Saudi Arabia confirms that it will deploy troops to Syria

[forcetrip]

Turkey has decided to sit out the Saudi party it invited everyone too.

Turkey not considering sending troops into Syria: agency - World - DAWN.COM

 

[B@KH]

Look at this beautiful quote

how Fit are these quote even today.

No doubt it is thru division that enemy continue to invade.

 

[T-Rex]

Russia actually opened up the pandorabox for Syria. Though invited by Asad regime, Russians gave excuse to Turks and Saudis for making an official push into Syria. And this is just the start, I afraid soon we will see many countries pushing into Syria to fulfill their own agendas and ISIS will be the least significant part of that.

There's a gathering of armed forces of 20 countries in north SA. They say it's for drill but it looks more like a preparation for a ground assault into Syria through Jordan.

Troops from 20 countries prepared for largest military drill - Saudi Gazette

 

[Madali]

You begin by doing what you accuse me of doing, and take the opportunity to pretend that you're 'masoom'?

I haven't visited every thread to constantly talk about shia-sunni problems in Pakistan. You are the one who are obsessed by Iran. I talk about Syria in Syrian thread, talk about Saudi in Saudi thread, and Pakistan in Pakistan thread. You talk about Shias & Iran in EVERY thread. ALL your posts are about Iran.

1. The Supreme Executive of Pakistan can be and on occasions have been Shiite.

In Iran, the Supreme Executive MUST be a Shiite.

I have no problem against Pakistan. I don't know why you are defending Pakistan to me. I like Pakistan, and I think they handle the difference between the sects in their country pretty well.

But I explained to you that Sunnis can be mayors, can be in majlis, and can be in Assembly of experts. They can and are. There is very little likehood they can be president, because the population of sunnis in Iran is between 5-10%. It is extremely unlikely that with a population so low, there would be a sunni president. Specially since even this percentage are not in major cities of Tehran or Mashahd or Isfahan. They are in border cities, so have less political influence.

This isn't a ruling which has come down from heaven. It's a law made by the Ayatollahs of Iran, who are men, so don't pretend that it is about anything more than seizing power on behalf of one religious community.

When the rulers of Iran made such laws, they automatically declared all Sunni Iranians as second-class.

Don't talk about something you don't know. The constitution of Iran makes no such claims.
"This is article 19 and 20,
Article 19 [No Discrimination, No Privileges]
All people of Iran, whatever the ethnic group or tribe to which they belong, enjoy equal rights; color, race, language, and the like, do not bestow any privilege.

Article 20 [Equality Before Law]
All citizens of the country, both men and women, equally enjoy the protection of the law and enjoy all human, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, in conformity with Islamic criteria."

Article 23,
Article 23 [Freedom of Belief]
The investigation of individuals' beliefs is forbidden, and no one may be molested or taken to task simply for holding a certain belief

In Iran, we don't have religion sect mentioned in our passport, shenasname, or ID. That's why we don't have an exact number of sunnis & Shias in Iran, because it is not mentioned anywhere.

2. I'll take that with a shipload of salt.

Obviously, you will, since we are such an EVIL country. But in Iran, we have Sunni leaders (you think they are banned??). These leaders don't go Qom or Mashhad to study, they go to Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.

3. One bird does not herald spring.

You said, " In Iran a Sunni has never been allowed to head any senior military post." You used the word "never". When I proved you clearly wrong, with evidence, you just now say something else?

4. Check the link below



World Report 2012: Iran | Human Rights Watch

Sunni Muslims banned from holding own Eid prayers in Tehran | World news | The Guardian

Iranian police prevent Sunni prayers during Islamic unity confer

I'm less impressed with quotes about peaceful intentions, than I am by deeds showing them.

I look forward to the day when an Iranian Sunni has just as much right to be the supreme executive of Iran; as a Pakistani Shiite has to be the same in Pakistan.

Now if you don't want to discuss these topics, I suggest you don't bother replying. I would have more trust in your word that you are not interested in discussing these issues.

