What's new

Iranian Chill Thread

I pointed to the fact that you're comparing a marginal phenomenon in Iran to a generalized one here in the west and in other places affected by globalism.

Now I let you guess what would happen if it wasn't for the Islamic Republic's inward looking strategy, and Iran was integrated into the global economy - then the issue wouldn't be confined to bunch of complexed employees in northern Tehran, it would turn into a widescale norm.



Modern Persian in its present form is heir to an extremely rich literary heritage, of which Ancient and Middle Persian are nowadays deprived. Most people have no interest in ditching this legacy for the sake of ultra-nationalist obsessions of purity. Ferdosi himself continued to use 700+ Arabic words in the Shahname. Moreover, these Semitic-origin vocabs imported into Persian aren't pronounced in a glottal manner.

It's not a matter of preference, but of what the most acute present threat is. If you have no issues with Persian starting to get mixed with vocabs from European languages, you ought not refer to yourself as an uber-nationalist but openly endorse westernization.
It's a growing problem, Salar. I have been monitoring the job market for quite a long time. Many positions now require proficiency in English when even the owners of the company cannot properly speak English. It's just pure "oghdeh" and it's not out of necessity for integrating with the global economy.

The Islamic Republic is also a strong supporter of its own version of globalism, but instead of globalism, the IR advocates Islamic ummah to the point that it is ready to sacrifice Iran's interests for the formation of the Islamic ummah. Read the theory of Umm-ul Qura (ام‌القری) by M.J. Larijani, the person responsible for some of the worst strategies of the IR in foreign policy.

Using 700+ words of Arabic origin in Shahnameh (I don't know about the exact number though) is nothing for one of the largest corpora of poetry in the world's literature. It's like a tiny drop in a lake. Nobody is saying that all Arabic words should be removed from Persian. Arabic itself has some words that their etymology is traced to Persian. The problem is with the IR that is trying to replace Persian words with Arabic words. This is quite easily seen in the terminology of the Iranian law after the revolution, for example.
 
It's a growing problem, Salar. I have been monitoring the job market for quite a long time. Many positions now require proficiency in English when even the owners of the company cannot properly speak English. It's just pure "oghdeh" and it's not out of necessity for integrating with the global economy.

For all its self-sufficiency, Iran is trading with international partners to the tune of around 150 billion USD. This means many companies will necessarily have to employ a few people with sufficient English skills.

As for "oghde", I know / can imagine this type of people, but am simply stating that if all protective barriers erected by the IR were to fall all of a sudden, use of English in the professional realm could be expected to increase substantially from current levels, boosted as it may now be by a token number of "oghdei's".

The Islamic Republic is also a strong supporter of its own version of globalism, but instead of globalism, the IR advocates Islamic ummah to the point that it is ready to sacrifice Iran's interests for the formation of the Islamic ummah. Read the theory of Umm-ul Qura (ام‌القری) by M.J. Larijani, the person responsible for some of the worst strategies of the IR in foreign policy.

I wouldn't call it globalism, but three layers of religion-based, language- / nation- / civilization-based, as well as anti-imperialistic solidarity, which are quite different from glovalism.

Iran is not practicing an open borders policy in the globalist sense. For one, Afghans are the only large immigrant group and no matter their differences, they're still closer to Iranians than the myriad immigrant communities from every corner of the world populating the west. And Afghans aren't here just because they're fellow Muslims, for by that logic it could be argued they're an Iranic people and hence this is a pan-Iranian policy. In truth, the main reason is simply the incessant series of conflicts imposed onto Afghanistan by imperial powers, and the fact that it's a neighbor. Afghan immigration into Iran was alive and well under the shah already, it's the wars which amplified it. Nonetheless, Iranian law has been strict in granting residence and work permits, let alone citizenship to immigrants, in comparison to actual globalist-ruled regimes of the west.

Foreign policy-wise, the three layers of solidarity are real, they connect Iran with friendly and allied movements or governments, however this doesn't translate into transcendence, into dissolution of national specificity and sovereignty into an overarching totality, as globalism would call for.

As for the Larijanis, I'm not particularly fond of them and neither is the Leader it would seem, since they're in the process of being and have largely been sidelined.

The problem is with the IR that is trying to replace Persian words with Arabic words. This is quite easily seen in the terminology of the Iranian law after the revolution, for example.

