Saudi's Foreign Minister invites Iranian counterpart to visit

[Fotol]

Hasani, im just saying that the hatred is too big for a overhaul to happen in our lifetime. Time heals everything and it will heal this issue too. But it will take centuries as future will be more globalized and tolerance greater.

 

[F117]

Shahs nationalism did well for Iran, unfortunately that motherfucker Khomeini came and ruined our beautiful land, that wannabe Arab did alot of harm to Iran, caused death and destruction, imposed on us a weird shia cult that many Iranians are startign to dissassociate with each day passing.

True, atheism and Christianity now have a large following in Iran. I do not think Islam has a bright future in Iran.

Also, before 1979 the Arabs knew their place.

 

[al-Hasani]

Hasani, im just saying that the hatred is too big for a overhaul to happen in our lifetime. Time heals everything and it will heal this issue too. But it will take centuries as future will be more globalized and tolerance greater.

Well, that's the only thing I have been saying for months as well and throughout my entire time on PDF. As I wrote on many occasions then I don't have any particular people, nationality, ethnic group or what not. I am of mixed origins myself. It's just that PDF is toxic territory for trolling and it's easy to get carried away. In the case of a few Iranian old friends of mine on PDF who probably have the world record in creating double users, they are often good at winding people up either by senseless comments or just simply trolling or annoying posts about "Zionists, USA this and that, House of Saud this and that, Wahhabi this and that and what not. Or some talk about long-gone shrines that they wish to cry in. I don't know.

I don't expect that to happen either before the people of the ME mature. My fear is only that is takes a gigantic event such as the WW1 or WW2 that killed 60 million (!) Europeans for them to realize the idiotic hostility. At least the majority. Nobody says anything about being best friends or holding hands all the time.

Shockingly enough I have noticed that this transformation has already happened with most Arabs and Jews. Especially Sunni Arabs. Now Israel is the least of the focus to the great dismay of some Palestinians (Hazzy997) says hello.

So anything is possible.

 

[Fotol]

Entire arab world.. go to maghreb and don't even now where Tehran is located... or what persian means. So I think you mean the arab countries that are our neighbours.
These nationalistic terms that exist in both persian and arab language were introduced after arab-persian wars. So because of that we should have wars? they are our neighbours.. you want to Turks and White Europeans benefit by doing business with arabs but Iranians not (now or in futere).
You want to destroy the planned and strategic Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline because of some nationalistic terms in our languages?

I don't care about these goat-mullahs, but we're not going to destroy relations and foreign interest and normal ties with neighbors because of nationalism.
If shah wouldnt be a dictator and allow mossadeq to rule we would have no fucking mullah and we would be a democratic country now.

Bla bla strategic planned Syria iraq pipeline yes yes, those are all dreams and you yourself said it ''planned''. its not gonna happen, mullahs are incompetent. WHEN WILL YOU LEARN THIS FACT ? MULLAHS CANT RUN A COUNTRY.

We will have prosperity and a healthy future when we have competent people working at the top posts. Not some old demented clerics who make up imaginery enemies everyday they wake up.

**** them and everything they stand for. tof be goore pedarsageshoon.

Arab-Iranian hatred exists and is now even bigger thanks to the **** up of IR in Syria. Atleast the sunnis had some of a bit of respect for IR during the 2006 Israeli madness but now they want our heads on a plate thanks to these wannabe Arab mullahs.

Also, you keep talking about foreign interests and foreign policy as if Iran actually has one of them lol. What foreign policy dude ? we are only ahead of North korea in that matter, what interests ? lol... just stop it dude.

 

[al-Hasani]

True, atheism and Christianity now have a large following in Iran. I do not think Islam has a bright future in Iran.

Also, before 1979 the Arabs knew their place.

Christianity is a Semitic religions as well! That can't be good news. I would assume that people returning to Ziorostianism would be a good thing.
Which place? Iran during the short-lived Pahlavi Dynasty (1925-1979) never harmed the Arab world. Nor vice versa. Relations were better than now. It's the Mullah's that should know their place and stop interfering in every second Arab country for no gain other than tiny Southern Lebanon. Why don't you help your Tajik brethren in Afghanistan or Tajikistan who are living in absolute misery and are forced to emigrate to Pakistan or to Russia where they are treated as dirt and even sometimes killed in racial attacks together with other Central Asians and Caucasians?

Iranains on the other hand in the Arab world (UAE and other GCC states) never face such a treatment.

Despite Hizbollah now distancing itself more from the Iranian regime with each year.

