I Liked his post because he was reasonable there.
By extension, you may as well like zionist and NATO policy vis à vis Iran, given how it's in line with the user's comments.
1. Iran's establishment does not run a Islamic republic. No Muslim-majority country does now. It was only I will say the Libyan Jamahirya, a Communist-Socialist truly revolutionary society unlike the fake Islamic revolution of Khomenei. Here is a Libyan girl from 2011 during NATO bombing, speaking her support for Muammar and the jamahiriya, and she does not wear hijab :
Iran's an Islamic Republic and the 1979 Islamic Revolution is as authentic as it gets.
2. Balkanizing Iran into what ?
Into smaller entities along supposed "ethno"-linguistic lines.
As described in the following Isra"el"i think tank paper, for example:
In Iran, more and more non-Persian minorities— who make up about half the country’s population—are demanding independence, suggesting that Iran could disintegrate into ethnic/national states. Th
besacenter.org
3. You keep speaking against NATO and one of its components is the Turkish government and both the Iran government and Turkish government oppress the Kurds and use any excuse to bombard the Kurds including the PKK elements. Iran government fired missiles into Kurd bases in Iraq recently. Where is there a confluence between Khamenei and Erdogan ?
Iran does not "oppress the Kurds". But pushes back on armed separatist and terrorist grouplets supported by NATO and the zionists, which claim to speak for Kurdish Iranians but have been conducting attacks against Iranian border guards (including Kurdish-speaking ones) and threatening Iran's national security and territorial integrity.
Yet Irani military's first goals in Syria and those of its Shia non-Syrian allies in Syria included securing Shia-followed buildings like of Sayyida Zaynab that you write of later :
en.wikipedia.org
How does this allow you to sideline the geostrategic objectives mentioned? There's no denying them, which in turn negates your initial contention that Iran intervened in Syria for no other purpose than protecting local Shia Moslems. That's simply untrue.
Shia religious mythology, beliefs and mysticism is more important to Irani military in Syria than defending the Syrian people and the Baath system.
Defending the anti-imperialist Resistance Axis against terrorists and assisting an ally, the Syrian government, is most important to Iran.
1. Please don't use the word Iran to describe what are just the objectives of the Irani mullah government and its military elements like Basij, IRGC etc. These people do not represent the beliefs and aspirations of the most of the Irani people including those who are now protesting despite being violently opposed by the government.
I'll use the word Iran because it's accurate. No, the Iranian people aren't opposing the Islamic Republic's non-sectarian outlook.
Nor can those who presently indulge in rioting, be portrayed as legitimate representatives of the Iranian nation.
"Iran" word used by Iran government to describe its policies is as misleading as Modi using "India" to describe his fascist, anti-human, Hindutvadi governments and administrators at the center and in many states. The Communist Party of India was established by seven people including two Muslims in Tashket in Uzbek SSR in 1920 - 102 years ago. Then the CPI dispersed into various factions within India and into the Communist Party of Pakistan and Communist Party of Bangladesh at the due times. In the pre-Indian-Partition days in Srinagar city in India-administrated Kashmir the famous landmark called Lal Chowk was so renamed by Kashmiri Muslim and Sikh Communists in inspiration from Red Square in Communist Moscow in their agitation against the Hindu raja whose dynasty had been created in the 1800s by the British colonialists. Does Modi represent all these streams in India ? There are many non-Communist progressives in India too. Modi does not represent any of that yet he arrogantly and lyingly uses "India" as if his word and ideology represents the desires and thinking of all Indians and India's history and current. This is improper and so is you and the Irani government using "Iran" to talk as if they represent all Iranis.
In this context I don't care too much about Modi to be honest, since he has no bearing on the discussion at hand. The Islamic Republic is Iran's legal government and so the name Iran can be used interchangeably with Islamic Republic. What's more, the Islamic Republic is enjoying vast legitimacy amongst the Iranian people.
2. Iran promoting inter-denominational unity ? Firstly, the NATO-supported mullahs,
The Islamic Republic has been combating NATO. Unlike certain Trostkyists as well as other leftists handled by NATO.
have always worked against Muslim advancement, freedoms and natural human rights.
The IR's record says otherwise.
Both when it comes to the undeniable, solidly documented rise in Iran's development indicators after 1979, and in terms of restoring and safeguarding Iran's independence, self-determination and sovereignty against imperialist schemes. As a matter of fact Iran today is one of the most independent countries on earth.
Either way the above quoted retort isn't addressing the issue of sectarianism, or rather, Iran's principled rejection thereof.
Secondly, what is Iran government doing in case of Yemen in not sending daily convoys of ships to feed the starving Yemeni people ?
You should conduct some research into how the aggressors have blockaded Yemen and prevented all sorts of non-military goods from entering the country.