We were interested in concrete examples, Aryobarzan shared some quotes. To me these look like cases of religious talk, which is not an invention of the Islamic Republic. Prior to the Revolution, religious scholars would use the same kind of vocabulary in their sermons.

As for legal texts and practice, well since the IR instituted Sharia law, chances are that Arabic terms will be more frequent in this area. This again is related to the religious dimension and the theocratic nature of the state, it's not a deliberate policy aiming to reduce Persian words in every day, non-specific usage.
 
Last edited:
For all its self-sufficiency, Iran is trading with abroad to the tune of almost 150 billion USD, which means many companies will necessarily have to employ some people with sufficient English skills.

As for "oghde", I know / can imagine this type of people, but am simply stating that if all protective barriers erected by the IR were to fall all of a sudden, use of English in the professional world could only increase substantially from its current levels boosted by these "oghdei's".



I wouldn't call it globalism, but three layers of religion-based, language- / nationality-based, as well as anti-imperialism-based solidarity, which is different.

Iran is not practicing an open borders policy in the globalist sense. For one, Afghans are the only large immigrant group and no matter their differences, they're still closer to Iranians than the myriad immigrant communities from every corner of the world are to their western hosts. And Afghans aren't here just because they're fellow Muslims, for by that logic it could be argued they're an Iranic people and hence this is a pan-Iranian policy by Iran. In truth, the main reason however is simply the incessant series of conflicts mostly imposed onto Afghanistan by imperial powers, and the fact that it's a neighboring state. Afghan immigration into Iran was alive and well under the shah already, it's the wars which amplified it. Nonetheless, Iranian law has been strict in granting residence and work permits, let alone citizenship to immigrants, when compared to actual globalist-ruled regimes of the west.

Foreign policy-wise, the three layers of solidarity are real, they connect Iran to friendly and allied movements or governments, however this didn't translate into transcending and dissolving national specificity into an overarching totality, as globalism would call for.

As for the Larijanis, I'm not particularly fond of them and neither is the Leader it would seem, since they're in the process of being and have largely been sidelined.



We were interested concrete examples, Aryobarzan shared some quotes. To me these look like cases of religious talk, which is not an invention of the Islamic Republic. Prior to the Revolution, religious scholars would use the same kind of vocabulary in their sermons.

As for legal texts and practice, well since the IR instituted Sharia law, chances are that Arabic terms will be more frequent in this area. This again is related to the religious dimension and the theocratic nature of the state, it's not a deliberate policy aiming to reduce Persian words in every day, non-specific usage.
How do you think these people are formed? Are you saying that these people have appeared out of the blue? I don't think a society chooses a certain path without a reason. When sociologists explain why our culture is going down the toilet, they are ignored in the media and are often labeled or dissed as educated by Western ideas. Didn't the IR go as far as trying to "cleanse" social sciences and humanities from Western ideas and philosophy? LOL

As for trade with foreign countries, I can ensure you that in none of these companies that I have mentioned, there's any trade with any foreign entity. Not even Afghanistan or Iraq. It's just a sociological phenomenon. Look at giant tech companies in Iran like Snapp, Digikala or Alibaba. Have they succeeded in expanding their business into neighboring countries like Iraq, Afghanistan, Turkey, Armenia, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Qatar, UAE, etc.? Then look at giant tech companies in the US and see how they have entered literally every hub in the global economy. The amount of trade between Iranian companies and foreign countries is minimal now but requiring English proficiency for "Oghdeh" is at its peak and growing faster than ever.

Europe has received about 4-5 million refugees since the beginning of the Arab spring (civil war in Syria and Libya) and they are bitching about it all the time to the point that their nice "human rights" and "anti-racism" facade is unmasked. We are being flooded with Afghan refugees and already host over 4 million Afghan refugees and you say we don't have an open border policy? Are our borders in the east closed now? Turkey has started creating a wall in our border. That's how a country defends its borders. The IR has globalist policies motivated by religious ideas. It's different from what Anglo-Saxon countries try to enforce on the world in practice, but in theory, it's the same phenomenon. The only difference is that instead of a liberal culture, they want the whole region (and if they can, the whole world) to pursue a culture enforced on them by their religious values.

How many times Iran has been betrayed by these friendly countries? How many times do you want me to mention right now on the top of my head? Starting from Yaser Arafat to this very day.

