Suicide Bomb Blasts In Iran At Least 20 Dead

[Pasban]

And the target type influences that perception. The Soviet military is not civilians.

Indeed they are not and nor have I stated otherwise. However, whilst Soviet military personnel were indeed the primary targets they were not alone in being specified as such.

 

[Pasban]

You seem to think we actually care about Iran and its opinions, when thats def not true.

Perhaps not you, but the Pakistani state surely does. This fact that Iran and Iran-related subjects are present in such abundance on a Pakistani forum is evidence itself.

 

[Dance]

Perhaps not you, but the Pakistani state surely does. This fact that Iran and Iran-related subjects are present in such abundance on a Pakistani forum is evidence itself.

Well there this is supposed to be an international forum, so obviously we talk about Iran as well as other countries. And we usually talk about Iran if it has to do with Pakistan, or its very big news. But I don't think we talk about in abundance as we do about like india, China, Turkey ( thats why all these countries have their own sub forums and are important countries to Pakistan)

 

[Pasban]

Well there this is supposed to be an international forum, so obviously we talk about Iran as well as other countries. And we usually talk about Iran if it has to do with Pakistan, or its very big news. But I don't think we talk about in abundance as we do about like india, China, Turkey ( thats why all these countries have their own sub forums and are important countries to Pakistan)

I have no argument with that for conversation concerning India and China exceeds that concerning Iran in all regards amongst Pakistanis in general (and also other countries for that matter). This I know from personal experience whilst residing there. I'm not so sure about Turkey being put in the same category though for discussion about it in realistic terms, even if perhaps more positive in Pakistan, is just about as much for Iran.

 

[Dance]

I have no argument with that for conversation concerning India and China exceeds that concerning Iran in all regards amongst Pakistanis in general (and also other countries for that matter). This I know from personal experience whilst residing there. I'm not so sure about Turkey being put in the same category though for discussion about it in realistic terms, even if perhaps more positive in Pakistan, is just about as much for Iran.

Yeah I agree. But anyways what I meant was that I've seen this guy make a lot of stupid remarks about Pakistan before and if he thinks that his opinions will hurt our feelings he's def wrong. It's not that Iranian opinions don't completely matter ( you are our neighbor) But Iran isn't exactly our friend, so personally it wouldn't affect us as much it would if it was like Turkey or China.

 

[CAPTAIN AMERICA]

I disagree based on two points. One, terrorism is relative term based on an individual's own perception-- 'one man's hero is another man's enemy.' Two, as for being the largest, it would be on the list if various definitions of terrorism are accepted, but by no means the largest given the fact that it is superseded by other states such as the United States and Israel.



False. The people killed for Iranian civilians i.e not associated to the security forces. If they appear legtimate to you in this circumstance, then perhaps you should apply the same logic is other circumstances as well.



Refer to the point above on classifying parties as "terrorist." For instance, those fighting against Soviet and pro-Soviet forces in Afghanistan during the 80s were labeled as resistance by US-based media outlets but 20 years later they were labeled as terrorists.



As for the groups being terrorists, that is again, a subject of debate. The situation nevertheless has to be put in the proper context. One, the core issue that encourages these people is a feeling of injustice or deprivation apart from any other factor which has to be very real to find justification. Two, they reflect back the sentiment which they receive themselves.



Iran has a civilian, non-military/ para-military, population as well. In this case, they were targets and not any Iranian state-actor.

In the orignal news release the people killed were 4 military and 7 revolutionary guards and the attack was in retaliation for a member of the para military group that had been hung in june. To those were military targets in spite of being in a mosque.

To me terrorism is the deliberate attack on civlians. I dont approve of that.

To me those fighting against the USSR or their allies or the USA and their allies were only terrorist when they attack civlians. Take Irans funding of groups that blew up mosques full of Iraqi civlians, thats terrorism.

 

[Pasban]

In the orignal news release the people killed were 4 military and 7 revolutionary guards and the attack was in retaliation for a member of the para military group that had been hung in june. To those were military targets in spite of being in a mosque.

I believe you are being confused between two different stories. The injured and dead were Iranian civilians. Also, to me, the attack on a place of religious worship is terrorism (and inhuman) regardless of the occupation of worshipers or their religious affiliation.

To me terrorism is the deliberate attack on civlians. I dont approve of that.

Deliberate attack on uninvolved and unarmed parties receives no approval from myself.

To me those fighting against the USSR or their allies or the USA and their allies were only terrorist when they attack civlians. Take Irans funding of groups that blew up mosques full of Iraqi civlians, thats terrorism.

Iran did not fund or direct any mosque attack in Iraq. Provide sources for your claim. If one's own word alone suffices, then I shouldn't have to inform you about it, you should be well aware already of the multitude of allegations put on against the US, many of which I myself find questionable.