Besides, Iran has been shipping tons of humanitarian aid to Yemen where possible, in addition to calling for a lifting of obstacles to the delivery of such aid.
https://reliefweb.int/report/yemen/iran-sends-humanitarian-aid-yemen
There is a humanitarian disaster in the making in Yemen. The Najdi Bedouins have imposed a total blockade of the country preventing food, water and medicines from reaching the people. Iran plans to send a humanitarian aid ship that would include a large number of international peace activists...
crescent.icit-digital.org
http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-07/15/c_139212746.htm
What socialist or communist entity can claim to have done as much?
Iran government is busy in breaking the heads and bodies of Irani women.
In the alternate universe of zionist- and NATO-concocted narratives, yes. Not in the real world though.
What unity is being displayed here ?
What did those statements have to do with inter-denominational Islamic unity? They were beside the point.
What was the response of Iran government in 2011, especially then president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to the invasion of the Sunni-majority Libyan jamahiriya ? The biggest military invasion ever which also included Al Qaeda and "Muslim" Brotherhood, the former being the supposed enemy of the Iran government ? Mahmoud declared that the NATO-created destruction of the Libyan jamahiriya "was the will of the Libyan people".
And this proves that Iran is implementing sectarianist policies? Well no. If Iran was defining her policy in sectarian terms, she wouldn't have aided the Sunni Moslems of Bosnia, Sunni Moslem Palestinians, Sunni Moslem Kurds (against "I"SIS and Saddam), and so on.
Ahmadinejad's stance on Libya, whether one agrees with it or not, has nothing to do with Shia-Sunni considerations.
You are claiming that the Irani protesters are NATO / Zionist enabled but tell me, it has been what two months since the protests started yet no vociferous condemnation by Western governments against the Irani mullah regime.
Of course there were.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politic...-were-gonna-free-iran-as-protests-there-go-on
https://www.barrons.com/news/macron-meets-iran-women-activists-hails-revolution-01668193807
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is vowing to hold the "bloodthirsty" regime of Iran accountable for the families of victims aboard PS752.
www.foxnews.com
Western music artistes are boycotting Qatar football events because Qatar government speaks against LGBT but these same Western music artistes have not uttered a word in support of Mahsa, Niko and the protesters and against the Irani government, the police, the Basij, the burqa brigade and the military.
More facts you seem to have overlooked.
https://www.rollingstone.co.uk/musi...i-firefly-music-festival-footage-watch-23195/
British band joined on stage by exiled actor Golshifteh Farahani to sing protest song by Shervin Hajipour as Buenos Aires concert broadcast in 81 countries
www.theguardian.com
There is no talk of NATO-aided regime change for Iran. No "Right 2 Protect". No "They are killing civilians including women and children". Words NATO used in United Nations Terrorist Council against iraq, Libya and Syria. Why ?
Because Iran is in another league, militarily speaking, and has more deterrence assets than a thoroughly battered Iraq in 2003 or Libya in 2011. Please use your logic.
I want regime change in Iran but NATO does not. NATO never wanted the mullahs out.
NATO is seeking to overthrow the Islamic Republic much more fervently than you do, believe me. And has been pursuing this aim for 43 years non-stop, throwing everything it could at Islamic Iran, to no avail. The list of subversive activities by NATO and the zionists against Iran would fill entire books. Let's mention just a few of them as a formality.
The whole spectrum of exiled Iranian opposition groups is backed and financed by NATO regimes and their oligarchy. So is every armed terrorist and separatist organization operating against Iran.
No nation on earth has ever been subjected to a propaganda, psy-ops and social engineering campaign similar in intensity and scope: 70+ satellite broadcasters, innumerable "social media" accounts and websites including those managed by the Albania-based, CIA-sponsored MKO terrorist sect, whose leader holds meetings with the likes of Mike Pompeo and Rudy Giuliani. The most prolific foreign language services of the BBC and company are their Persian ones.
The USA regime tried to topple the Islamic Republic through military coups, using officers loyal to the ousted Pahlavi monarchy, such as in the Noje affair.
NATO massively supported Saddam's Iraq in its eight years of aggression against Iran. The USA military directly entered the war on Iraq's behalf in 1988, bombing the Iranian Navy and shooting down an Iranian civilian airliner.
Iran is the country most sanctioned by the USA regime and its clients.
Washington attempted a "color revolution" in Iran, namely the 2009 "Green movement".
If NATO dispatched terrorists to Syria, it was in order to break the Iran-led Resistance Axis and nothing else.
I could go on and on, but it's safe to say you'd gain in reading up on the deeply antagonistic relations between Iran and the west.
Khomenei was sitted comfortably by French government for a year till he arrogantly arrived in Tehran in 1979.
That too would be wrong. The Imam staid there for less than four months. And essentially because Saddam, upon request from the US-subservient shah of Iran, had expelled him from Iraq. Even so, Imam Khomeini did not wish to travel to France, his advisers convinced him.
