Mahoza, A Jewish Kingdom At War With Sassanid Iran

[SalarHaqq]

In 513 CE the Mahoza kingdom was set up by the exilarch (leader of Jews in exile) Mar Zutra II. Its homonymous capital was initially a suburb of Be-Ardeshir, a town founded around 230 AD on the left bank of the Tigris and now part of the Iraqi city of Al-Madayin. The state of Mahoza apparently came into existence after a successful uprising against the Sassanid Iranian empire.

However it was quite short lived, since seven years later Persians would reconquer the area, proceed to beheading Mar Zutra II as well as his grandfather Hanina and to attaching their corpses onto crosses which were put on public display. What's more, Mar Zutra's father Hama had also been killed by the Sassanids earlier on.

Jewish tradition has it that Mar Zutra II was the sole survivor of the house of prophet Davud (a.s.).

At any rate, this brief episode of history is of relevance in the present context insofar as it runs counter to and helps debunk a particular zionist narrative aimed at Iranian audiences: namely, that relations between Iran and Jewish potentates have throughout history been of invariably harmonious character. This is sometimes construed alongside the implicit suggestion that conversely, the relationship between Iranians and Arabs has never seen anything but conflict throughout. Needless to say, there is no historic accuracy to any one of these simplistic, naive myths. However, myths can serve as political tools.

The main recipients of this narrative are large sectors of the Iranian exiled opposition, namely monarchists (supporters of the regime toppled by the 1979 Islamic Revolution and its "crown prince" Reza Pahlavi), secular nationalists and assorted liberals, as well as reformist and moderate in-house liberals in Iran proper (one of whose public voices, Sadeq Zibakalam, recently went on the record suggesting that Jewish civilization is superior to western civilization, and that the west trumps Iran's own civilization).

Among several common traits between these groups is that they all seek an end to the Islamic Republic's principled policy of Resistance against zionist occupation. In other terms, they're aligned on the agenda of NATO and Tel Aviv whose backing they enjoy. This backing takes the shape of wholesale official sponsorship, funding and technical assistance in the case of the exile opposition, while more indirect means are used by the west and the zionists to prop up the domestic reformist-moderate nexus. A second commonality between exiled opposition grouplets and domestic liberals, is their shared objective to turn Iran into a client state of the USA like under the Pahlavi regime.

Of interest is the fact that within zionist circles themselves the historic revisionism alluded to is nowhere a dominant nor even a widespread belief. Indeed, it is specifically tailored for Iranian audiences, in the framework of western and zionist attempts to delegitimize the Islamic Republic's foreign policy, to put the blame for any economic challenges on said policy and incite the Iranian people to revolt against their government to the benefit of the mentioned foreign powers. Zionist and Jewish audiences however are seldom offered the same caricatural, overly idealized take on the history of Iranian-Jewish relations. References to instances of purported repression and persecution of Jews at the hands of Persians are not uncommon in zionist discourse intended for local audiences, nor in other sources of interest.

The Encyclopaedia Judaica's entry on Mar Zutra for example states that the exilarch Huna (Mar Zutra's father) had been killed during persecutions instituted by the Sassanid emperor Firuz. It also speculates that Mar Zutra's march against the Persian army may have been motivated by "Persian oppression of the Jewish religion". Likewise, sources report that the closeness of a number of other Babylonian exilarchs to the Sassanid court drew criticism.

Of course, the Jewish festival of Purim and the related Book of Esther in the Ancient Testament present us with another illustration as to the question at hand. While Persian emperor Xerxes (Ahasueres) is of course depicted in a favorable light owing to his marriage with Esther, the figure of Haman, an official at Khashayar's court is the reviled antagonist. So are Haman's ten sons who were hanged according to the Book of Esther, as well as 75000 Iranians killed subsequently.

---

Mahoza near Baghdad, Iraq​

In the early 6th century, Mahoza was the center of a independent Jewish kingdom, ruled by the exilarch Mar Zutra II (c. 496-520). Already a center of trade and learning in Babylon, the city had been destroyed in 363 AD and rebuilt a few years later.1 It remained part of the independent Jewish state for seven years, until Mar Zutra's defeat and death at the hands of the Persians. Mahoza is now part of the present-day city of al-Mada'in, not far from Baghdad. Also close by is Salman Pak, the burial place of Shallum, the brother of a former exilarch. Shallum, who was viewed as a hero by the Muslims and Jews of Babylon, defeated the Persians in the early 7th century and established a capital at Mahoza.2

Description​

Mahoza The ancient city of Mahoza was located on the bank of the Nahar Malka, a canal connecting the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. It was a suburb of Be-Ardashir, a city dating from roughly 230 CE on the left bank of the Tigris.3 Several trading routes, both caravans and river trade, passed through Mahoza. Many of Mahoza’s Jews were successful traders or farmers; by the mid-300s, the majority of the city’s population was Jewish.4 Starting in the late 200s, the city became a center of study; around that time, Joseph ben Hama founded an academy that would grow to great success under the leadership of his son Raba.5 Emperor Julian destroyed Mahoza in 363 when he invaded Babylon, but after his death the city was rebuilt.6 In the early 500s, it became the center of an independent Jewish state led by the exilarch Mar Zutra II.