I understand that using Arabic words when it comes to Sharia is justified and in some cases inevitable, but it is not completely so. Look at «نیایش» and «نماز». Both words are used extensively in religious texts. Nobody uses «صلاة» in Iran. Even the clerics use نماز. Or even better, «خدا‌» is used to refer to Allah. Even religious words can be replaced by their Persian equivalents. It's not entirely impossible or forbidden in Islam.
 
فضل = فرهیختگی، فرجادی، دانش
none of your mentioned equivalents, even packed together will transfer the proper meaning, that's the difference between literal meaning and context meaning.


its the language of our sacred book not our sacred language . don't mistake them with each other. if Arabic be our sacred language everything said in it would be sacred and I can't accept that. for me there is nothing sacred in Arabic language or any other language. the language is just simply a tool.
and in my book if you don't knew Arabica , its a lot better to read Quran and religious text translated to Persians than reading them in Arabic but don't knew what it say
First of all, "sacred language" is a term, so I didn't necessarily mean it's sacred.

Secondly, regardless of your personal opinion, in Islam and so for faithful Muslims, Arabic is indeed a sacred and divine language, and for example your Salat نماز wont be accepted unless it's in Arabic.

thirdly, FYI, the sacred Arabic is even different from the language of Arabs, even though they have apparent similarity, so from religous point of view, if you translate back Quran from farsi to Arabic it wont be the sacred Quran again.
 
Last edited:
@mohsen ..my friend you asked me who provoked me ..my answer is "Ferdosi" and his beautiful poem

View attachment 840557

In his honor and memory
View attachment 840558
And you are targeting the wrong side for your intention!

years ago I saw a good app on mobile it was called پارسی را پاس بداریم .
sadly it was not updated in years . this is the link for any body who is interested
https://p30download.ir/fa/entry/37545/
I'm glad our dear Ferdosi didn't fall from hailing Parsi to hating Arabic.


چو بوسید پیکان سرانگشت اوی
گذر کرد بر مهرهٔ پشت اوی
بزد بر بر و سینهٔ اشکبوس
سپهر آن زمان دست او داد بوس
قضا گفت گیر و قدر گفت ده
فلک گفت احسنت و مه گفت زه
 
I don’t understand how someone says Iran should incorporate more French or German words into its language rather than Arabic.

How does that even make sense?

If Iran was a French colony for decades (or centuries) and French and Farsi was naturally spoken then Farsi would incorporate French words.

Iran is an Islamic Republic
State religion language used: Arabic
trade partners language used: Arabic
allies language used: Arabic (Syria/Iraq/Lebanon)

So naturally Arabic words will “seep” into the language without any mischievous intent. It’s possible to make a concentrated effort to keep it out and keep whatever version of Farsi it is you are trying to preserve.

However, to make an effort to say no not Arabic influence, but instead let’s linguistically align our selves with French or German language.....sounds like a weird attempt to be seen as “European”. No utility in that approach.

And if we get to “choose” then why not choose Star Trek Klingon or Elven language from Lord of the Rings.
 

1651619315507.png


From Article:

Recently, the IRGC unveiled its first underground drone base. In the images published from this base, numerous UAVs, generally Shahed-136, were seen along with stacks of ballistic missiles of various types. According to officials, Shahed-136 has a range of 2,000 kilometers, and each base can operate 60 UAVs simultaneously. Interestingly, long-range suicide drones were stored among ballistic missiles. The motive for this can be explained as the facilitating of long-range joint offensive operations by each base independently.

Despite equipping with a relatively small warhead and low speed, it is very accurate, sorely troublous to detect and track, inexpensive, and easy to use in a large-scale swarm.
In the case of combined assault, we can describe two scenarios:

1: In this situation, the objective of the attack can be defined as the destruction of protected vast targets, against a foe with significant classical power. For example, to attack an enemy air or naval base, the burden of destroying hard and major targets will be on the ballistic missiles. Although, AB systems around the target could weaken the effectiveness of the onslaught. Even reduces it to such an extent that the operation is practically defeated. An initial solution to overcome missile defense could be to launch numerous ballistic missiles simultaneously to outnumber the enemy defensive systems. Such a solution, although quite possible, is also too expensive. In a combined attack, the first wave of the attack, which is the operation to suppress the SEAD defense, is carried out by suicide drones. This solution addition to being more cost-effective can also have a much higher success rate, as ballistic defense systems are generally weak against targets such as suicide drones. On the other hand, more ballistic missiles, which are expensive and valuable equipment, can be used to hit the other targets.

