Tehran’s Worst Nightmare Armenia Azerbaijan conflict

[Hormuz]

So if Azerbaycan is an artificial country, why criticize them for trying to make themselves complete?



Persian Sunni scholars taught Islam to Turks, Pakistanis, Afghans, and Tajiks. Ofcourse, we are going to use the language.

Are iranians the only ones allowed to use the language?

If so, why are you speaking and learning Arabic?

no that not the only reason that most of these areas belonged to Iran in the past. please read history. the pakistani national anthem isn't in persian cause some scholars taught Islam to you.
and i don't think that tajikistans people speak fluent persian cause some scholars taught them Islam. afghanistan same and parts of turkey same.
we use arabic in religion, but our language is still persian. even urdu is a aryan language so is pashto,
i think you never saw a world map before 2000. otherwise you wouldn't talk this nonsense here.
i realy don't understand why you don't read history before writing things here. don't listen to people rather read for yourself.

 

[SalarHaqq]

If you know Turkish it's all explained by a leading Muslim scholar of Turkey.....

Iran, KSA etc. are there to kill the Muslim world from inside...

He should ponder about regimes that let the zionists into the Muslim world, host Isra"el"i embassies, intelligence personnel on their soil and conclude defence contracts with Tel Aviv.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Hardly anyone would consider Aran's conflict with Armenia as a Shia cause. This is specially true for the more religiously inclined among Shia Muslims, who do not view Baku's jailing of ulema, its tolerance of gay parades, its banning of hijab at universities, its use of masonic symbols in a positive light.

Afterall the regime in Baku is staunchly secularist, meaning that it operates a strict separation between religious considerations and (geo)politics. Which is why it seems not to have any difficulties welcoming insurgent fighters from Syria, most of whom have a reputation of being somewhat sceptical towards Shia Muslims (to say the least).

Shia Pakistanis supportive of the current Arani regime owe their stance to the favorable views Pakistanis generally have towards Turkey. Not to their confessional affiliation.

There is no contradiction between Iran's absolute neutrality in the current Karabakh conflict on the one hand and her general narratives on the others. Supporting actors that promote "ethno"-separatism against her has never been part of Iran's discourse. Likewise, Iran's narrative doesn't focus on exclusive solidarity with Shia Muslims, but chiefly on anti-imperial struggle against the zio-American oppressors, with particular sympathies for oppressed Muslims beyond sect.

Of course if a regime starts expressing hostility towards Iran or working with Iran's existential foes to threaten her territorial integrity and stability, then there is no longer an obligation for Iran to aid them.

Baku chose its side during the 90's Karabakh war: it preferred Tel Aviv over Tehran, as well as backing of anti-Iranian separatism and "ethnic" animosity over strategic cooperation and alliance. There was no obligation for Baku to make this choice, as it was receiving military assistance from Iran until it decided to switch sides. Despite this, Iran never opted for full blown hostility towards Baku, did not cultivate or encourage movements advocating re-annexation of her former province, separated from her by tsarist Russia in the early 19th century, etc.




Propaganda. Iran supported Aran after the fall of the USSR, until the regime in Baku decided to thank Iran by cultivating "ethno"-irredentist fantasies against Tehran and killing pro-Iranian officers inside the Arani armed forces, prior to entering a military alliance with the zionist entity and allowing Mossad operatives and Isra"el"i drones to be stationed on Iran's borders.



Other way around. Aran has been an integral part of Iran for millenia until tsarist Russia occupied that land in the early 19th century. Even the names (Aran, Azarbaijan) are Iranian.

Mental gymnastics you have to perform to defend Iranian negative policies is admirable.

Fact is that Iran's image has taken a deep hit among Shia's around the world. Iran is no longer being seen as a champion of Shias, but as a Persian nationalist regime for supporting Armenia on a racial basis against Shia Azerbaycan. You will see the wider ramifications soon.

Those saying Azerbaycan is not Muslim are full of it and committing takfir (a major sin in Islam.) State secularism doesn't make one irreligious, if that was the case then a large portion of Iran is secular in lifestyle, but they are not questioned as being non-Muslim.