Mar Zutra II the center of an independent Jewish state led by the exilarch Mar Zutra II. Mar Zutra II (c. 496-520) was the son of Huna, a previous exilarch killed by the Persians.7 According to tradition, Mar Zutra II was the sole survivor of the House of David. In 512, his grandfather Hanina had him installed as the official exilarch, at the age of fifteen.8 The new exilarch led four hundred soldiers against the Persians and won several victories, allowing him to establish an independent Jewish state based in Mahoza. Seven years later, the Persians finally defeated him; he and Hanina were captured and eventually executed.9

Exilarchs The title exilarch first appeared in late antiquity as an office responsible for administering communal affairs among Babylonian Jews.10 It eventually developed into a hereditary title—justified by a claim of descent from King David—and one of the principal offices of centralized Jewish authority. Babylonian exilarchs were often wealthy, as well as being frequent attendees at the Sasanian royal court; many were criticized for being too close to Persian rulers, as well as their lax religious observance.11

Sources​

[1] Beer, Moshe. Encyclopaedia Judaica. "Mahoza." Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007. Accessed August 4, 2014. http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE|CX2587513033&v=2.1&u=mlin_m_wellcol&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=2ea41df345288184f92d75190df9e080
[2] The Committee for Historical Research in Islam and Judaism. "The Conquest of Persia and Shallum's Return." 2012. Accessed August 5, 2014. http://www.alsadiqin.org/en/index.php?title=The_Conquest_of_Persia_and_Shallum's_Return
[3] Beer. "Mahoza."
[4] Ibid.
[5] "Mahoza." Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. Accessed August 5, 2014. http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10292-mahoza
[6] Beer. "Mahoza."
[7] "Zutra, Mar." Encyclopaedia Judaica. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007. Accessed August 4, 2014. http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE|CX2587521673&v=2.1&u=mlin_m_wellcol&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=9c496ef5205f850027a41a72d0eca8ff
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Franklin, Arnold. Encyclopedia of Jews in the Islamic World. "Exilarch and Exilarchate." Brill Online, 2014. Accessed August 5, 2014. http://0-referenceworks.brillonline...ic-world/exilarch-and-exilarchate-COM_0007510
[11] Ibid.

---

Born: c. 496
Died: 520

ZUTRA, MAR​

ZUTRA, MAR, the names of three *exilarchs during the fifth and sixth centuries. MAR ZUTRA I (d. c. 414), exilarch from 401 to 409, the successor of Mar Kahana and a contemporary of R. Ashi. It may be that he was the son of Huna b. Nathan, although his father's name does not appear in the sources. Mar Zutra was a student of R. Papa and R. Pappai and he transmitted the teachings of the earlier generations. He associated to a great extent with R. Ashi and Ameimar, and their differing opinions regarding various laws concerning meals are recorded in the Talmud (e.g., Ber. 44b, 50b; Shab. 50b). His piety and character were exemplary, and the title "the pious" was appended to his name (BK 81b; BM 24a). Whenever he had to pronounce a ban on a scholar, he first banned himself and then pronounced it on the culprit. Later, Mar Zutra absolved himself and then absolved the other (MK 17a). He prayed and fasted for the welfare of others but never on his own behalf (TJ, Ma'as. Sh. 5:8, 156d). When Mar Zutra was carried in honor on the shoulders of his audience on the Sabbath before the Pilgrim festivals at a time when he preached on the festival laws, he would repeat the verse (Prov. 27:24): "For riches are not for ever; and doth the crown endure unto all generations?" (Yoma 87a).

MAR ZUTRA II (c. 496–520), exilarch from 512 to 520. He was the son of *Huna , who had previously served as exilarch and was killed during the persecutions instituted by the Persian monarch, Firuz. His mother was the daughter of the head of the academy, Mar Ḥanina. According to tradition, Mar Zutra was born after the entire house of the exilarch had died out, and he was the sole survivor of the House of David, from whom the exilarchs were traditionally descended. During his minority, the exilarchate was administered by his brother-inlaw, Mar Paḥra or Paḥda, who bribed the king to retain him in office. When Mar Zutra reached the age of 15, his grandfather induced the king to install him as the legitimate exilarch. The new exilarch took up arms against the Persians, perhaps because of Persian oppression of the Jewish religion. Marching at the head of 400 Jewish warriors, Mar Zutra succeeded in defeating the Persians and setting up an independent Jewish state, with Maḥoza as his residence. The new state survived for seven years, but immorality spread among his followers and they were finally defeated in battle by the Persians. Both Mar Zutra and his grandfather, Ḥanina, were taken prisoner and beheaded, and their bodies were later suspended from crosses on the bridge at Maḥoza.

MAR ZUTRA III (sixth century), the son of Mar Zutra II. According to tradition he was born on the day that his father was executed and was therefore named after him. He later succeeded him as exilarch. He left Babylon to settle in Ereẓ Israel, where he was appointed to an academic position in a college. It is thought that he disseminated knowledge of the Babylonian Talmud in Ereẓ Israel.

In addition to a tanna called Zutra who is mentioned in a baraita (Ber. 13b), there were also some other amoraim of this name: ZUTRA BEN TOBI (third century), a student of Rav and R. Judah who transmitted their teachings (Ber. 7a; Yev. 44a); MAR ZUTRA BEN R. NAḤMAN (b. Jacob; fourth century), who transmitted his father's teachings and who, in his youth, adjudicated a monetary case without previously obtaining the permission of the exilarch and erred in his decision (Sanh. 5a); and MAR ZUTRA BEN MARI (b. Issur; fourth century), the brother of R. Adda the elder (Kid. 65b).