 

[into the wild]

If I understand you right, you are alleging that India is supporting "local Shi'a terrorists" and that too from the Iran-Pakistan border?

Secondly, if they are local that would mean that they are Baluch i.e so you are of the argument that India is supporting a Shi'a Baloch uprising in Pakistani Baluchistan?

Thirdly, this would necessitate purpose ignorance on the part of Tehran or rather a free-hand from Tehran.

I would disagree with you in entirety on that. For one thing, the religious demographics of either Pakistani or Iranian Baluchistan do would be unable to render this as even a possibility. The prime reason being that the Baluch, weather in Pakistan or Iran, are overwhelmingly of different Sunn'ite denominations.

Also, Iran is not keen on allowing leverage to any element there or elsewhere in Iran that is not a part of the Iranian state. For a foreign state to conduct such grandiose operations from within the Iranian border would be a, mind the language, ludicrous proposition.

Moreover, this is an indirect way of saying Iran and India are behind all, if any, radical Shi'a outfits in Pakistan. This cannot even be substantiated. As such, the same statement can be reflected by an Iranian towards Pakistan in reverse using the same faulty logic.

i said, indians recruit from the shia iranians from iran, and send them to pakistan to conduct terrorism in balochistan, also the elements from BLA cannot be armed inside pakistan, and its high possibility that the weapons and all other intelligence support comes from across the border of either afghanistan that lawless country or iran which plays with india.. esp with the assistance of money and we know well, which country on the west has to support all these anti pakistan activities.

in the mid ninties there was militant shi uprising, and iran was behind that instibility, we can also say iran plays with india to make shia sunni division in pakistan, after iran pakistan has 2nd largest shia population..

if you say why cont govt provide proof so, i say our govt is deadly silent on many other vital issues too

iran has a big portion of balochistan and BLA must get a good deal of support from there

 

[Pasban]

i said, indians recruit from the shia iranians from iran, and send them to pakistan to conduct terrorism in balochistan, also the elements from BLA cannot be armed inside pakistan, and its high possibility that the weapons and all other intelligence support comes from across the border of either afghanistan that lawless country or iran which plays with india.. esp with the assistance of money and we know well, which country on the west has to support all these anti pakistan activities.

in the mid ninties there was militant shi uprising, and iran was behind that instibility, we can also say iran plays with india to make shia sunni division in pakistan, after iran pakistan has 2nd largest shia population..

if you say why cont govt provide proof so, i say our govt is deadly silent on many other vital issues too

iran has a big portion of balochistan and BLA must get a good deal of support from there

I see what you a driving at here.

Firstly, it would be very difficult for any country other than Iran to recruit Iranians for religious purposes, and rather impossible for any other state if the recruitment has a Shi'ah notion to it. Also, given the very minor demographics of Shi'a adherents in Pakistani Baluchistan, to conduct operations there based on this notion is unfounded also. The Shi'a of Balucestan are mainly centered in Quetta and consist mostly of the Haazara ethnic.

Secondly, BLA largely operates from within Pakistani Baluchistan. When operations are endangered they base themselves in southern Afghanistan. Iranian Baluchistan would be an equally more difficult and unfriendly ordeal for them then even Pakistani Baluchistan. This is because the Iranian portion is smaller, much more tightly controlled and much more keen on monitoring border movements. The India-BLA link has been brought up by sources within Pakistan on numerous instances. I do give veracity to their argument. However, Afghan collaboration with India and not Iranian would be needed for it to be put into effect. Pakistan's Baluchistan insurgency is a problem not just for Pakistan, but for Iran also.

As for the existence of Shi'a militancy in Pakistan, if it is present in a sizable or material amount even (which I doubt given the population pattern), it is most probably necessitated by elements within the minority Shi'a community to mirror/ counter the militant Sunn'ite radical groups they sometimes face in Pakistan, which all accounts, are a much more grave threat to Pakistan's internal security. As to the second-largest Shi'ah population, that is true by most accounts, however in demographics terms there are at best 25-30 percent by most estimates, scattered and largely urban-- as such, a determined movement or "uprising" as you term it cannot even find a foothold. Also, even if completely independent of Iran, the basis of connection to Iran is the fact of being Shi'ah alone-- which is not a surprise as the mention of the word imprints the name of Iran on many and this isn't even recent or post-Revolution for that matter. Hence, I find nothing new with the charge.

