Sadr or no Sadr, Iran is not going anywhere

[Maula Jatt]

camelguy dude, did you watched this video?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1480278187821182990

The video was shot in Kirkuk, 2017.

what is he saying dude?

 

[Bahram Esfandiari]

Iraqis as everyone else in the region are overly friendly to any visitor, this is a culture trait. In the west, people refer to Turkey being very guest friendly. That's basically what you just described here.

The majority of Iraq sees Iran as cancer, doesn't mean they'll kill Iranian visitors.

From a state interest pov, Iran undermines Iraq in every way and is extremely damaging. Iraq is a shithole and Iran has a big hand in it.

Iraq was not a Shit hole when you where gassing Halabja right? Iraq is not a shit hole because of Saddam being a stupid moron who lost two wars against a U.S led coalition? Its only a shit hole because of Iran according to this genius! If Iran wanted Iraq to be a real shit hole we would have stood by and let Daesh do its thing!

 

[Titanium100]

The majority of Iraq sees Iran as cancer, doesn't mean they'll kill Iranian visitors.

I really hope the militias try to overthrow the Iraqi government. We will invade by Allah if that was to occur..

 

[dBSPL]

what is he saying dude?

The fall of Kirkuk and the events that followed (how daesh took over the city within days cannot be explained even today, and there was a great wave of migration and a series of massacres in the events that followed) was quite traumatic event for Iraqi Muslims.

In the video in question, Qassem Soleimani is seen sitting with the Hashd al-Shaabi commanders and has a military-security map of Kirkuk in front of him. Speaking in Arabic, Soleimani says: “The Shiites won. Believe me; If Sunnis, Christians and Jews all over the world from east to west could not stand in the way of this victory, it is Allah's decision.”

Someone next to Soleimani said, “Haji, the Israeli project was crushed in two hours. “This was a big Israeli project,” he says. Another says, "This is a great achievement," arguing that "success" is achieved without war and damage.(lol) Looking at the content of the video in question, it is understood that Qasem Soleimani spoke after an agreement he made with the Kurdistan Patriotic Union (PUK) officials at that time and referred to October 16 as "a gift from God".

 

[Maula Jatt]

The fall of Kirkuk and the events that followed (how daesh took over the city within days cannot be explained even today, and there was a great wave of migration and a series of massacres in the events that followed) was quite traumatic event for Iraqi Muslims.

In the video in question, Qassem Soleimani is seen sitting with the Hashd al-Shaabi commanders and has a military-security map of Kirkuk in front of him. Speaking in Arabic, Soleimani says: “The Shiites won. Believe me; If Sunnis, Christians and Jews all over the world from east to west could not stand in the way of this victory, it is Allah's decision.”

Someone next to Soleimani said, “Haji, the Israeli project was crushed in two hours. “This was a big Israeli project,” he says. Another says, "This is a great achievement," arguing that "success" is achieved without war and damage. Looking at the content of the video in question, it is understood that Qasem Soleimani spoke after an agreement he made with the Kurdistan Patriotic Union (PUK) officials at that time and referred to October 16 as "a gift from God".

Arabization successful @camelguy ?

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Arabization successful @camelguy ?

Kurds peshmerga were never capable, it's not an achievement. Overrunning them was easy, Iraq could take Arbil as well militarily as far as the peshmerga goes

 

[Naram_Sin]

Like all things, people change with time, and with how connected the world has become in this era we live in, this process has become ever more rapid... And ever more predictable.

Al-Sadr is merely the exit point of what has been accumulating slowly but surely for sometime now, the dissatisfaction with the current state of the country, with the path its headed on, this along with having both the threat of Isis and US presence greatly diminished, has left only the groups backed by Iran, the one currently running the show, to take the blame.

You can only use the rhetoric of resistance so much until the veil starts to tear, showing what's truly behind, rhetorics don't build nations or feed people.

So the IRGC backed groups are on a downward spiral, the more cunning VAJA influence will probably persist, and that is acceptable for now, balance is key in everything and specially in statecraft, any drop in Irans presence must be carefully weighted against the presence of other regional actors.

 

[Big Tank]

I'm surprised at the confidence of this camel guy sitting somewhere in Europe or US ranting how good his pappa Saddam was

Dude. He lost a war against Iran, two wars against US. All he could do is hunt his own people with his drunkard sons. You've to understand that Iraq is and forever will be a Shia stronghold. You've lost.

 

[Titanium100]

Like all things, people change with time, and with how connected the world has become in this era we live in, this process has become ever more rapid... And ever more predictable.

Al-Sadr is merely the exit point of what has been accumulating slowly but surely for sometime now, the dissatisfaction with the current state of the country, with the path its headed on, this along with having both the threat of Isis and US presence greatly diminished, has left only the groups backed by Iran, the one currently running the show, to take the blame.

You can only use the rhetoric of resistance so much until the veil starts to tear, showing what's truly behind, rhetorics don't build nations or feed people.

So the IRGC backed groups are on a downward spiral, the more cunning VAJA influence will probably persist, and that is acceptable for now, balance is key in everything and specially in statecraft, any drop in Irans presence must be carefully weighted against the presence of other regional actors.