BIBLIOGRAPHY:​

Hyman, Toledot; Ḥ. Albeck, Mavo la-Talmudim (1969), 283–4.

Zutra, Mar - Document - Gale eBooks

 

[Muhammed45]

"Shallum, who was viewed as a hero by the Muslims and Jews of Babylon, defeated the Persians in the early 7th century and established a capital at Mahoza.2"
@SalarHaqq dear brother
I failed to understand this part of the article.

Shallum was viewed as a hero by Muslims? Which Muslims would consider a Jew as a hero and what exactly was the reason for it?

It has turned a light in my mind pointing to the fact that our beloved prophet refused to militarily engage with Iranians.

Am i missing something?

 

[Muhammad Saftain Anjum]

our beloved prophet refused to militarily engage with Iranians.

Is there any reference for this?
Had this been the case,Caliph Umar would never have ordered to military conquer Iran.

And i read a speech of Hazrat Khalid bin Waleed (R.A) to his soldiers before attacking Persia but I will not write it here b/c Irani Muslim nationalists will feel broken internally.
So I think there was no such thing as you said

 

[Muhammed45]

Is there any reference for this?
Had this been the case,Caliph Umar would never have ordered to military conquer Iran.

And i read a speech of Hazrat Khalid bin Waleed (R.A) to his soldiers before attacking Persia but I will not write it here b/c Irani Muslim nationalists will feel broken internally.
So I think there was no such thing as you said

Oh there was. Attack on Iran was wrong from the first moment. Iran of that era wasn't an annoying factor for Muslims of Arabian peninsula because of permanent conflicts with west. In fact, prophet himself disagreed with the idea of waging war against a country that was supposed to be in peace. Islam is nor religion of invasion on neighboring country.

Khalid bin Walid despite being respected by Sunnis by majority has committed henious crimes against innocent civilians of that time. Islam as the religion of peace never promotes savagery against a neutral neighbor. Given the peaceful and respectful nature of Quran, Islam conquers hearts of every sane human being.

That campaign which ended up with killing innocents was a wrong move from the first moment.

But at least we can say that the disaster of attacking a peaceful neighbor which never posed any threat to Muslim world made Iranians known to Quran and its teachings.

 

[SalarHaqq]

"Shallum, who was viewed as a hero by the Muslims and Jews of Babylon, defeated the Persians in the early 7th century and established a capital at Mahoza.2"
@SalarHaqq dear brother
I failed to understand this part of the article.

Shallum was viewed as a hero by Muslims? Which Muslims would consider a Jew as a hero and what exactly was the reason for it?

It has turned a light in my mind pointing to the fact that our beloved prophet refused to militarily engage with Iranians.

Am i missing something?

This thread has a specific purpose: to highlight the historically bumpy and generally conflictual relationship between ancient Iranian states and Jewish-led entities of that era. As such, it instantly debunks the colonialist propaganda which secularist Iranian nationalists have been brainwashed with since the 19th century, including the gibberish compulsively spread by a particularly comical, racialist-minded example on this website - not least the fallacious and baseless notion that "Iranians and Jews have always enjoyed harmonic ties whilst Iranian-Arab interactions have been but a collection of hostility and violence".

A twisted narrative fabricated by zionists and Anglo-imperialists for a reason. Likewise, this thread goes a long way invalidating anti-Iranian fantasies from the sectarianist and takfiri camp, which perfectly echo the nonsense Iranian secular bāstān-gerā nationalists believe in. This ugly confluence of maniacal, irrational hatred was witnessed first hand with the terrorist attack at Shah Cheraq by "I"SIS terrorists, which saw secular nationalist oppositionists (and other anti-IR elements) develop shameless trivializing narratives (including the ludicrous but dastardly claim that the mass killing of Moslem mo'menin was supposedly an "inside job").

I would therefore kindly invite you to support this purpose by avoiding asides about Islam and Iran, seeing how they would in fact be unrelated to the subject at hand. Also, there's no shortage of published material on the topic you alluded to (mostly of propagandistic nature of course, concocted by western and zionist colonialists for Iranian compradors and their counterparts in other Moslem nations), whilst the title story here is blatantly unknown to the public in question. Let these people know Iran fought Jewish-led entities as early as some 1500 years ago - historic facts must be straightened. And in this particular instance, repeated and shared as often as possible since it's an existential enemy's narrative which needs to be taken aim at.

So that alert Iranians never experience the dark days of the Pahlavi era again, when Iran was deprived of her sovereignty and self-determination by zionist and NATO imperialists through a variety of means such as the deployment of domestic fifth columns (Zeytun network, freemason grand-masters, leadership of the Haifan Bahai organization, SAVAK stay-behind assets handled from abroad etc). Better yet, so that those same hostile foreign powers do not succeed in their current sinister endeavour to break Iran into multiple sub-national micro-"states".

If you wish to discuss Prophet Muhammad's (s) take on regional politics and the Sassanid empire in particular, or the position of local Moslems in Babylon during the early 7th century, please let's do so in a separate, dedicated thread.