Oh huge surprise, western media claiming something negative about Iran. What a shock.

You don't need to look forward to any day, because situation in Iran is stable & calm. When was the last time you read on the news that a mosque, in Iran, was blown up by a Sunni or a Shia? When was the last time a Sunni or a Shia attacked the other group in Iran?

We have peace and stability in our country. We don't need people like you stirring the pot. Go look what people like you have done to the rest of the region.

For us, we have nothing against Pakistan, so you don't need to defend it again and again. I personally love Pakistan, and Pakistan's respect for both sects is an inspiration for all of us.

 

[libertycall]

senseless and worthless. Iran is overwhelmingly shia and all minorities have their due rights and representation.

In Pakistan Shia do not consider themselves as minority. since shias are the second largest segment after sunni barelvis. therefore there is no point of any such legislation in Pakistan that ruler be sunni and not shia. Pakistan is quite a different. Zia tried but failed. The only chance in Pak is equal rights. KSA gangs too did their best to marginalize and deprive shias of their due rights without much success since Shias are not less in pak and cannot be defeated or marginalized.

these sectarian talks lead to nowhere. this problem will be over when Muslims ummah get rid of the monarchy.

Plainly all minorities do NOT have their rights and representations when Sunni Iranians are denied the right to lead their country.

Check your facts. There is not a single Pashtun that I know who isn't a Deobandi. That's just the Pashtuns. Count how many other parts of Pakistan are overwhelmingly Deobandi, Ahl-e-Hadees, and Salafi. I don't give a rats *** what you think of our religious beliefs. A large chunk of Pakistan is Pashtun and hence Deobandi; don't like it, get back on your train to Indian Punjab with your Barelvi peers. You become Pashtuns enemy the day you begin using derogatory terms to describe our religious beliefs. If you think you can get away with attacking us and we're going to ignore it, chacha your parents didn't teach you about how long we hold a grudge against those who wrong us!

Zia did not try anything. If Zia was truly the monster you've portrayed him as he wouldn't have allowed 2 million Shiites to turn up in a demonstration on the orders of the Ayatollahs of Iran, saying they refused to pay Zakat. He also allowed the Ayatollahs to use Karachi port to conduct their trade while other ports were closed to them and their own were out of action because of the Iraqi Air-force, this too against objections from the Gulf Arabs. For all those favors including supplying them with parts for radars to defend their cities, he is still attacked by people like yourself for being anti-Shia. Chacha, you don't hate him because he carried out any anti-Shia acts; you hate him because he wasn't a member of your sect.

Everything in the universe lasts for a period. Enjoy yours while you can. We most assuredly will not forgive or forget.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

So will it give Iran the right to deploy troops in yemen to fight "Al Qaeda" as saudi arabia has given itself the right to enter syria to fight "ISIS" ?

But I think sending forces to syria will prove to be a blunder and it can also cause even a bigger war between saudi arabia and iran. Pakistan should keep its hands off of that arab coalition.

If syrian rebels are mujahideen then yemeni houthis are also mujahideen by that same logic. Saudia calls houthis as terrorists and iran calls syrian rebels as terrorists. I don't see a difference. Both should stop meddling in each others backyards.

On the contrary I pray both opposing sides work together against Daesh. Which is by far worse enemy of all

Best will be to assist Iraq against Daesh as well.
These are my prayers
What the rulers of middle East will actually do is another matter. Human blood is cheap and life of anyone friend or foe carries no value.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Lol hope it works out good. For people of Syria and bad for Daesh.
As long as focus is true to declared objective
There is no problem

 

[raptor22]

4. In Iran it's next to impossible for Sunnis to get permission for a mosque. In Pakistan there are thousands of not only Shia mosques but also imam-barghas etc.

5. In Iran, Sunnis are forced to read Eid prayers behind a Shia religious leader. In Pakistan, Shia can pray behind whoever they like.

Now be honest. Which is more fair to its minority??