It's the idioticy of the Shia school and the Mahdi nonsense, end of world and dreams of turning the entire ME to a theocracy ruled from Qom that is a large problem. Then you can't possible blame largely illiterate people from turning hostile to you. Let alone the involvement in Syria which has not helped.

Pre 1979 hardly any people of the Arab world knew the difference between Sunnis and Shias. Not kidding here. Ask the Arab users here or any Arab out there.

 

[Fotol]

Well, that's the only thing I have been saying for months as well and throughout my entire time on PDF. As I wrote on many occasions then I don't have any particular people, nationality, ethnic group or what not. I am of mixed origins myself. It's just that PDF is toxic territory for trolling and it's easy to get carried away. In the case of a few Iranian old friends of mine on PDF who probably have the world record in creating double users, they are often good at winding people up either by senseless comments or just simply trolling or annoying posts about "Zionists, USA this and that, House of Saud this and that, Wahhabi this and that and what not. Or some talk about long-gone shrines that they wish to cry in. I don't know.

I don't expect that to happen either before the people of the ME mature. My fear is only that is takes a gigantic event such as the WW1 or WW2 that killed 60 million (!) Europeans for them to realize the idiotic hostility. At least the majority. Nobody says anything about being best friends or holding hands all the time.

Shockingly enough I have noticed that this transformation has already happened with most Arabs and Jews. Especially Sunni Arabs. Now Israel is the least of the focus to the great dismay of some Palestinians (Hazzy997) says hello.

So anything is possible.

I agree. We have idiots on both sides and the one is more retard then the other.

 

[Shapur Zol Aktaf]

Bla bla strategic planned Syria iraq pipeline yes yes, those are all dreams and you yourself said it ''planned''. its not gonna happen, mullahs are incompetent. WHEN WILL YOU LEARN THIS FACT ? MULLAHS CANT RUN A COUNTRY.

We will have prosperity and a healthy future when we have competent people working at the top posts. Not some old demented clerics who make up imaginery enemies everyday they wake up.

**** them and everything they stand for. tof be goore pedarsageshoon.

Arab-Iranian hatred exists and is now even bigger thanks to the **** up of IR in Syria. Atleast the sunnis had some of a bit of respect for IR during the 2006 Israeli madness but now they want our heads on a plate thanks to these wannabe Arab mullahs.

Also, you keep talking about foreign interests and foreign policy as if Iran actually has one of them lol. What foreign policy dude ? we are only ahead of North korea in that matter, what interests ? lol... just stop it dude.

Mullahs are a reality, do you accept the reality? Mullahs are ruling Iran. They are not going to change because you complain on PDF.

Maybe you should know that the civil war in Syria was one of the factors to destroy this strategic pipeline and why Iran should defend its interests. Either you want ottoman-western influence in Syria or Iranian influence. This would be the same with or without mullahs. We want best for Iran ofcourse, every Iranian wants that.
PressTV - Iran, Iraq sign deal on gas pipeline construction

If you try to imply that I'm defending mullahs you're death wrong, I'm just defending my countries interests like I defended some aspects of shahs foreign policy and at the same time hated his dictatorial ways.
We should have a dual foreign policy, based on working with shia-arab and friendly arab neighbours (oman,Iraq etc) and nationalist policy in central asia (closer ties with tajikistan, afghanistan, ancient partners China and Indo-Iranian countries Pakistan, India). Wa tamam!

 

[Fotol]

Mullahs are a reality, do you accept the reality? Mullahs are ruling Iran. They are not going to change because you complain on PDF.

Maybe you should know that the civil war in Syria was one of the factors to destroy this strategic pipeline and why Iran should defend its interests. Either you want ottoman-western influence in Syria or Iranian influence. This would be the same with or without mullahs. We want best for Iran ofcourse, every Iranian wants that.
PressTV - Iran, Iraq sign deal on gas pipeline construction

If you try to imply that I'm defending mullahs you're death wrong, I'm just defending my countries interests like I defended some aspects of shahs foreign policy and at the same time hated his dictatorial ways.
We should have a dual foreign policy, based on working with shia-arab and friendly arab neighbours (oman,Iraq etc) and nationalist policy in central asia (closer ties with tajikistan, afghanistan, ancient partners China and Indo-Iranian countries Pakistan, India). Wa tamam!

And i am telling you this very simple fact : Mullahs dont understand foreign policy or any politics. Look at their pipeline with Pakistan, they wasted billions upon billions on the pipeline and at the very last point Pakistan backed out, either also out of incompetence or to US pressure.