I have never seen you defend Pakistani interests, only Iran's. maybe your flags need to be altered to show the reality.

no that not the only reason that most of these areas belonged to Iran in the past. please read history. the pakistani national anthem isn't in persian cause some scholars taught Islam to you.
and i don't think that tajikistans people speak fluent persian cause some scholars taught them Islam. afghanistan same and parts of turkey same.
we use arabic in religion, but our language is still persian. even urdu is a aryan language so is pashto,
i think you never saw a world map before 2000. otherwise you wouldn't talk this nonsense here.
i realy don't understand why you don't read history before writing things here. don't listen to people rather read for yourself.

It seems like the understanding of history, linguistics, and genetics from the Iranian perspective is markedly different than its understanding outside Iran.

Yes, I am not well versed in Iranian propaganda, i will admit, neither do I give it much influence over my world view.

Persian language influence in our regions was due primarily to Islam. I mean, before that, Greeks ruled Pakistan-Afghanistan for as long as the Persians.

We do speak Iranic languages, that is due to our genetics and our relationship with Indo-Aryans, Sakas, Kushans, and Hepthalites. That is why our number systems, words, etc. are similar in origin to other Indo-European people.

 

[Imad.Khan]

Mental gymnastics you have to perform to defend Iranian negative policies is admirable.

Fact is that Iran's image has taken a deep hit among Shia's around the world. Iran is no longer being seen as a champion of Shias, but as a Persian nationalist regime for supporting Armenia on a racial basis against Shia Azerbaycan. You will see the wider ramifications soon.

Those saying Azerbaycan is not Muslim are full of it and committing takfir (a major sin in Islam.) State secularism doesn't make one irreligious, if that was the case then a large portion of Iran is secular in lifestyle, but they are not questioned as being non-Muslim.

I have never seen you defend Pakistani interests, only Iran's. maybe your flags need to be altered to show the reality.


It seems like the understanding of history, linguistics, and genetics from the Iranian perspective is markedly different than its understanding outside Iran.

Yes, I am not well versed in Iranian propaganda, i will admit, neither do I give it much influence over my world view.

Persian language influence in our regions was due primarily to Islam. I mean, before that, Greeks ruled Pakistan-Afghanistan for as long as the Persians.

We do speak Iranic languages, that is due to our genetics and our relationship with Indo-Aryans, Sakas, Kushans, and Hepthalites. That is why our number systems, words, etc. are similar in origin to other Indo-European people.

He is right though about Pashto atleast, Pukhtoons and Baloch are of Iranic gene.
Personally i would like to see the days of when my father was young come again when Iran Pakistan and Turkey had open borders with each other. Also instead of fighting each other we get stronger by being united, especially against the Arabs.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Mental gymnastics you have to perform to defend Iranian negative policies is admirable.

I have never seen you defend Pakistani interests, only Iran's. maybe your flags need to be altered to show the reality.

Practically a third of your comment represents a digression from the topic and gets personal. These sorts of remarks won't make anyone's arguments more valid and I'm not interested in them.

Fact is that Iran's image has taken a deep him among Shia's around the world. Iran is no longer being seen as a champion of Shias

Can you substantiate that claim with solid evidence?

but as a Persian nationalist regime for supporting Armenia on a racial basis against Shia Azerbaycan.

First, people holding such views would actually be believing in a complete absurdity. "Racially", Persians and Azaris belong to one and the same group, as evidenced by genetic studies.

Second, Iranian policy is not informed by any "racial" considerations. This is self-evident to those actually listening to official discourse in Iran or even superficially contemplating political life there.

Third, Iran is not supporting Armenia, she is neutral in the current war. Unless proven, the claim represents disinformation.

Requiring evidence for such claims is not mental gymnastics by any means. Quite the contrary: simply making that claim without substantiating it in any way is what amounts to gratuitious accusation. In other words, it is hardly of value in a serious discussion.

Those saying Azerbaycan is not Muslim are full of it and committing takfir (a major sin in Islam.)

1) What has that to do with my post? Kindly direct this to those who made that statement, not to me.

2) If by "Azarbaijan" one is referring to the state, then the fact is that as a secular regime, the Azari state considers itself religiously neutral or beyond any particular religious affiliation, if you will. That's the definition of secularism, of separation of state and religious institution.