Get a life sir,,,

An Iranian Sunnie woman who is the governor in Sisatan and Balochestan province she is a doctor and her previous positions were head of state welfare organization of Iran in Chabahar :

Another one in north of Iran , she is Turkman and Sunnei:

Another one which she is mayor in Kalat and also Sunni:

He is governor in Hormozgan and he is Sunnie:

It's a short list of Sunnie people who have become MP in Iran parliament just in 8th and 9th terms :

 

[raptor22]

4. In Iran it's next to impossible for Sunnis to get permission for a mosque. In Pakistan there are thousands of not only Shia mosques but also imam-barghas etc.

5. In Iran, Sunnis are forced to read Eid prayers behind a Shia religious leader. In Pakistan, Shia can pray behind whoever they like.

Now be honest. Which is more fair to its minority??

Sunni prayer in Sanandaj:

Sunni prayer in Bandar Abbas:

Friday Paryer in 400 mosques is held in Sistan and Balouchestan:

Sunnis Hawza in Sistan and Balouchestan:

 

[libertycall]

You're still not answering my question about whether Iranian Sunnis can have equality in Iran as opposed to Pakistanis Shiites who have exactly the same rights to be elected to any post in the land.

Once again, NO SUNNI IN IRAN is allowed to be Supreme Leader. Every other job title in Iran can't fart without the Supreme Leader's approval. Pakistan has had Shiite Prime Minister's, Pakistan has had Shiite President's, Pakistan has had Shiite COAS. Iranian law actively discriminates against Iranian Sunnis in this regard.

This law was introduced by Khomeini. All the talk in the world about 'Sunni brothers' cannot hide the fact that Khomeini created a law granting LESS rights to Sunnis.

For example, a large number of senior conservative clerics, and particularly a number of traditional maraje-e taqlids (literally, ‘sources of emulation’, the highest - ranking clerics in Shia Islam), neither tolerate the presence of women and Sunni Muslims in high political positions, nor accept any relaxation of police controls over women’s dress or youth behaviour.

and these by the way are supposed to be practical examples of how Shiites should behave. Imagine if that's how they teach Shia to behave towards Sunnis??

and

Footnote 15
It must be noted that even though Rouhani received the highest percentage of votes in the Sunni provinces of Sistan-va-Baluchistan and Kurdistan at the 2013 election, the president has not appointed a single Sunni provincial governor, out of concern to prevent a backlash from the traditional conservatives and particularly Shiite mara'je-e taqlids, something that has been criticized by the Sunnis.

Similarly, despite the hopes that female voters had invested in Rouhani, he has not appointed a single female minister to his administration. It appears that the president, who knows that he was not the preferred presidential choice of the Supreme Leader, does not wish to create a confrontation with the high -ranking clerics over such issues as a female cabinet minister or a Sunni provincial governor while he is engaged in a bitter conflict with the hardliners over the nuclear issue

https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/...ent/20141124RouhaniislamicRepublicBastani.pdf

I've also given you a long list of some of the Sunni ulema killed by the Shiite regime in Iran. Would you like me to post the list again?

Remember what I said about how Khomeini had treated those Sunnis deluded or naive enough to support his 'revolution'?

Based on Iranian law, women and non-Shias are barred from running for the presidential seat but according to the constitution, which the president is in charge of handling, all people of Iran, whatever ethnic group or tribe, enjoy equal rights; color, race, language, and the like, do not bestow any privilege.

In protest, former reformist Kurdish Member of Parliament Jalal Jalali Zadeh highlighted, in a statement, the role Kurds played in the Islamic revolution and argued that the Kurds are now exposed to discrimination when applying for low-paid jobs as well.

Rouhani vs. the Ayatollahs - Your Middle East

In your 'Islamic State', women and Sunni Iranian men have exactly the same rights. In Pakistan, women have been the leaders of State, as have Shiites.

 

[Pakistani E]

@libertycall

You love the Saudis, We get it. Now stop derailing the thread.

 

[Madali]

You're still not answering my question about whether Iranian Sunnis can have equality in Iran as opposed to Pakistanis Shiites who have exactly the same rights to be elected to any post in the land.