Moreover at that time the French regime was unsure about the role Imam Khomeini would play in a post-Revolution Iran, as well as of the direction Iran would take. They could not foresee the anti-imperialist reorientation of Iranian policy, the neutralization of the spy den also known as USA "embassy" in Tehran, and so on.
NATO desires for the Irani mullahs to rule.
The opposite is the case. NATO seeks to destroy both the Islamic Republic and Iran herself, and has put tremendous efforts into that sinister plot.
All those sanctions are as fake as those imposed on India after India blasted nukes. You want to know what are sanctions then look at the DPRK.
Go ask the Iranian children suffering from a rare disease who were martyred because the Swedish company which held a monopoly on the cure refused to sell it to Iran, citing sanctions.
Patients with rare diseases fall victim to U.S. sanctions against Iran-
english.news.cn
There's nothing "fake" about the illegal sanctions imposed on Islamic Iran. You simply issuing such a claim with nothing to substantiate it, will not make it factual.
But couldn't disprove it, because it's accurate.
In addition, Libya aided iran during Iran-Iraq war yet why didn't Irani military go to Libya in 2011 to aid Muammar Gaddafi and his guided Jamahiriya society and the Libyan defense forces against the imperialists you speak of in the next point ?
1) Libya withdrew its help to Iran during the Imposed War very shortly after initiating it.
2) Afterwards, bilateral relations became ambivalent. Among other things, Tripoli is reported to have gone over to supporting ethnicist separatists in Iran's Khuzestan province. Also Tripoli is suspected of having had a hand in Imam Musa Sadr's disappearance and probable martyrdom.
3) Iran and Libya weren't bound by any mutual defense treaty.
In sum, apples and oranges. Libya never was the steady ally to Iran that Syria has happened to be. Had Libya had similar relations with Iran, Iran would've assisted it the same way as Syria.
I will say Iran government should immediately declare war on NATO and Israel. All this in the middle of the Irani people declaring rebellion and agitation against Iran government. Let us see if the Irani people support the mullahs or use the opportunity to overthrow the mullahs and form their own progressive governance.
1) Iranian decision makers aren't short sighted like Saddam, so Iran will not declare war, invade a neighbor or the like unless and until attacked.
2) Rioters and terrorists do not represent the Iranian people.
There you are ! Defense of religious mythology before defending the lives of the Syrian people. Not different than the so-called Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda and "I"SIS with its magazine called Dabiq.
I listed three objectives before. And those were paramount.
1. You ignore Russia. There are Russian ships and aeroplanes in Syria and Syrians are present in Ukraine in support of Russia.
Secular group (rather than state) was what I stated. Also you might want to remember who brought Russia into the Syrian theater - shahid Soleimani.
At any rate, Iran's contribution has been at least as important as Russia's. And that's the bottom line.
Is the Irani military in Ukraine in support of "The Anti-imperialist Axis" ?
Iran's the only state actor to have supplied significant amounts of weaponry to Russia during its campaign in Ukraine.
Russian forum users have explained how Russians these days are quipping, "we have only two real allies, one is Belarus and the other's Iran".
2. There is nothing Islamically religious about Irani mullahs and its military in Syria so it is incorrect to use the words secular and religious here. Islam in essence is a leftist ideology with much in common with modern Communism. Irani mullahs are none of this.
Please, let's not enter this sort of discussion. Iranians including IR officials understand full well what Islam is and what it isn't.
Because it is what the Irani people are now agitating for.
No. These rioters have pro-western tendencies. And they're not exactly "the Iranian people".
A quick illustration among so many others:
Moreover, by that token Syrians were agitating for a takfiri type of regime. Both suggestions are equally erroneous, no difference here.
There's never been such an intention on Iran's part, so the discussion's moot.
No, rightful ideology and humanity should always triumphs selfish governmental interests. Would the USSR have collaborated with the other fake Islamic Republic, that of the Taliban ?
Geopolitical imperatives aren't necessarily selfish governmental interests. Preserving the Resistance against global imperialism and arrogance is not a selfish state interest. However this too at times requires flexibility in the choice of strategic partners. Hence why the secular Syrian government gladly entered an alliance with Islamic Iran.
Yes, the Irani protesters are mobs for you because they are not your beloved mullahs but reject the hijab.
They are mobs because they attack and murder law enforcement personnel and other citizens. They are mobs because they torch and destroy public and private property. Exactly like the extremists who managed to destabilize Syria.
Furthermore they're brainwashed by the 70+ western-sponsored, Persian-language satellite broadcasters, by the hundreds of thousands of western-promoted "social media" accounts and websites demonizing the IR around the clock, by the propaganda of the west's liberal fifth column inside Iran.
They're irrational and potentially dangerous because if they had their way, they'd open the floodgates for NATO and the zionist regime to implement the balkanization agenda against Iran.
But Indian anti-female anti-human traditional culture is not different from the Irani mullahs who impose the hijab.