 

[Muhammed45]

This thread has a purpose: to highlight the historically bumpy and generally conflictual relationship between ancient Iranian states and Jewish-led entities. As such, it represents yet another thorn in the side of the colonialist propaganda which secularist Iranian nationalists have been brainwashed with since the 19th century, including the gibberish compulsively spread by a particularly comical, racialist-minded example on this website.

I would therefore kindly invite you to support this purpose by avoiding asides about Islam and Iran, seeing how they would in fact be unrelated to the subject at hand. And also, there's no lack of material on the topic you alluded to (mostly of propagandistic nature, concocted by western and zionist colonialists for Iranian compradors and their counterparts in other Moslem nations), whilst the title story here is as good as unknown to the public in question.

If you wish to discuss Prophet Muhammad's (s) take on regional politics and the Sassanid regime in particular, or the position of local Moslems in Babylon during the early 7th century, please let's do so in a separate, dedicated thread.

Sure. My apologies for derailing the thread. There are some issues that needs to be addressed. I will consider it an insult if someone claims Iranians are Muslims of swords not truth.

Thanks for this informative article. It sheds light on many issues.

 

[aryobarzan]

Last time that some one attacked Iran they spoke Arabic.. and that was only 43 years ago...no angels around us...just stay strong and rely on the powers of a united nation...

 

[Hack-Hook]

Last time that some one attacked Iran they spoke Arabic.. and that was only 43 years ago...no angels around us...just stay strong and rely on the powers of a united nation...

well if we don't learn from that it will repeat itself , for several month before the war every sane person and every commander of the army screamed that Iraq is preparing for war with Iran and certain traitors instead of strengthening armed forces there removed them from border and dismantled and destroyed their equipment and we saw the result.

now todays we have such reports

Taliban Prepare Suicide Bombers in Water Dispute With Iran

After two decades fighting the US, Taliban leaders now find themselves sparring with neighbors as the realities of global warming hit home.

time.com

طالبان آماده جنگ با ایران شد!

یک خبرگزاری آمریکایی نوشت که طالبان خود را آماده جنگ احتمالی با ایران بر سر مناقشه آب می کند.

donya-e-eqtesad.com

طالبان حضور نظامی خود در مرز با ایران را تقویت کردند – DW – ۱۴۰۲/۳/۱۰

باشندگان ولایت هرات در مرز با ایران می‌گویند از اوایل صبح چهارشنبه ده‌ها عراده واسطه نظامی گروه طالبان که مجهز با سلاح سبک و سنگین هستند به منطقه مرزی میان افغانستان و ایران اعزام گردیده اند.

www.dw.com

and what we do , well let me tell you we hide it when in may Taliban attacked our border nobody went to the help of those border guards . nobody bombed Taliban, no drone fly over Taliban
what we did , we take photos of Taliban attacking opposing forces in north of Afghanistan and killing them and post it as those are Taliban dead and expected people don't dig up the truth we made lies about shelling Taliban position and killing tens of them while in truth two of our border guards and one Taliban terrorist died in that attack .
our official didn't learned the lesson from history and still traitors are holding our armed force back sadly this time it seems they even infiltrated them

 

[Muhammed45]

well if we don't learn from that it will repeat itself , for several month before the war every sane person and every commander of the army screamed that Iraq is preparing for war with Iran and certain traitors instead of strengthening armed forces there removed them from border and dismantled and destroyed their equipment and we saw the result.

now todays we have such reports

Taliban Prepare Suicide Bombers in Water Dispute With Iran

After two decades fighting the US, Taliban leaders now find themselves sparring with neighbors as the realities of global warming hit home.

time.com

طالبان آماده جنگ با ایران شد!

یک خبرگزاری آمریکایی نوشت که طالبان خود را آماده جنگ احتمالی با ایران بر سر مناقشه آب می کند.

donya-e-eqtesad.com

طالبان حضور نظامی خود در مرز با ایران را تقویت کردند – DW – ۱۴۰۲/۳/۱۰

باشندگان ولایت هرات در مرز با ایران می‌گویند از اوایل صبح چهارشنبه ده‌ها عراده واسطه نظامی گروه طالبان که مجهز با سلاح سبک و سنگین هستند به منطقه مرزی میان افغانستان و ایران اعزام گردیده اند.

www.dw.com

and what we do , well let me tell you we hide it when in may Taliban attacked our border nobody went to the help of those border guards . nobody bombed Taliban, no drone fly over Taliban
what we did , we take photos of Taliban attacking opposing forces in north of Afghanistan and killing them and post it as those are Taliban dead and expected people don't dig up the truth we made lies about shelling Taliban position and killing tens of them while in truth two of our border guards and one Taliban terrorist died in that attack .
our official didn't learned the lesson from history and still traitors are holding our armed force back sadly this time it seems they even infiltrated them

Are you really comparing Taliban with Ba'ath regime of Iraq?

DW the dutch shit spewing media is one of the most anti Iranian media out there. The 2 above are clickbait websites not even worth of openening.

Taliban can never posses tge superiority that Ba'ath army of Iraq had thanks to support of both west and Soviet union. Ideologically, Taliban cannot be even compared to Ba'ath savages. If you read comments of Ba'athis in this website then you would have gotten to known with them and their mentality. Phrases like Majoos, fire worshippers, inferior Ajam, need to be Arabized etc. Taliban is not like that. They don't have an ideology like that.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Are you really comparing Taliban with Ba'ath regime of Iraq?