2: This situation can be described as a reverse of the first case. In areas with low protection, small and large main targets, but numerous small fixed / mobile targets, the combined attack can be an advantageous response. In this case, first, the main targets get neutralized by ballistic missiles, then a swarm of suicide drones loiters over the target area to conduct search and destroy operations.

Other features of this drone include the following:
• Carrying out deep strike operations, blocking enemy forces from reaching operational areas.
• Surgical operation, precise destruction of strategic targets deep in the conflict zone to paralyze hostile forces.
• providing close air support for ground forces
• Disrupting the enemy logistic.
• Execution of A2/AD operations in the network-centric warfare and swarm operation format.



DEZFUL-MISSILE-INFOGRAPHY-EN-REV3-FINAL-1-25-22



shahed-136-infography-En-2-3-22-2500px
 

View attachment 840641

From Article:

Recently, the IRGC unveiled its first underground drone base. In the images published from this base, numerous UAVs, generally Shahed-136, were seen along with stacks of ballistic missiles of various types. According to officials, Shahed-136 has a range of 2,000 kilometers, and each base can operate 60 UAVs simultaneously. Interestingly, long-range suicide drones were stored among ballistic missiles. The motive for this can be explained as the facilitating of long-range joint offensive operations by each base independently.

Despite equipping with a relatively small warhead and low speed, it is very accurate, sorely troublous to detect and track, inexpensive, and easy to use in a large-scale swarm.

In the case of combined assault, we can describe two scenarios:

1: In this situation, the objective of the attack can be defined as the destruction of protected vast targets, against a foe with significant classical power. For example, to attack an enemy air or naval base, the burden of destroying hard and major targets will be on the ballistic missiles. Although, AB systems around the target could weaken the effectiveness of the onslaught. Even reduces it to such an extent that the operation is practically defeated. An initial solution to overcome missile defense could be to launch numerous ballistic missiles simultaneously to outnumber the enemy defensive systems. Such a solution, although quite possible, is also too expensive. In a combined attack, the first wave of the attack, which is the operation to suppress the SEAD defense, is carried out by suicide drones. This solution addition to being more cost-effective can also have a much higher success rate, as ballistic defense systems are generally weak against targets such as suicide drones. On the other hand, more ballistic missiles, which are expensive and valuable equipment, can be used to hit the other targets.

2: This situation can be described as a reverse of the first case. In areas with low protection, small and large main targets, but numerous small fixed / mobile targets, the combined attack can be an advantageous response. In this case, first, the main targets get neutralized by ballistic missiles, then a swarm of suicide drones loiters over the target area to conduct search and destroy operations.

Other features of this drone include the following:

• Carrying out deep strike operations, blocking enemy forces from reaching operational areas.

• Surgical operation, precise destruction of strategic targets deep in the conflict zone to paralyze hostile forces.

• providing close air support for ground forces

• Disrupting the enemy logistic.

• Execution of A2/AD operations in the network-centric warfare and swarm operation format.



DEZFUL-MISSILE-INFOGRAPHY-EN-REV3-FINAL-1-25-22



shahed-136-infography-En-2-3-22-2500px

The drones were primarily shown off in the underground base as a middle finger to Israel after their sabotage of a “drone warehouse” in the weeks prior to the video being released.

Not sure why the author didn’t detect that.
 
All BS aside a few low grade Iranian kamikazi drones and/or a few hundred mid grade (Mohajer) to higher end Iranian drones (Shaheen Gaza) could really speed up the Russian advance and change the balance of the conflict in the favor of the Russians.

Just look how the Houthis using a few low grade Irainian drones in high numbers were able to bypass hundreds of billions of dollars worth half a dozen patriot batteries (some PAC 3 the most advanced variant) and wipe out half of Saudis oil reserves.

Just a few weeks ago the Houthis did it again destroying and damging several sites including a fuel facility. water treatment plant and many more over 24 hrs. Those drones costing thousands cost the Saudis billions just in repairs and to beef up their air defences. Just a few minutes nths ago they had to beg the US for more missiles for their batriot batteries since since they were running low on missiles. Same thing with Israel's Iron dome, Hamas made them run out of missiles. For their reputed Iron Dome.