The problem with these IRGC backed militias is that they cause economical failure in each country they set foot on and they are an eternal parasite and sometimes I have seen their Iranian handlers just resigning because they can't control these militias

I'm surprised at the confidence of this camel guy sitting somewhere in Europe or US ranting how good his pappa Saddam was

Dude. He lost a war against Iran, two wars against US. All he could do is hunt his own people with his drunkard sons. You've to understand that Iraq is and forever will be a Shia stronghold. You've lost.

Saddam never lost a war to Iran come again.. You said Iraq is forever a Shia Stronghold? there is no such thing as shia stronghold Iraq is a failed state and bound to politically change for the better by either foreign interference or just locally besides.. Besides is that not blatant sectrian post. Iraq is the seat of Abbasid throne someone can be passing thru but thats about it is off-limits.. Including Iran itself is off-limits for auction meaning they will have to re-enter the body either willing or by force eventually.. Not out of hate but out of love we are one and the same destined together

 

[Hack-Hook]

The problem with these IRGC backed militias is that they cause economical failure in each country they set foot on and they are an eternal parasite and sometimes I have seen their Iranian handlers just resigning because they can't control these militias


Saddam never lost a war to Iran come again.. You said Iraq is forever a Shia Stronghold? there is no such thing as shia stronghold Iraq is a failed state and bound to politically change for the better by either foreign interference or just locally besides.. Besides is that not blatant sectrian post. Iraq is the seat of Abbasid throne someone can be passing thru but thats about it is off-limits.. Including Iran itself is off-limits for auction meaning they will have to re-enter the body either willing or by force eventually.. Not out of hate but out of love we are one and the same destined together

he lost in the sense that he achieved zero of his goal despite the financial backing of Persian Gulf Arabs and providing mercenaries by countries like (Jordan, Egypt, Morocco , Sudan ,Somali and Persian gulf Arabs), technological and weapon backing of Europe they even provided Saddam with WMD, weapons and training from USSR, intelligence and political support of USA and its effort to close the route for any weapon for Iran.
we still remember how king of Jordan fired Cannons toward Iran and congratulated Saddam for starting the war. even Argentina and brazil helped Saddam in that war

and all these against a country who was sanctioned , and a certain country b increasing the production of oil tried to reduce its income as much as possible.
so yes Iraq and its backer failed in all their goals of starting the war

Iraq is the seat of Abbasid throne someone can be passing thru but thats about it is off-limits..

well , before that Iraq was the seat of Sasanid and Parthians if you want to use that logic

 

[SalarHaqq]

he lost in the sense that he achieved zero of his goal despite the financial backing of Persian Gulf Arabs and providing mercenaries by countries like (Jordan, Egypt, Morocco , Sudan ,Somali and Persian gulf Arabs), technological and weapon backing of Europe they even provided Saddam with WMD, weapons and training from USSR, intelligence and political support of USA and its effort to close the route for any weapon for Iran.

Plus massive weapons supply to Iraq by France (top of the line Mirage Super Etendard and F-1 fighter jets, Roland SAM systems etc), sale of a nuclear reactor (intended to serve as a source for nuclear weapons), even supply of French pilots flying sorties against Iran.

Plus multiple companies from a range of European countries including the likes of Germany and Belgium equipping Iraq with the dual-use precursors which were used to manufacture banned chemical weapons... With exports being officially authorized by the European regimes in question, despite the fact that they were perfectly informed of how Baghdad was using these materials to produce the WMD its army was the only side to field and employ on the war fronts. With the US at the UN Security Council opposing its veto to a draft meant to condemn Saddam's WMD attacks on Iranians.

Plus some countries which weren't part of either Eastern or Western bloc, such as former Yugoslavia, also backing Saddam.

Plus assistance in the propaganda and intelligence realm by some of the strongest spy agencies of the Cold War, not least East Germany's Ministry for State Security (Stasi). The infamous hoax of the "keys to paradise" Iran was supposed to have outfitted juvenile soldiers with was first concocted by an East German "journalist" who toured the Iraqi side of the front.

Plus on the financial end, Saddam's entire war effort being bankrolled by the PGCC regimes. Iraq as a matter of fact spent very little on the war.

Plus Washington siding with Baghdad in the tanker war and even directly taking part in the fighting on Saddam's behalf during the last couple of years of the
conflict in the Persian Gulf, when the US Navy attacked Iranian forces and oil installations, and also downed a civilian Iranian airliner in a terrorist strike.

And so on, and so forth. The unbeliavable imbalance in terms of foreign assistance to the opposing parties in this war has to be the heaviest of any major inter-state conflict of the 20th century.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

I'm surprised at the confidence of this camel guy sitting somewhere in Europe or US ranting how good his pappa Saddam was

Dude. He lost a war against Iran, two wars against US. All he could do is hunt his own people with his drunkard sons. You've to understand that Iraq is and forever will be a Shia stronghold. You've lost.

Iraq didn't lose against Iran. Shiites took power whom are Iran friendly. If Iraqis closed the door to Iran Iran would have no influence similarly to how Turkey and Saudi can do little in Baghdad.