It would thus depend on what the persons making the above statement mean by "Azarbaijan": if they're talking about the state, then they're not really wrong; if they mean the population, then obviously their statement is incorrect.

State secularism doesn't make one irreligious, if that was the case then a large portion of Iran is secular in lifestyle, but they are not questioned as being non-Muslim.

Sure. Problem is, I never talked about the people, I was referring to the regime. And this was clear from the terminology I used. Let's stick to what I actually wrote.

To reiterate: when we have such an ultra-secular regime (with a record of antagonizing some of its more religious citizens) in charge, pious people might tend to be comparatively less keen on considering the wars it fights as a properly religious cause (including because said regime itself is refraining from doing so) or to automatically lend their support.

 

[Hormuz]

It seems like the understanding of history, linguistics, and genetics from the Iranian perspective is markedly different than its understanding outside Iran.

Yes, I am not well versed in Iranian propaganda, i will admit, neither do I give it much influence over my world view.

Persian language influence in our regions was due primarily to Islam. I mean, before that, Greeks ruled Pakistan-Afghanistan for as long as the Persians.

We do speak Iranic languages, that is due to our genetics and our relationship with Indo-Aryans, Sakas, Kushans, and Hepthalites. That is why our number systems, words, etc. are similar in origin to other Indo-European people.

you say Iranian propaganda and in the next sentence you admit what i said.
i didn't know that Iran have that much porwer and told all these centuries european asian russian american historians to write the books and draw the world map in favour of Iran for her propaganda.
do you sometimes read what you write? sometimes i think you do it on purpose to annoy people here.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Azerbaycan is a reality which everyone has no choice but to accept, most of all Armenia which is losing territory day by day.

Underestimating Turks is a grave mistake, which has been made over and over by the same people.

When talking about Azerbaycan, which members here love doing, it would be nice to get the Azeri persepective on all of this.

Until then, it is all Iranian propaganda and I am not interested.

Let's get back to the main topic.

He is right though about Pashto atleast, Pukhtoons and Baloch are of Iranic gene.
Personally i would like to see the days of when my father was young come again when Iran Pakistan and Turkey had open borders with each other. Also instead of fighting each other we get stronger by being united, especially against the Arabs.

All of us have those genetics, not just Pukhtoons and Baloch who also share linguistic commonality with them..

Pakistanis (and Afghans) have much more in common with each other genetically than we do with outsiders.

 

[Hormuz]

Practically a third of your comment represents a digression from the topic and gets personal. These sorts of remarks won't make anyone's arguments more valid and I'm not interested in them.



Can you substantiate that claim with solid evidence?



First, people holding such views would actually be believing in a complete absurdity. "Racially", Persians and Azaris belong to one and the same group, as evidenced by genetic studies.

Second, Iranian policy is not informed by any "racial" considerations. This is self-evident to those actually listening to official discourse in Iran or even superficially contemplating political life there.

Third, Iran is not supporting Armenia, she is neutral in the current war. Unless proven, the claim represents disinformation.

Requiring evidence for such claims is not mental gymnastics by any means. Quite the contrary: simply making that claim without substantiating it in any way is what amounts to gratuitious accusation. In other words, it is hardly of value in a serious discussion.



1) What has that to do with my post? Kindly direct this to those who made that statement, not to me.

2) If by "Azarbaijan" one is referring to the state, then the fact is that as a secular regime, the Azari state considers itself religiously neutral or beyond any particular religious affiliation, if you will. That's the definition of secularism, of separation of state and religious institution.

It would thus depend on what the persons making the above statement mean by "Azarbaijan": if they're talking about the state, then they're not really wrong; if they mean the population, then obviously their statement is incorrect.



Sure. Problem is, I never talked about the people, I was referring to the regime. And this was clear from the terminology I used. Let's stick to what I actually wrote.