DW the dutch shit spewing media is one of the most anti Iranian media out there. The 2 above are clickbait websites not even worth of openening.

Taliban can never posses tge superiority that Ba'ath army of Iraq had thanks to support of both west and Soviet union. Ideologically, Taliban cannot be even compared to Ba'ath savages. If you read comments of Ba'athis in this website then you would have gotten to known with them and their mentality. Phrases like Majoos, fire worshippers, inferior Ajam, need to be Arabized etc. Taliban is not like that. They don't have an ideology like that.

Taliban dared attack us, kill to of our border guard and our response was some lame fake media tweet .
also Raeisi 3 month ago gave a serious warning to Taliban about Iran share of Hirmand water . what was their response in last 3 month?

and for the record answer me one thing Iran border guard are better equipped and armed or Taliban fighters ? its years we have abandoned our eastern borders and let foreign and foreign backed terrorist do what ever they want to those area

 

[aryobarzan]

Both of you are right about Iraq and Taliban..I was in Iran few months before Iraq attacked working in defence industry so we were very aware of the threats. However newly arrived revolutionaries were naive and saying we do not need an army we have 40 million "people's army"!!..I am not kidding you in one trip from Shiraz to Tehran in the bus I saw Iranian regular soldiers wearing military uniform with sneakers calling their superior "Brother"giving "Peace signs"!!...imagine this was the level of military discipline few months after collapse of the system and Arab invasion of Iran.

They (revolutionaries) learned their lessons hard way and sacrificed a lot to save the country from Arabs.

My point: Yes may be 1500 years ago some jews attacked Iranian empire but Iran's immediate and real threat is from Arabs..I know IR is trying to say we are all muslims and brothers blah blah blah..but Arabs will attack Iran the minute they see weakness just as they did 43 years ago...and remember they all participated in it (all 22 arab countries minus one syria)..

conclusion: Jews are not our friends but Arabs are our enemy. Some none Iranian is trying to say the reverse of this...3000 years of history is my evidence.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Sure. My apologies for derailing the thread. There are some issues that needs to be addressed. I will consider it an insult if someone claims Iranians are Muslims of swords not truth.

Are you really comparing Taliban with Ba'ath regime of Iraq?

DW the dutch shit spewing media is one of the most anti Iranian media out there. The 2 above are clickbait websites not even worth of openening.

Taliban can never posses tge superiority that Ba'ath army of Iraq had thanks to support of both west and Soviet union. Ideologically, Taliban cannot be even compared to Ba'ath savages. If you read comments of Ba'athis in this website then you would have gotten to known with them and their mentality. Phrases like Majoos, fire worshippers, inferior Ajam, need to be Arabized etc. Taliban is not like that. They don't have an ideology like that.

Just to quickly and efficiently debunk the infantile hogwash reiterated in this thread by your (negatively) racist friend:

- Funnily enough they go on about the Taleban, seemingly not realizing how the latter are in fact speakers of Iranian languages. So after tons of fearmongering about Arabs, Iranians now suddenly pose the biggest foreign threat to Iran. If it's not Arabs, it's Iranians - they'll reference everything and its contrary, just not the actual threat namely zionism and NATO. This alone shows you where these bogus narratives are stemming from, who coined them for the compradors and brown sahibs of Iran. But when you deal with such self-defeating rhetoric, your job is made easy.

Washington wants Iran to get bogged down in Afghanistan, hence why the west's fifth column (treasonous reformists, moderates) is pressing for offensive war against the Taleban. It's absolutely not going to happen though, rest assured. Comparing the Taleban's rather petty power of nuisance with the huge conventional military fielded by Iraq in the early 1980, as well as local post-Revolutionary turmoil in Iran with contemporary conditions is a silly joke indeed, worthy of two-bit demagogues and third rate NATO / zionist propagandists, but certainly not of a serious observer.

- Mahoza did not represent an isolated incident. There's also the episode of Purim, during which 75000 Iranians were massacred by Jewish forces and an Iranian emperor at their service, according to the Ancient Testament (those numbers being tremendous for that time). An entire Iranian tribe is said to have been wiped out from existence, women, children and elderly included. Arab conquerors never eliminated an entire Iranian tribe. Also, historically accurate or nor, the events of Purim as narrated in the Ancient Testament are celebrated to this very day. There is no equivalent celebration in Arab tradition.

- Ancient Iranian emperors during the Sassanid period were fond of their Arab allies and brothers in arms. The way in which Arab Lakhmids used to secure the Iranian empire's southwestern borderlands against raids by other groups was unparalleled. Lacking such a reliable partner in the northeast, the Sassanids were forced to spend huge amounts on erecting a massive wall across several hundreds of kilometers to contain invading Turkic armies.

- No foreign victor other than the Mongols ever subjected the Iranian nation to full fledged, downright genocide. But the British empire towards the end of World War I did, when it deliberately organized and triggered a famine which in the most savage ways and over a period of merely a couple of years eliminated between 10 and 11 million Iranians out of a population of some 20 million. Which is actually the biggest mass-killing of Iranians ever committed in history, and by a gigantic factor at that. On an interesting side note, the British empire was bankrolled by two families with zionist inclinations: the Rothschilds in the west, and the Sassoons in the east.