Once again, NO SUNNI IN IRAN is allowed to be Supreme Leader. Every other job title in Iran can't fart without the Supreme Leader's approval. Pakistan has had Shiite Prime Minister's, Pakistan has had Shiite President's, Pakistan has had Shiite COAS. Iranian law actively discriminates against Iranian Sunnis in this regard.

This law was introduced by Khomeini. All the talk in the world about 'Sunni brothers' cannot hide the fact that Khomeini created a law granting LESS rights to Sunnis.



and these by the way are supposed to be practical examples of how Shiites should behave. Imagine if that's how they teach Shia to behave towards Sunnis??

and



https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/...ent/20141124RouhaniislamicRepublicBastani.pdf

I've also given you a long list of some of the Sunni ulema killed by the Shiite regime in Iran. Would you like me to post the list again?

Remember what I said about how Khomeini had treated those Sunnis deluded or naive enough to support his 'revolution'?



Rouhani vs. the Ayatollahs - Your Middle East

In your 'Islamic State', women and Sunni Iranian men have exactly the same rights. In Pakistan, women have been the leaders of State, as have Shiites.

You keep saying Pakistan this and Pakistan that, as if we are insulting Pakistan, and you need to defend it.

We think Pakistan is a good example of Islamic governance. It has female leaders, and respects both sects. We have (or at least I do, I can't speak for all Iranians) complete respect for Pakistan. It is heads above other Islamic countries that are sheikhdoms or dictators. Pakistan has had problem with constant military coupes, but it seems to be on the right track now, and inshallah, it will be so for the future.

In regards to Iran, our constitution was voted by the people after the revolution. The constitution, because over 90% of the population is Shia sect, has taken the 12 Imamers as its official school.

Article 12 of our constitution mentions this,
"The official religion of Iran is Islam and the Twelver Ja'fari school, and this principle will remain eternally immutable. Other Islamic schools are to be accorded full respect, and their followers are free to act in accordance with their own jurisprudence in performing their religious rites. These schools enjoy official status in matters pertaining to religious education, affairs of personal status (marriage, divorce, inheritance, and wills) and related litigation in courts of law. In regions of the country where Muslims following any one of these schools constitute the majority, local regulations, within the bounds of the jurisdiction of local councils, are to be in accordance with the respective school, without infringing upon the rights of the followers of other schools."

Notice the last part. In areas, where a particular sect is the majority, that their traditions take precedence.

In the constitution, the office of the Religious Leader is voted in by the Assembly of Experts. The Assembly of Experts are voted in by the people. We have currently several sunnis in the Assembly of Experts, but majority are Shia (again, no surprise, since the people will vote for experts that are closer to their own beliefs). It would make little sense if the Assembly of Experts had majority sunnis.

Now, this Assembly of Experts is responsible for choosing the next leader. If they can't decide on a person, they are allowed to choose instead of a council of religious leaders.

These are the qualifications of the Religious Leader as per the constitution,
"(1) Following are the essential qualifications and conditions for the Leader:
a. Scholarship, as required for performing the functions of religious leader in different fields.
b. Justice and piety, as required for the leadership of the Islamic Ummah.
c. Right political and social perspicacity, prudence, courage, administrative facilities, and adequate capability for leadership.
(2) In case of multiplicity of persons fulfilling the above qualifications and conditions, the person possessing the better jurisprudential and political perspicacity will be given preference."

Notice that it does not mention Sunni or Shia. However, realistically, it will be very unlikely it will be a sunni. Because, let me repeat,
The Assembly of Experts has 88 seats. They are voted in by the public. Several of these are sunnis, but because the people vote, it is unlikely that the majority of the Experts will be sunnis. Therefore if the majority of the people vote for shia leaders for the Assembly of Experts, then the Assembly of Experts will most likely choose a leader that is closer to their wishes.

Hopefully, this has shed some light on our country and removes some of the misunderstanding.