 

[ای ایران]

by sending trained local shia terrorists into pakistan from iranian border.. and to gather intelligence from balochistan.

when india has no business now with iranian border regions, so there is no need to have an indian consulate in the border with pakistan

Please do not make-up stuff. There are no Iranian 'Shia terrorists' spying for India against Pakistan. What an absurd allegation to make. And Indians or anyone else are free to establish consulates anywhere in Iran if the Iranian government allows it. The Indians want to partner with Iran in developing a port and free trade zone in Sistan-Baluchestan province so they do actually have business there.

the solution to these problems is to invest in this underdevelopled region, formalize and legitimize the trade that goes on, create an effective anti narcotics force, and of course bring all the different local stakeholders to the table --even the rebel group members who are willing to talk constructively

You’re merely stating things here that everybody concerned is already aware of. The problem Iran faces is not an issue of trying to figure out “solutions” but trying to figure out why Pakistan’s government does not act on any of these proposed “solutions”. Iran already has invested big-time in fortifying the border between Sistan-Baluchestan and Pakistan, and already has an anti-narcotics task force and border force deployed in the province. But Pakistan has not done the same on its side of the border, thats one of the biggest issues Iran has with Pakistan.

You know its not just criminals and terrorists who cross the border from Pakistan into Iran but annually hundreds of illegal Pakistani immigrants are caught trying to cross into Iran in the hopes of making it to Turkey and then onto Europe. Its a huge problem for Iran that Pakistan does not appear to want to stop this.

India has 3 consulates in Iran(compare this to the number of consulates in United States — just four). Of course this seems minuscule to the whopping 9 consulates in Afghanistan, but still.

Im not sure what that has to do with anything. I mean your country also maintains several consulates in Afghanistan. One could ask the Pakistanis, for example, why they have a consulate in Herat which is far away from Pakistan, does no significant trade with Pakistan and has no Pakistani population living there.

You are aware of the sensitive nature of Pakistan-hindustan relations. You are also aware that Zahedan is at the doorstep of Quetta by bus. You are ALSO aware that hindustan is supporting Baluch rebels directly and indirectly through channels, in an effort to create disturbance in Pakistani Baluchistan (this has repercussions against Iranian Sistan va Baluchestan too)

wake up bro, wake up. We dont care how long that consulate has been there. It should be shut down.

It wont be shut-down because the Indians are doing business with Iran in that particular province. Iran is not going to take sides in the India-Pakistan rivalry and whatever issues your countries have with eachother.

incidentally, although Revolutionary Guards monitor Zahedan-Taftan road, there is no regular check post of Pasdaran on the road between Khash and Jalq, making it easy for all kinds of elements to cross here and there easily (though this isnt your fault per se, the geography is difficult)

You have a source for this? The IRGC by the way is just one of several Iranian security forces. There is the police, border forces and anti-narcotics/smuggling forces.

it's obvious that a game is being played and that ''Jundollah'' is a cat's paw for enemies of Iran.....but dont make the mistake of blaming Pakistan for something we are not responsible for alon

How do you know that some people in Pakistan’s intelligence agency have not supported Jondallah? Ordinary people in Iran do not really care anything about Afghanistan and South Asia so it doesnt benefit the I.R’s popularity among people or for their propaganda purposes to openly criticize countries like Pakistan. They do this because they have good reason too. According the Iranian media (and you can search this yourself on English-language sections on Iranian news sites) Pakistani agents have in the past aided Jondallah, according to what Abdolhamed Rigi, the brother of Jondallah’s former leader had confessed to Iranian officials. Iran is very suspicious of Pakistan for several reasons, not least because of Pakistan’s relationship to the Taliban since 1994 but because of other hostile and duplicitous behaviour towards Afghanistan, and Iran too.

All these issues could have been resolved years ago. But Pakistan is not serious about resolving them, or chooses not to. This is the problem from Iran’s perspective.


Iran annually spends billions of dollars on its both armed proxies, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza, and on many other terrorist and fundamental armed organizations in Yemen, Iraq and other Arab states. Iran and Syria openly encourage, instigate, fund, guide, train, and organize and use all the terrorist groups in the Middle East that advocate for havoc, jihad, intolerance, sectarianism and hatred. I just cant get too excited when some one does the same thing to Iran especially when they are targeting the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

The I.R barely spends 3% of Iran’s GDP on its own armed forces. Iran does not have “billions of dollars” to spend on Hezbollah or anyone else. Stop making-up crazy stuff, man.

 

[ای ایران]

iran has a big portion of balochistan and BLA must get a good deal of support from there

Actually it doesnt. Iran's Sistan-Baluchestan province is a combination of two different territories; Sistan in the north, and Baluchestan in the south. The population of the entire province is only around 2.5 million, out of which, an estimated 1 to 1.5 million are Baluch.

Baluchis are an insignificant minority in Iran and nobody would ever hear or talk about them if Jondallah had not come into existence and started a campaign of terrorism and crime against Iran.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

well in mid 1990s when Shiia-Sunni target killings was at its peak under Bhutto administration (and Iranian diplomats were being targetted) -- Iran was supported militant Shiia groups. Even in my native Parachinar where most people are Shiia, we were seeing gunmen who were holding posters of Khomeini and stuff like that.