So to focus obsessively on "Arabs" as an object of historic phobia while staying comparatively mum about the worst tragedy in Iranian history i.e. the horrible genocide induced by the 1917-1919 Great Famine, an attitude Iranian secular bāstān-gerā nationalists are notorious for (and which liberal fifth columnists actively encourage in order to underhandedly score points against the Islamic Republic), does not reflect a sound understanding of history but a caricatural, baseless one rewritten by Anglo-zionist colonialists in the framework of their divide and rule agenda in the Islamic world. You will witness bāstān-gerā "nationalists" rant ten times a month about "Arabs" without the slightest peep about the British empire which brutally murdered over 10 million Iranians a mere century ago. This is not "nationalism" by any valid yardstick, it is uninformed, ill-inspired comprador racialism for emotive house slaves, directly benefiting the foremost criminals against the Iranian nation. You could thus call it treason as well.

- As I reminded earlier, zionists and their footmen from the Haifan Bahai organization had infiltrated at the highest levels and deprived the Iranian government of its sovereignty during the rule of the Pahlavis prior to the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. In other terms, a quite contemporary threat, not an ancient one. So-called Iranian "nationalists" will of course opt to keep silent on this reality or clumsily attempt to sweep it under the rug. To no avail though, since we're here to set the historic record straight.

- The claim that "all Arab states minus Syria were backing Saddam in his aggression of Iran" and the ludicrous inference that Arabs are predisposed towards enmity against Iran, is a fabrication which runs counter to established facts as well as to rational analysis. For one, several Arab governments in addition to Syria chose to refrain from siding with the Iraqi Ba'thist regime. We could namely cite Algeria, Lebanon, but also Libya which initially offered some assistance to Iran but then adopted a neutral stance. Iranian secular bāstān-gerā nationalists scream and shout a lot about "Arabs" but lack mastery of their own country's recent history of foreign affairs.

The zionist apologist also claimed that "the last time some one attacked Iran they spoke Arabic". False again. Since that crime too was the work of the USA, which attacked Iran in the Persian Gulf towards the end of the Imposed War (see operation Praying Mantis, terrorist downing of an Iranian civilian airliner, torture to the death of an Iranian POW aboard a US Navy vessel, and so on).

Secondly and more importantly, the reason why various Arab regimes were supportive of Saddam, was their subservience to either one of the two global superpowers (USA, USSR) and their integration into corresponding blocs (mostly the western capitalist bloc). Considering that Saddam himself was nothing but a proxy to western and Soviet imperialists desperate to contain the Islamic Revolution and its message of self-determination and emancipation from imperial yoke, western-aligned Arab potentates naturally had to follow suit. Yet again, the source of the issue for Iran was not located in Arabia whatsoever but in the capitals of global imperialist powers.

- The chronically fragile zionist regime, in accordance with the Bernard Lewis doctrine and the Oded Yinon plan, is bent on dismantling regional nation-states as a preemptive measure against potential (future) challenges to its regional hegemony. The USA regime's entire neo-con and lib-hawk led policy across West Asia and North Africa consecutive to 9-11, 2001, has methodically been aiming at this sinister objective. As a result of it Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen have already fallen victim to this zionist-designed aggression. And Iran happens to be highest on their kill list. As a matter of fact, Anglo-zionist imperialism today forms a common threat to both Arabs and to the Iranian nation, but also to Turks, Pakistanis etc. Hence the necessity to join hands and to cooperate against said threat. Given the wealth of resources at the disposal of the zio-American empire and given its quasi openly declared goal of smashing Iran's territorial integrity through systematic support for armed "ethno"-separatist elements, it follows that the current existential threat to Iran is emanating straight from the USA and Isra"el"i regimes, not from any fictitious, romanticized "Arab" bogeyman.

Note that this confrontation was entirely initiated by American and zionist imperialists when they placed Iran under their thumb consecutive to the 1953 military coup orchestrated by the CIA (in-house reformists and moderates are seeking to deny the role of their western patrons in the coup, and engage in demonizing the democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadegh under whom Iran's hitherto British-controlled oil industry was nationalized). Today the adversity is prolonged by zionist and NATO insistence to perpetuate their imposed hegemony on the people and governments of the region, compounded in the zionist entity's case through its continued illegal occupation of another nation's lands, a precedent highly dangerous for every party.

- Last but not least, the globalist, masonic project to uproot every single nation and traditional religious belief system on earth, and replace these with a totalitarian unified "one world republic" as well as with a Noahide type of oecumenism, through cultural and informational soft war, destruction of the nuclear family structure, LGBTism, Malthusian denatalism, Hollywoodism etc, is spearheaded not by "Arabs" as a distinct political actor but by messianist zionist oligarchs (the likes of Soros), freemason grand-masters and international banking elites. Those too are ranking among the foremost enemies of the Iranian nation.

- Generally speaking, the idea of some trans-historic, fixed enmity between peoples spanning multiple millennia is a non-scientific, primitive one. To put it simply, statements such as that "Arabs have always been enemies to Iranians" make no sense whatsoever.

In short, when contemplating the list of existential and actually influential and able enemies facing Iran not just as a government but as a unified, coherent nation and civilization, there's no "Arab" power to be found amongst them. What Iran is being threatened by, at the inter-state level is the zio-American empire and beyond, that role is held by the hegemonic networks of zionist messianism, freemasonry and financial capitalism.