My point is, our country is not ideal now to have a sound working foreign policy and that is why i pointed out in my previous post that our foreign policy should also be our internal policy, so we should have 2 foreign policies which both have to be INTERNAL POLICY, convert our foreign diplomats into domestic diplomats and pull the country back from the pit it was thrown by the mullahs.

I can NAME COUNTLESS incompetence acts by the wannabe mullahs but ive neither the mood or the time for it. Just do a simple google search and you will find it. But most notable ones are the investment projects done in Syria,Lebanon that is blown to bits by terrorists. There you go, our oil money just like that wasted. Do you like that ?

Also the whole world knows our incompetence, dont hide the facts, we are already embarassed enough. WE are not in a position to brag about any foreign policy because there is none, i just see suicidal mullah acts.

Our people cant even buy some chicken for their dinner for FUCKS SAKE and you are calling for pipeline to syria through Iraq.

Talking about wrong priorities.

 

[al-Hasani]

I readily admit that I do not have much knowledge about Arab-Iranian issues. My perspective is tolerant Pakistani Islamist, and therefore I am not attracted to ethnicity related issues. Islamic Republic of Iran has a Shia-dominated perspective on foreign policy issues and that is how it is viewed from within Pakistan - hence my observation.

I do find the mutual enmity very disconcerting. I do not understand why it should be important in this day and age. Ethnicity is only a part of identity, not a total perspective. I feel sorry for those who think it is the primary identity and a valid basis for hatred of others.

In Pakistan we learn to respect other ethnic components that make up our country. Punjabis have healthy respect for Pathans and Baluchs a number of whom live in Punjab. We also respected Urdu-speaking people who migrated from Indian heartland and live all around Pakistan but concentrated mostly around Karachi & Hyderabad. And of course THE most popular (and polarizing) leader Pakistan has ever had was a Sindhi. When 2005 earthquake struck Hazara and Kashmir, the whole of Pakistan got together to do anything and everything possible to provide relief and help. So you see, being a Pakistani means to accept ethnicity as a relatively minor part of our identity. Typically Pakistanis would describe themselves as Muslims first, Pakistanis second, and Sindhi/Pashtun/Punjabi/Baluch/Urdu-speaking/Kashmiri/Hazarwal/etc... third.

I hope you see what I mean and why I can not hope to understand why an Arab must hate a Persian and vice versa (if that at all).

Well, I have got little time left for today but all I can tell you is that it is bound in ancient history and rivalry. Even predating Islam and when different Semitic kingdoms, empires and similar entities clashed with those of neighboring Iran. Babylonians/Assyrians etc. versus Parthians etc. In reality both people are native to the ME and mostly of a local stock and tied genetically and also culturally since there were mutual influence especially the earliest Persians were really influenced by the local Semites in culture, symbols, form of government, language (Aramaic was the official language) etc.

So it was FAR from always being the case. In fact one can argue that it first really started after the Muslim Arab invasion of what is today Iran 1400 years ago. Interestingly you had Arab Christian Kingdoms who fought with the Sassanids against the Muslim Arabs.

Anyway but the two peoples developed into distinct entities thousands of years ago and welcomed slightly different outsiders throughout the millenniums into the region that later mixed with them.

It's not just bound in ethnicity. Politics, sect, rivalry, colliding interests, mistrust, stereotypes, pride etc. is involved.

Having said that it's far from all that think this way but if just one single of those points I mentioned are played out by the rulers, influential people or become relevant due to the events of the region it's very easy to just follow suit by either the Arabs or Persians.

I can't describe it better than this. I think that most Arabs and Persians would agree with my conclusions in this post and if not I would hear how they think about this whole thing. I hope that it helped a bit at least. Basically the rivalry has many different layers. Depending on the topic.
Also I might have gone too far here with my conclusions to prove a point since it's not as bad as it seems to be in real life.

 

[Chak Bamu]

Well, I have got little time left for today but all I can tell you is that it is bound in ancient history and rivalry. Even predating Islam and when different Semitic kingdoms, empires and similar entities clashed with those of neighboring Iran. Babylonians/Assyrians etc. versus Parthians etc. In reality both people are native to the ME and mostly of a local stock and tied genetically and also culturally since there were mutual influence especially the earliest Persians were really influenced by the local Semites in culture, symbols, form of government, language (Aramaic was the official language) etc.

So it was FAR from always being the case. In fact one can argue that it first really started after the Muslim Arab invasion of what is today Iran 1400 years ago. Interestingly you had Arab Christian Kingdoms who fought with the Sassanids against the Muslim Arabs.