To reiterate: when we have such an ultra-secular regime (with a record of antagonizing some of its more religious citizens) in charge, pious people might tend to be comparatively less keen on considering the wars it fights as a properly religious cause (including because said regime itself is refraining from doing so) or to automatically lend their support.

bro just leave him. he have a complex when it comes to Iran. there is no other way i can discribe that. no matter what you say and how much proof you bring, he answer with baseless things which are not covered with any historical proof or at least something.
he bet he watch youtube videos and talk with his friends about geopolitics in school. and repeat what other say here in the forum.

 

[SalarHaqq]

In their quest to portray the 1915 events as genocide, Armenians have resorted to using religion in an attempt to bolster their narrative. This involves portraying Armenians as the perpetually victimized and downtrodden “first Christian nation”, while portraying Turks as the perpetually victimizing and cruel Muslims. Resorting to religion is useful in the sense that it helps Armenians gain unquestioning supporters for their narrative in the Christian world that is currently seeking solidarity among co-religionists. This drive for solidarity can be seen not only in the historic meeting that took place between Pope Francis of the Roman Catholic Church and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia (Russian Orthodox Church),[1] but also in the various activities of the World Council of Churches,[2] the world’s largest association of churches.

RELIGION AND DOUBLE STANDARDS

RELIGION AND DOUBLE STANDARDS

avim.org.tr

Pakistani expert: Armenia - country where Islamophobia perceived as state policy

25 September 2020 12:15 (UTC+04:00)

1 052

By Trend
Armenia is a country where Islamophobia is perceived as a state policy, Pakistani expert on geopolitics and international relations, Malik Eyub Sumbal, told Trend.
The Armenians are destroying mosques in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan and keeping animals, including pigs and cows, in the destroyed mosques, Sumbal noted.
The expert emphasized that the Armenian government is abusing religion and demonstrating its fascist character to the whole world.
“In countries, where religion is used as a tool against other peoples, internal religious extremism is growing, which keeps them away from the world. Armenia also uses this kind of tactic. Toying with the religious sentiments of any people is a shame and a crime. Disrespect for religious values and sacred sites is unacceptable,” he said.
“Unlike Armenia, freedom of religion, multiculturalism, and respect for other religions are one of the priorities of Azerbaijan's state policy,” stressed the Pakistani expert.
“I witnessed how tolerant the Azerbaijani society is in relation to other religions, representatives of each religion freely perform their religious rites in Azerbaijan,” Sumbal added.

Pakistani expert: Armenia - country where Islamophobia perceived as state policy

Armenia is a country where Islamophobia is perceived as a state policy, Pakistani expert on geopolitics and international relations, Malik Eyub Sumbal, told Trend.

www.azernews.az

Islamophobia and Turkish-Armenian controversy: Analysis - Türkiye News

Religion plays an important role in the 1915 Events and the related Turkish-Armenian controversy. In the Armenian genocide narrative, Armenians are frequently portrayed as the downtrodden “first Christian nation”, while Turks are portrayed as the cruel Muslims who sought to annihilate various...

www.hurriyetdailynews.com

https://azertag.az/en/xeber/Preside..._where_Islamophobia_is_a_state_policy-1589789

Sure, Armenians are such structural islamophobes that hundreds of thousands of them prefer to live in Muslim majority countries, including 100.000-200.000 in Iran, some 100.000 in Syria, 150.000 in Lebanon, 15.000 in Iraq and so on. There, they are constantly at war with their next-door Muslim neighbours, of course.

Also before the first Karabakh war, some 25% of Armenia's population used to be Muslim.

Sebeos, one of the first historians to write an account of the Prophet of Islam was an Armenian. Some Armenians such as Badr al-Jamali, vizier of the Fatimid califate, held top positions in Islamic empires. Others converted to Islam and rose in the ranks of various Muslim states.

Armenians were hyperopic for leaving intact this fine place of worship in the heart of their capital:

Restored Govhat Agha Mosque in Shushi, Karabakh:

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

bro just leave him. he have a complex when it comes to Iran. there is no other way i can discribe that. no matter what you say and how much proof you bring, he answer with baseless things which are not covered with any historical proof or at least something.
he bet he watch youtube videos and talk with his friends about geopolitics in school. and repeat what other say here in the forum.

I disagree with your state policies, so it makes me have a complex?

I have loyalty only to islam and Pakistan. I have no loyalty to the Iranian regime which funds terrorists against my country and promotes sectarian wars.