 

[libertycall]

You keep saying Pakistan this and Pakistan that, as if we are insulting Pakistan, and you need to defend it.

We think Pakistan is a good example of Islamic governance. It has female leaders, and respects both sects.

"The official religion of Iran is Islam and the Twelver Ja'fari school,

Look, I'm not saying you're insulting Pakistan. I'm not even saying that Pakistan is better in all ways. I'm not saying that Pakistan is less violent. I'm not saying that Pakistan is more wealthy or more advanced.

I'm giving Pakistan as a comparison in ONE very specific respect: Pakistan treats ALL Muslims whether Sunni or Shia as equals. Iran does NOT.

The whole notion of a 'school' or madhab in Islam is that the Muslims may differ in fiqh issues but they agree on the aqeedah. Thus one Muslim may pray this way and the other another way. One Muslim may think this is perfectly acceptable, but the other may regard it as Makrooh. Even in Sunni families you may find that the father follows one madhab while the son or daughter follows another. Nobody treats anyone any differently except according to what the person asks for.

Iran does not treat Sunnis as if they belong to another madhab; it treats them as if they belong to another religion.

Madhab's differ on practice; they don't require that a person has a particular set of beliefs. Iran demands that Muslims have an additional set of beliefs. If all it asked was that a Muslim agree to uphold the rule of law, that would be acceptable. It asks much more in terms of a Muslim's personal religious belief.

Look at the two of your statements that I just highlighted above.

Pakistan has has made Islam the 'official' religion; it hasn't made a particular madhab as a qualification.

There's a gathering of armed forces of 20 countries in north SA. They say it's for drill but it looks more like a preparation for a ground assault into Syria through Jordan.

Troops from 20 countries prepared for largest military drill - Saudi Gazette

I think that's the military plan. A two-pronged military assault. Classic hammer and anvil.

 

[T-Rex]

Look, I'm not saying you're insulting Pakistan. I'm not even saying that Pakistan is better in all ways. I'm not saying that Pakistan is less violent. I'm not saying that Pakistan is more wealthy or more advanced.

I'm giving Pakistan as a comparison in ONE very specific respect: Pakistan treats ALL Muslims whether Sunni or Shia as equals. Iran does NOT.

The whole notion of a 'school' or madhab in Islam is that the Muslims may differ in fiqh issues but they agree on the aqeedah. Thus one Muslim may pray this way and the other another way. One Muslim may think this is perfectly acceptable, but the other may regard it as Makrooh. Even in Sunni families you may find that the father follows one madhab while the son or daughter follows another. Nobody treats anyone any differently except according to what the person asks for.

Iran does not treat Sunnis as if they belong to another madhab; it treats them as if they belong to another religion.

Madhab's differ on practice; they don't require that a person has a particular set of beliefs. Iran demands that Muslims have an additional set of beliefs. If all it asked was that a Muslim agree to uphold the rule of law, that would be acceptable. It asks much more in terms of a Muslim's personal religious belief.

Look at the two of your statements that I just highlighted above.

Pakistan has has made Islam the 'official' religion; it hasn't made a particular madhab as a qualification.



I think that's the military plan. A two-pronged military assault. Classic hammer and anvil.

@ libertycall is it true that Asad won't be allowed to run in the election if he steps down? I think he should be given a fair chance to run for the office if he steps down. Could you get information as to what has been offered to Asad by the opposition in Syria?

 

[libertycall]

@ libertycall is it true that Asad won't be allowed to run in the election if he steps down? I think he should be given a fair chance to run for the office if he steps down. Could you get information as to what has been offered to Asad by the opposition in Syria?

At the moment nobody is sure what the position is regarding the future, not only because they want to hide their cards until any peace talks, but also because nobody has a fixed idea of what they can offer without alienating their own supporters.

The only consensus on the Syrian majority side is that they hate Bashar and the forces defending him. I suspect that if this turns into a guerrilla war, it will provoke a form of terrorism not seen since the 1960's and 1970's except that the target will be Iran and Iranians.