Same way certain Arab countries were propping up and supporting wahhaby type people who are brainwashed to think that Shiias are not Muslim and this and that.

when push comes to shove, it's all bakwas. Any patriotic Pakistani should demand an end to other countries settling their scores by using our land. That isnt right and its unacceptable


to get back on topic, I dont see why Iran would have an incentive to support a group like the BLA. Iran itself faces problems with Baluch seperatism. Actually, Iran is much worse off than Pakistan. They have to deal with the ethnic AND sectarian component of the Baluch terrorist organizations (BLA, Jundollah, etc.)

believe me, the Iran-Pakistan border is one of the most God-forsaken areas of the world. The amount of illicit **** that goes down there, you would never believe. Everything from human-trafficking, drug barons and drug-related activity going back and forth, weapons, smuggling....list goes on.

There are 2 sides of a border...and there are 2 parties that need to do more to secure this tricky area which is barely even marcated. I personally would advocate more intel-sharing and also joint exercises with the Iranians in order to promote mutual understanding and better border enforcement

the seperatists are a threat to both countries....there is meddling going on from outside and we know who would support such groups and why they would do that. Strenthen the people there by bringing in the proper leadership and reforms.


i express sorrow over the loss of lives in Iran; and the Iranians should also wake up and realize we are also confronted with security risks --we are in a hostile neighbourhood

 

[Bhim]

One of the most powerful Indian Businessman, Ratan Tata, is an Irani by descent. There are thousands and thousands of successful Iranians in Bombay and Calcutta that are top quality businessmen or scientists and they still value their Persian traditions. As a matter of fact after the Gujrati, Sindhi people the Parsi Irani are the most enterprising. The Parsi is a very powerful lobby in Indian Politics, and they all have roots to Iran. And these are the very people who are investing big time in the land of their origin. So if any one says to kick them out, then I don't think Iranians would want to kick their own people out?/
Also they have contributed immensely to the development of India in Science and Technology.
Homi Baba the father of Indian Nuclear Technology was an Irani. The list is endless.
We have shared traditions with them and lived for centuries as one community as peaceful brothers. This goes for with every community in India, after all Indians are a very tolerant society with a big heart. So we don't care what others say about us, as we know we wish no ill will against any one.
Thanks

 

[Pasban]

well in mid 1990s when Shiia-Sunni target killings was at its peak under Bhutto administration (and Iranian diplomats were being targetted) -- Iran was supported militant Shiia groups. Even in my native Parachinar where most people are Shiia, we were seeing gunmen who were holding posters of Khomeini and stuff like that.

Same way certain Arab countries were propping up and supporting wahhaby type people who are brainwashed to think that Shiias are not Muslim and this and that.

The fact of that matter is, the residents of Parachinar were replying in kind to what they were facing themselves from militant Wahabi elements . Iranian involvement came as a result of targeting of Iranians specifically. Also, I have noticed that people on this forum have very wrong notions about anyone that holds a poster of Khomeini and this probably given their lack of wisdom about the person except from what manipulated profiles have been fed to them about him.

when push comes to shove, it's all bakwas. Any patriotic Pakistani should demand an end to other countries settling their scores by using our land. That isnt right and its unacceptable

I would agree but why shouldn't the same logic be extended to other states?

to get back on topic, I dont see why Iran would have an incentive to support a group like the BLA. Iran itself faces problems with Baluch seperatism. Actually, Iran is much worse off than Pakistan. They have to deal with the ethnic AND sectarian component of the Baluch terrorist organizations (BLA, Jundollah, etc.)

Iran does face problems in that portion of it's domain but to say that it is worst off than Pakistan is a gross misunderstanding. Iranian Baluchistan is a small province even within Iran (whereas Pakistani Baluchistan is Pakistan's largest), its population density is very low (much lower than Pakistani Baluchistan), it is more urbanized in comparison to it's it's neighboring larger Pakistani segment, and the ethnic Baluch are demographically in lower numbers. Also, the Iranian portion is better contained (due to it's size) and has a large security presence and is without specific Tribal areas, the traditional feudal system is absent, and has less arms in hands of non-state actors-- in fact the presence of arms is limited to elements fighting Iranian personnel only.

There are 2 sides of a border...and there are 2 parties that need to do more to secure this tricky area which is barely even marcated. I personally would advocate more intel-sharing and also joint exercises with the Iranians in order to promote mutual understanding and better border enforcement

The Pakistan-Iran border is well-demarcated and as a part of this demarcation a small portion of land was purposely conceded to Pakistan. The Durrand Line, between Afghanistan and Pakistan, is however a more contentious issue concerning demarcation which is at best approximate in most border areas.

Also, yes, further and more determined mutual efforts are needed.