Most Pakistanis (Sunni and Shia) have negative views of Iran today, just like we do about backstabbing Gulf countries.

To us, you are both two sides of the same coin. Extremist Wahhabi, puppets of the West, friends of Indians/Israelis vs. Extremist Shia, puppets of Russians/Orthodox, friends of Indians/Neo-Crusaders.

One coalition destroyed Yemen. The other coalition destroyed Syria and Iraq.

True Islam is not found here with these butchers, terrorist proxies, and backstabbers.

 

[Hormuz]

this is a nice interview you should watch, if you have time for it. interview guest is mohmmad marandi, i think most of you guys know him.

 

[Salmanov]

Alex is neocon scumbag and one of the shah followers

According to the Last Shah, he was undone by a CIA ops which put both the Islamists and the communists within the same crucible....

The rationalization by the Iranian Molla regime never fails to amuse me....

I am yet to meet an Iraninan in real life who supports the Molla regime.....

Just like your erdogan

That is not how it works.

@AgNoStiC MuSliM Can we do something about these repeated allegations that Azerbaycan is not Muslim or Shia?

Isn't this Takfir?

Their regime isn’t so don’t be hypocrite by criticizing Iran and its relationship with India while supporting the anti Islamic regime of baku

 

[Hormuz]

I disagree with your state policies, so it makes me have a complex?

yes cause you claims are not based on facts. they are rather your opinion and emotions, but have nothing to do with reality.

I have loyalty only to islam and Pakistan. I have no loyalty to the Iranian regime which funds terrorists against my country and promotes sectarian wars.

again you show that i am right. but you don't say the haq cause of your loyality. CAUSE YOUR CLAIMS ARE NOT BASED ON ANY FACTS. we don't need people like you being loyal to us. and see again thats the double standart you have, so thats why you are a hypocrat. i never see claim about turkey or saudi funding terrorist. and show me one so called terrorist attack from Iran or her alliace killing innocent people (and don't show me thing in war cause there is no guarranty that innocent people don't die in wars).

To us, you are both two sides of the same coin. Extremist Wahhabi, puppets of the West, friends of Indians/Israelis vs. Extremist Shia, puppets of Russians/Orthodox, friends of Indians/Neo-Crusaders.

ya and pakistan is the mazloom here and the shy bride thats so innocent. come on please you think you talk to bunch of 10 year old kids here.

One coalition destroyed Yemen. The other coalition destroyed Syria and Iraq.

again no facts just talking baseless and nonsense. who in the first place attacked iraq and syria? was it Iran or isis with teh support of your friends turkey and saudi. bith goverments asked us for help. due to the laws made by the united nations Iran had all the rights to fight there, cause the goverment of that country asked for help. you rather would like a wahabi backwords cave men ruling there than others. so don't compare yemen with thos two countries. yemen got attackt by the saudis only because the yemeni people didn't liked the goverment, which was a saudi puppet. Iran on the other hand didn't attack any country on helped the goverments of those country AFTER THEY ASKED FOR HELP!

thats the reason i say you have a Iran complex. when it comes to Iran you don't even see the tree in the forest.

True Islam is not found here with these butchers, terrorist proxies, and backstabbers.

watch in the mirror before you throw big words like that. i only say jundullah, taliban and al qaeda.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

It is your opinion that Iran had nothing to do with Kulbushan Yadav and Indian terror operations, which killed thousands of our citizens.

That is not fact, but your opinion.

Most Pakistanis will call you out on that, I am just a bit more vocal than most because I find no use in hiding uncomfortable facts.

The fact that Iran is supporting Armenia confirms the suspicions of many people regarding Iran's real policy in the region. This is no grand altruistic Islamic defense campaign, but a cut-throat diplomatic and military campaign to expand Iranian influence by falsely using sentiments of Shias worldwide.

I am glad that Pakistani, Afghan, Arab, and Azeri Shias are waking up to this reality.

 

[Itachi]

The hope is to have the conflict spill over into Iran and give Iran a big headache...

Hopefully Iran doesn't allow that but seeing as how it's supporting Armenia.....that might happen in the future.