Anyway but the two peoples developed into distinct entities thousands of years ago and welcomed slightly different outsiders throughout the millenniums into the region that later mixed with them.

It's not just bound in ethnicity. Politics, sect, rivalry, colliding interests, mistrust, stereotypes, pride etc. is involved.

Having said that it's far from all that think this way but if just one single of those points I mentioned are played out by the rulers, influential people or become relevant due to the events of the region it's very easy to just follow suit by either the Arabs or Persians.

I can't describe it better than this. I think that most Arabs and Persians would agree with my conclusions in this post and if not I would hear how they think about this whole thing. I hope that it helped a bit at least. Basically the rivalry has many different layers. Depending on the topic.
Also I might have gone to far here with my conclusions to prove a point since it's not as bad as it seems to be in real life.

Thanks for your reply. As I understand it: It is important if you think it is, otherwise it is not. Therefore the potential of abuse is significant at the hands of a leader / opinion maker, etc...

It is far better to focus on shared humanity and being a creation of Allah. That is the easiest and most fundamental precept of all. That is why Sufis were / are so popular (not the fake type).

 

[al-Hasani]

Thanks for your reply. As I understand it: It is important if you think it is, otherwise it is not. Therefore the potential of abuse is significant at the hands of a leader / opinion maker, etc...

It is far better to focus on shared humanity and being a creation of Allah. That is the easiest and most fundamental precept of all. That is why Sufis were / are so popular (not the fake type).

It's human nature to create groups. Ethnic groups started with brothers/relatives leaving well-known pastures in search for distant lands where they then developed independently and later turned into distinct entities. Those points where collision can happen is natural for people to exploit.

I have noticed that it is a human trait to find differences rather than similarities. After all we are all humans and basically more or less the same. At the core. Culture, language is always something that can change. Even skin color can. It's called evolution.

Sufis are a interesting bunch I have to admit although I don't always agree with their teachings nor all of their practices. There are also strong traditions of Sufism in the Arab world and Sufi orders. In Hijaz among the locals for instance and many other areas of the Arab world.

In some teachings they are doing crazy things. I have seen that on videos. In the ME the Sufi Kurds are good at doing that. Swords and all kind of instruments. They remind me of fakirs in South Asia.

 

[HRK]

A welcome move ... my best wishes for both brotherly Nations ....

 

[Sam1980]

Its a good move.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

Well, I have got little time left for today but all I can tell you is that it is bound in ancient history and rivalry. Even predating Islam and when different Semitic kingdoms, empires and similar entities clashed with those of neighboring Iran. Babylonians/Assyrians etc. versus Parthians etc. In reality both people are native to the ME and mostly of a local stock and tied genetically and also culturally since there were mutual influence especially the earliest Persians were really influenced by the local Semites in culture, symbols, form of government, language (Aramaic was the official language) etc.

So it was FAR from always being the case. In fact one can argue that it first really started after the Muslim Arab invasion of what is today Iran 1400 years ago. Interestingly you had Arab Christian Kingdoms who fought with the Sassanids against the Muslim Arabs.

Anyway but the two peoples developed into distinct entities thousands of years ago and welcomed slightly different outsiders throughout the millenniums into the region that later mixed with them.

It's not just bound in ethnicity. Politics, sect, rivalry, colliding interests, mistrust, stereotypes, pride etc. is involved.

Having said that it's far from all that think this way but if just one single of those points I mentioned are played out by the rulers, influential people or become relevant due to the events of the region it's very easy to just follow suit by either the Arabs or Persians.

I can't describe it better than this. I think that most Arabs and Persians would agree with my conclusions in this post and if not I would hear how they think about this whole thing. I hope that it helped a bit at least. Basically the rivalry has many different layers. Depending on the topic.
Also I might have gone too far here with my conclusions to prove a point since it's not as bad as it seems to be in real life.

You are an arab nationalist so for you rivalry with persians is on racial and cultural lines, reality is, it is merely sectarian. Shia arabs are close to iran. I have also seen you making fun of pashtuns while argueing with iranis, just because you read some where that pakhtuns are iranic people. You are so ultra-nationalist that you consider islam an arab thing and you mock persians, turks, afghans etc as conquered people by arabs.

 

[dawn_news]

You are an arab nationalist so for you rivalry with persians is on racial and cultural lines, reality is, it is merely sectarian. Shia arabs are close to iran. I have also seen you making fun of pashtuns while argueing with iranis, just because you read some where that pakhtuns are iranic people. You are so ultra-nationalist that you consider islam an arab thing and you mock persians, turks, afghans etc as conquered people by arabs.

Hmm this remind me of something....