 

[Hack-Hook]

- Funnily enough they go on about the Taleban, seemingly not realizing how the latter are in fact speakers of Iranian languages. So after tons of fearmongering about Arabs, Iranians now suddenly pose the biggest foreign threat to Iran. If it's not Arabs, it's Iranians - they'll reference everything and its contrary, just not the actual threat namely zionism and NATO. This alone shows you where these bogus narratives are stemming from, who coined them for the compradors and brown sahibs of Iran. But when you deal with such self-defeating rhetoric, your job is made easy.

nonsense at best .
its not about arab or Persian speaking Taliban.
its about posting incidents of 1400 years ago and apply them to today geo politic
its not important if they speak Arabic or Persian or Hebrew , its about who threaten us and attack us , and who has design for our country and you tend to forget anybody but Israel . you don't care its 30 year all arab country without exception support uae claims on our country land even your bff Assad did that while we were dying protecting his throne from UAE funded terrorists . you don't care it was hamas who taught our battle strategies to ISIS in Syria.
and as I recall you didn't care when Taliban directly attacked our country with heavy weapon and killed our border guards and were among the people who insisted on they are good people we must not respond to them.

Washington wants Iran to get bogged down in Afghanistan, hence why the west's fifth column (reformists, moderates) is pressing for offensive war against the Taleban. It's absolutely not going to happen. Comparing the Taleban's petty power of nuisance with the huge conventional military fielded by Iraq in the early 1980, as well as local post-Revolutionary turmoil in Iran with contemporary conditions is a joke indeed, worthy of two-bit demagogues and third rate NATO / zionist propagandists, but certainly not of a serious observer.

if we destroyed the column that attacked our border how that was equal to bogged down in Afghanistan , we only expected an example be made out of the ones who killed our soldiers but sadly some traitor don't care and let not point finger at who these traitors are .

- Ancient Iranian rulers during the Sassanid period were fond of their Arab allies and brothers in arms. The way in which Arab Lakhmids used to secure the Iranian empire's southwestern borderlands against raids by other groups was unparalleled. Lacking such a reliable partner in the northeast, the Sassanids were forced to spend huge amounts on erecting a massive wall across several hundreds of kilometers to contain Turkic invaders.

and if you read the history there are also Arabs that were ally with Rome why not mention them and while you are at it why not mention that Muslim arab attacking Iran was not the first or last time arabs attacked Iran while you mention that 75000 supposedly killed at purim why not mention how many arabs killed and how many destruction they left behind them.

No victor other than the Mongols ever subjected the Iranian nation to full fledged, downright genocide. But the British empire towards the end of World War I did, when it deliberately organized and triggered a famine in Iran which eliminated between 10 and 11 million Iranians out of a population of some 20 million in the most horrible ways and over a period of merely a couple of years. On an interesting sidenote, the British empire was bankrolled by two zionist banker dynasties: the Rothschilds in the west, and the Sassoons in the east.

and Arabs at the time of second khalif commited not only genocide but also cultural genocide or you also like certain member here believe there was no science and culture and art in iran before islam and iranian were illiterate

- As I reminded earlier, zionists and their footmen from the Haifan Bahai organization had infiltrated at the highest levels, and deprived the Iranian government of its sovereignty during the rule of the Pahlavis prior to the victory of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. In other terms, a quite contemporary threat, not an ancient one. So-called Iranian "nationalists" will of course opt to keep silent on this reality and clumsily attempt to brush it under the rug. To no avail though, since we're here to set the historic record straight.

I assure you their infiltration is not as deep as Arab and other Iran enemies apologists

the genocide induced by the 1917-1919 Great Famine, an attitude Iranian secular bāstān-gerā nationalists are known for (and which liberal fifth columnists encourage to underhandedly score points against the Islamic Republic), does not reflect a sound understanding of history but a caricatural, baseless one written by Anglo-zionist colonialists in the framework of their divide and rule agenda in the Islamic world. This is not "nationalism", it is uninformed, ill-inspired brown sahib and comprador racialism directly benefiting the biggest criminals against the Iranian nation. You could thus also call it treason.

and Russia did no such thing and had no hand in that , if you think so go read history again

The zionist apologist also claimed that "the last time some one attacked Iran they spoke Arabic". False again. Since that crime too was committed done by the USA, which attacked Iran in the Persian Gulf towards the end of the Imposed War (see operation Praying Mantis, terrorist downing of an Iranian civilian airliner, torture to the death of an Iranian POW aboard a US Navy vessel, and so on).

no for the information it was taliban the last group who attacked iran.

Secondly and more importantly, the reason why various Arab regimes were supportive of Saddam, was their subservience to either one of the two global superpowers (USA, USSR) and their integration into corresponding blocs (mostly the western capitalist bloc). Considering that Saddam himself was nothing but a proxy to western and Soviet imperialists desperate to contain the Islamic Revolution and its message of self-determination and emancipation from imperial yoke, western-aligned Arab potentates naturally had to follow suit. Yet again, the source of the issue for Iran was not located in Arabia whatsoever, but in the capitals of global imperialist powers.

no it was their Arab prejudice , have you forgot what Arafat Said about iran and iraq ,

- Generally speaking, the idea of some trans-historic, fixed enmity between peoples spanning multiple millennia is a non-scientific, primitive one. To put it simply, statements such as that "Arabs have always been enemies to Iranians", make no sense whatsoever.

wonder what is your idea when we replace Arabs with Israel .
that aside its true saying always is wrong and inaccurate but we see action when one arab nation said no to UAE stand about our island then we talk about this

 

[lydian fall]

98% of Iranian voted to IR

No one attacked Iran

 

[SalarHaqq]

nonsense at best .

