaking they are arguably in a much better position even because at least they will retain their sovereignty and their civilizational particularity as long as the Islamic Republic keeps resisting zionism and the global criminal oligarchy.
China already enjoys so much military power that if it desired to, it could embark on oppressive imperialist policies at a far from insignificant scale, yet unlike the US and zionist regimes we are not seeing such behaviour from China.
Enough of these fictitious hypotheticals already. China is not engaging in such policies towards Iran. And there is no reason to believe it would. Should it ever proceed to do so, Iran will consequently adapt its response. In the meantime nothing will be lost cooperating on equal footing with Beijing.
At this point the commenting has reached a consternating mix of fictive storytelling and random sinophobic ranting interspersed with logically faulty deduction. I doubt further comments are needed.
Last edited:
QWECXZ
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2010
- Messages
- 3,150
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
آخه نظر یه کسخل که مسیر آشپزخونه رو گم کرده نشسته پای اخبار سیاسی ربان زرد گذاشته ارزش بررسی داره؟
Ich
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2018
- Messages
- 2,541
- Reaction score
- -26
- Country
- Location
If true, Iran has to put him in jail for some years. Such idiots only learn respect by the hard way.
Duh!
- Importing sunnis from the peninsula to the gulf area to change the demographics. (Gulf Arabs used to be mainly Shia and loyal to Persia)
- The mass starvation/famine/genocide of 1917
- occupying us during ww2
- Mossadegh
- Forcing Reza Pahlavi to abdicate and installing Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
- Conspiring against Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and instigating mass protest and riots
- Iran Air flight 655
- Pressuring Saddam to Attack us
- Providing satellite coverage over our troops to Saddam
- hiding his use of chemical weapons
I can go on forever
Point is, after 1979, we had the chance to start over again, but we decided to make enemies of the US and we were so damn delusional that we actually thought we could win a war against the US in 1979!
Now we have no international diplomacy, literally every country on earth except for China, Russia (neutral), and Syria + NK (LOL) hates us. We put ourselves in such a position that Mahan had to continue flights to China to show support in the middle of a pandemic. We couldn't afford to criticize China for keeping covid a secret from us.
Anyway, what do you think is going to happen? China is going to somehow win a new cold war over US, EU is going to ditch US for China, then we will reap the benefits? Victory for Iran?
Mithridates
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2019
- Messages
- 2,897
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
bro Persian gulf please...
What do you mean bro? The Gulf Arabs where mainly Shia and loyal to Persia, Brits imported Sunnis to change the demographics so they could control the ports.
Mithridates
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2019
- Messages
- 2,897
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I mean use PG, not merely gulf.
skyshadow
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2017
- Messages
- 5,056
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
QWECXZ
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2010
- Messages
- 3,150
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Have you noticed how similar @mangekyo is to Kastor?
Apparently all of these so-called liberals have no sense of patriotism whatsoever.
Omitting the name Persian was so natural for him that he didn't even understand your comment when you corrected him.
QWECXZ
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2010
- Messages
- 3,150
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Who thought Iran could win a war against the US in 1979?
The embassy crisis was the result of a stupid response to an emotional action by a bunch of students. Honestly, I blame the staff of the US embassy as well. The US embassy had been built in a way that it could resist even a potential invasion of Iran by the Soviet forces. They had a vault in the embassy that could keep them safe for 2 weeks without access to the outside world. The staff of the embassy surrendered to the revolutionary students on their own, not by force. Had they not come out of their vault voluntarily, nobody could've even touched them, let alone taking them hostage.
But I don't think that the US embassy crisis is really our main issue with the US now. Since then, the US embassy has come under violent attacks in Iraq, South Korea and Greece in just recent months. Did the US severe ties with them immediately? No. Also, it's something that happened 41 years ago. The US has an issue with Iran's influence in the region as she sees herself committed to Israel and Saudi Arabia. And we will not give up our regional influence for the US to reestablish their ties with us.
As for Mahan flights to China, I completely disagree with you. Almost all countries that stopped their flights to China were hit with covid-19 as strongly as us, sometimes even much worse than us. United States, Italy, Spain, Britain, France, Brazil and Germany were hit by covid-19 just like us.
I believe that Europe will become less and less relevant to the world order in the coming decades. Emerging powers like Brazil, Turkey, India will be able to take more independent decisions after 2030. China will become strong enough to unilaterally stand against the US. The US will continue to remain a super power for the next decade at least but it will become less powerful than it is today slowly.
Blue In Green
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2016
- Messages
- 2,359
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Well, apparently Iran has positioned its mock-up carrier somewhere in the Persian Gulf (or around there) and will be using it for live-fire drills/training and tests soon.
But other than that it has been pretty slow, almost suspiciously slow.
Sineva
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 24, 2018
- Messages
- 4,657
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Do you genuinely believe that the west would`ve been simply just willing to "start over" with iran after its vassal despot had been overthrown and that irans new government was now going to pursue a policy of non alignment?
You seem to be forgetting that iran was the western appointed "policeman of the gulf", tasked with ensuring the continued flow of oil to the west and as a vital regional bulwark against any possible soviet expansionism in the persian gulf,so the idea that the west would just simply accept a now non aligned iran with its own independent foreign policy is quite literally absurd.Its very clear what would`ve happened,there would`ve been another western backed attempted coup almost certainly from disaffected elements from within the [us trained] pahlaviite military,in fact it would`ve probably been little different to the actual nojeh coup plot,except of course that this particular attempt had no us backing which was probably one of the reasons why it [luckily] failed.
Frankly tho at this point it seems rather foolish in the extreme to play games of "if only..." or "what if..." or "wouldnt it have been nice...",what should be of most concern now is the present reality,and the most painfully obvious part of that reality is that the attempted reengagement with the west that categorized the rouhani era has conclusively utterly failed,and the question naturally enough is what comes after this?,does iran put all of its hopes in a new post chumpist american regime ie strategic patience,or does iran perhaps consider whether it is still in its interests to continue to pursue its 40 year long policy of non-alignment in a unipolar world.
Similar threads
- Article
- Locked