Losing a conventional war against the US is not a shame, you would all lose. It makes us Chads that we disobey rules and went to war against them.

Pakistan despite its massive population would be crying in front of America.

 

[cocomo]

If not for Iran, Syria Iraq hell the whole Levant region would've been over run by salafi lunatics imposing their cut throat barbaric interpretation. People who argue that without Iranian intervention that region would've been a bed of roses are either fools or fooling others.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Plus massive weapons supply to Iraq by France (top of the line Mirage Super Etendard and F-1 fighter jets, Roland SAM systems etc), sale of a nuclear reactor (intended to serve as a source for nuclear weapons), even supply of French pilots flying sorties against Iran.

Plus multiple companies from a range of European countries including the likes of Germany and Belgium equipping Iraq with the dual-use precursors which were used to manufacture banned chemical weapons... With exports being officially authorized by the European regimes in question, despite the fact that they were perfectly informed of how Baghdad was using these materials to produce the WMD its army was the only side to field and employ on the war fronts. With the US at the UN Security Council opposing its veto to a draft meant to condemn Saddam's WMD attacks on Iranians.

Plus some countries which weren't part of either Eastern or Western bloc, such as former Yugoslavia, also backing Saddam.

Plus assistance in the propaganda and intelligence realm by some of the strongest spy agencies of the Cold War, not least East Germany's Ministry for State Security (Stasi) - the infamous hoax of the "keys to paradise" Iran was supposed to have outfitted juvenile soldiers with was first concocted by an East German "journalist" who visited the front on the Iraqi side.

Plus on the financial end, Saddam's entire war effort being bankrolled by the PGCC regimes. Iraq as a matter of fact spent very little on the war.

Plus Washington siding with Baghdad in the tanker war and even directly taking part in the fighting on Saddam's behalf during the last couple of years of the
conflict in the Persian Gulf, when the US Navy attacked Iranian forces and oil installations, and also downed a civilian Iranian airliner in a terrorist strike.

And so on, and so forth. The unbeliavable imbalance in terms of foreign assistance to the opposing parties in this war has to be the heaviest of any major inter-state conflict of the 20th century.

Persian boy, you fought against Iraq whilst Iraq is majority shiite, has a far smaller population and did not wield top American weaponry.

You had F-14's as well as Israeli TOW delivery to deal with Iraqi tanks.

Iraq had to deal with Shias standing against the state, Kurds in the north rising up and deal with hordes of Basijis including children storming the battlefield. Syria to our west aiding Iran and the list goes on.

Stop the sobbing already, you had many advantages

well , before that Iraq was the seat of Sasanid and Parthians if you want to use that logic

Today I see Arabs in most of Iraq, which is all that matters. LOL, who gives a shit about Cyrus the dead.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Persian boy, you fought against Iraq whilst Iraq is majority shiite, has a far smaller population and did not wield top American weaponry.

You had F-14's as well as Israeli TOW delivery to deal with Iraqi tanks.

Iran was placed under a strict arms embargo. Try flying an F-14 without spare parts or proper upkeep. Heck, US military advisers before leaving Iran in 1979 even sabotaged whatever machinery and tools they could inside the maintenance facilities. Iraq wielded top French weaponry, top Brazilian weaponry, tons of efficient Soviet weaponry as well as WMD.

Iraq may have a Shia majority, but the Iranian province Saddam intended to grab and annex (and resoundingly failed at), is partly inhabited by Arab-speaking Iranians. Also, Saddam would take it out on close relatives of any Iraqi army recruit refusing to obey orders. Iran had no need to resort to such draconian measures: volunteers, including from religious minorities came in such endless streams that the few desertions Iran had were not even clamped down on.

Iran received 2500 TOW missiles only. For comparison: the US sold Saudi Arabia no less than 13000 TOW's to arm the Syrian insurgents with! And it didn't happen because the US wished to help Iran, but because its had its hand forced after Iran escalated in Lebanon, where US Marine barracks were blown up and Hezbollah was created to fight zionist occupation, where the CIA station chief was killed and scores of western journalists taken hostage. As for Isra"el", it merely served as an intermediary, because the US asked them to deliver this limited amount of TOW missiles from their stocks so as not to leave any traces, seeing how it was a clandestine operation that the Reagan administration tried to keep hidden from Congress.

I'm not "sobbing" but analyzing historic facts. And yes, in terms of foreign assistance to either side, the Imposed War was probably the most imbalanced of the 20th century. That's just a fact.

Iraq had to deal with Shias standing against the state, Kurds in the north rising up and deal with hordes of Basijis including children storming the battlefield. Syria to our west aiding Iran and the list goes on.

I'm talking about the imbalance in foreign assistance. Indeed, had Iraq not received these unusual amounts of backing from both East and West and had Iran not been placed under arms embargo - it was a rare instance, if not the only such case of a conflict in which NATO and the Warsaw Pact were aligned, surely Iran could have overrun Iraq. But this just highlights once again the idiotic decision-making of Saddam. To think that launching a full fledged war against a country like post-revolutionary Iran would end in victory for him, or that Iraq would benefit from it in any way, no matter how massive the support from abroad, was simply short sighted.