Immaculate truth. Fix your reading comprehension issues.

its not about arab or Persian speaking Taliban.
its about posting incidents of 1400 years ago and apply them to today geo politic

Boring rhetoric.

its not important if they speak Arabic or Persian or Hebrew ,

It is to the racialist secular nationalists whose narrative you lend tactical support to.

its about who threaten us and attack us , and who has design for our country and you tend to forget anybody but Israel .

Wrong. I apply correct hierarchization of foes and am able to see who is empowering whom.

You deliberately obfuscate these essential criteria because of the underlying aim you amateurishly seek to promote on this website, namely a revision of Iran's foreign policy principles and renewed subjugation of the Iranian nation to zionist and American imperial yoke, which corresponds to the agenda of liberal fifth columnists.

Then again, what else could be expected from a subject who openly suggests being on the payroll of foreign enemies in an effort to overthrow one's own government is "not" an act of treason. You exposed your colors in full sight and no amount of pilpul will change that.

you don't care its 30 year all arab country without exception support uae claims

You are lying.

on our country land even your bff Assad did that while we were dying protecting his throne from UAE funded terrorists . you don't care it was hamas who taught our battle strategies to ISIS in Syria.

Nobody cares about hollow statements indeed. Rhetoric is one thing, concrete actions a complete different pair of shoes.

Moreover allies are no vassals, there can be disagreements on secondary topics. You have no understanding of how contemporary geopolitics work.

Hamas did not "teach" anything to "I"SIS. Furthermore the massive advantages of Iran's relationship with Hamas outweigh the minor downsides by far, hence why it was maintained. Nowadays Hamas are in the process of normalizing their ties with Damascus as well. Iran made the right choices, grounded in an accurate priorization of threats. And will continue doing so, much to the chagrin of zionists.

and as I recall you didn't care when Taliban directly attacked our country with heavy weapon and killed our border guards

Lie.

and were among the people who insisted on they are good people

That is a lie as well. Honesty is not your strong suit.

we must not respond to them.

A third lie in a row.

if we destroyed the column that attacked our border how that was equal to bogged down in Afghanistan , we only expected an example be made out of the ones who killed our soldiers but sadly some traitor don't care and let not point finger at who these traitors are .

Iran responded to the attack. Traitors are those who rehash Taleban propaganda claiming Iran's counter-shelling did no damage.

and if you read the history there are also Arabs that were ally with Rome why not mention them

It's nothing to do with and does not affect my point in the slightest.

and while you are at it why not mention that Muslim arab attacking Iran was not the first or last time arabs attacked Iran while you mention that 75000 supposedly killed at purim why not mention how many arabs killed and how many destruction they left behind them.

Certainly no 75000 nor in a matter of days. And they certainly did not wipe out an entire Iranian tribe.

and Arabs at the time of second khalif commited not only genocide

No they didn't.

but also cultural genocide

No such thing took place.

or you also like certain member here believe there was no science and culture and art in iran before islam and iranian were illiterate

Facts:

1) No act committed by Arabs in Iran comes even remotely close to the planned, methodical genocide of 10 to 11 million Iranians or 50% of the entire population by the zionist-funded British empire in the early 20th century.

2) The way in which secular Iranian nationalists respectively treat these two events completely runs counter to their relative discrepancy.

You have no point, only desperate ranting.

I assure you their infiltration is not as deep as Arab and other Iran enemies apologists

You are nobody to "assure" me of anything.

There is no such thing in Iran. No political grouping is serving any Arab government.

But liberals are directly working at the behest of well identified hostile powers (USA, Isra"el").

and Russia did no such thing

Indeed, she didn't.

and had no hand in that , if you think so go read history again

I prefer to focus on the perpetrator rather than on aides or second fiddles. Unlike you who are bent on whitewashing the perpetrator.

no for the information it was taliban the last group who attacked iran

No, for your information the Taleban are no native Arab speakers. So my response to the user was right either way and you have no point, once again.

And going by that logic, the USA and Isra"el" are still the latest aggressors, given more recent attacks on border guards committed by zio-American backed separatist groups.

no it was their Arab prejudice , have you forgot what Arafat Said about iran and iraq ,

I don't know what "Arab prejuduce" is, unlike you I do not subscribe to racial essentialization of peoples.

Arafat is not a government.

Saddam acted as a western and Soviet proxy. It were his foreign superpower backers which enabled and encouraged him to wage war on Iran in the first place.

wonder what is your idea when we replace Arabs with Israel .

Isra"el" is not a people, it's an illegitimate regime.

that aside its true saying always is wrong and inaccurate but we see action when one arab nation said no to UAE stand about our island then we talk about this

That's one topic among thousands, and not the most pressing one given Iran's unchallenged dominance in this regard. It doesn't inform about the overall state of relations between Iran and governments in question.

You are supposed to work at a hospital, not spend several hours per day spreading zionist propaganda on a forum. Don't blow your cover.