Russians should seriously put their pride aside and buy a few hundred Iranian drones
 
For all its self-sufficiency, Iran is trading with international partners to the tune of around 150 billion USD. This means many companies will necessarily have to employ a few people with sufficient English skills.

As for "oghde", I know / can imagine this type of people, but am simply stating that if all protective barriers erected by the IR were to fall all of a sudden, use of English in the professional realm could be expected to increase substantially from current levels, boosted as they may be by these "oghdei's".



I wouldn't call it globalism, but three layers of religion-based, language- / nationality-based, as well as anti-imperialistic solidarity, which is different.

Iran is not practicing an open borders policy in the globalist sense. For one, Afghans are the only large immigrant group and no matter their differences, they're still closer to Iranians than the myriad immigrant communities from every corner of the world populating the west. And Afghans aren't here just because they're fellow Muslims, for by that logic it could be argued they're an Iranic people and hence this is a pan-Iranian policy. In truth, the main reason is simply the incessant series of conflicts imposed onto Afghanistan by imperial powers, and the fact that it's a neighbor. Afghan immigration into Iran was alive and well under the shah already, it's the wars which amplified it. Nonetheless, Iranian law has been strict in granting residence and work permits, let alone citizenship to immigrants, in comparison to actual globalist-ruled regimes of the west.

Foreign policy-wise, the three layers of solidarity are real, they connect Iran with friendly and allied movements or governments, however this doesn't translate into transcendence, into dissolution of national specificity and sovereignty into an overarching totality, as globalism would call for.

As for the Larijanis, I'm not particularly fond of them and neither is the Leader it would seem, since they're in the process of being and have largely been sidelined.



We were interested in concrete examples, Aryobarzan shared some quotes. To me these look like cases of religious talk, which is not an invention of the Islamic Republic. Prior to the Revolution, religious scholars would use the same kind of vocabulary in their sermons.

As for legal texts and practice, well since the IR instituted Sharia law, chances are that Arabic terms will be more frequent in this area. This again is related to the religious dimension and the theocratic nature of the state, it's not a deliberate policy aiming to reduce Persian words in every day, non-specific usage.
Foreign speakers often complain that their language is being overrun with borrowings from English. But the fact is, English itself is a voracious word thief; linguist David Crystal reckons it’s half-inched words from at least 350 languages. Most words are borrowed from French, Latin and Greek; some of the more exotic provenances are Flemish (hunk), Romany (cushty), Portuguese (fetish), Nahuatl (tomato – via Spanish), Tahitian (tattoo), Russian (mammoth), Mayan (shark), Gaelic (slogan), Japanese (tycoon), West Turkic (horde), Walloon (rabbit) and Polynesian (taboo). Calques (flea market, brainwashing, loan word) are translations of borrowings.

The Guardian
 
Doesn't really matter in relation to what the diagram is indicating in terms of the UAS purpose and usage.

Seems this part

Recently, the IRGC unveiled its first underground drone base.​


The motive for this can be explained as the facilitating of long-range joint offensive operations by each base independently.​


Maybe I mis-interpreted this part. When I saw the video, I assumed Iran was trying to send Israel a message that our drone production is beyond the reach of destruction and our inventory is beyond your comprehension.

But yes the diagrams do explain their use in the military doctrine of Iran.
 
Maybe I mis-interpreted this part. When I saw the video, I assumed Iran was trying to send Israel a message that our drone production is beyond the reach of destruction and our inventory is beyond your comprehension.
Oh no, don't get me wrong when I saw the video it was quite clear to me, they want to have survivable basing for these drones as well and it's probably in relation to that incident that cause them to change their mind about how they want to inventory them.

These hangers are simply too vulnerable in a large country like Iran, small UAS penetration from any corner can occur.

But I was just indicating the purpose of that post is just for doctrine explanation.
 

^ Extremely close quarters combat ^


Interesting concept—seems the West has learned a thing or two from Iran regarding cheap highly lethal drones.



These guns are simply amazing. It seems Iranian artillery only goes up 155m shells.

Artillery rocket’s reach 300mm with the Falq system. Seems Iran doctrine relies more on artillery rocket (falq, zelzal, etc) than large artillery shells.
 
Back
Top Bottom