What's new

“This war against our republic is also a war against Iran’

Their railway had no economic benefits and didn't pass through major cities, the goal was quick transfer of British forces from a deserted port in Persian gulf to capital Tehran; in case of feeling unhappy about their puppets (as they did it in WWII).
well , the rail road was built by Germans not British so I doubt it was the goal . but nevertheless it was not finished and after the war let say there was a lot difference in the personality of the new king with the previous one and also the victor of the war prefered our infrastructure remain the same even degrade
 
.
Their reform in agriculture was to end Iran's self-reliance and make it dependent (as they did it).
the reform itself was not bad and was necessary, the way it was executed was the problematic disaster.
 
.
Regarding industry, all they did was to advertise western superiority and suppress Iranian spirit for self production, students were being brainwashed to migrate to west, not the advancement of the country, they never attempted to go beyond some assembly lines, the exact same policy of Gulf monarchies.
well let be honest after 40 year of revolution still best of our student in industrial universities are planning to go west , just go and look at institute like Goethe institute and see when is the first open space to learn German language
 
.
The real criminal who is peddling this conflict is israel. The zionist-piglet state stands to benefit from a war between Russia and Turkey (as zionists have done so in the past). Also if this article has any credibility, then again, it's israel that benefits from any conflict that drags Iran into the fold. It's interesting how this little cockroach of a state (israel) has strong defense alliances with Georgia, Azerbaijan and has one of the most comprehensive defense alliances with turkey in the past, by far the largest one israel has had with any Muslim state.

If you ever bothered to ask why israel has such relationships with Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkey. Then you have got study about the dots that connect the israelis who are essentially European Jews, which is an evolved term from the term "Ashkenazi" that means the former term. Ashkenazis trace their lineage to the Caucus Region natives, which were conglomerate of tribes under the dominance of the Khazar Kingdom. The latter emerged from the larger Western Turkic Kaghanate. This race of idiots had their tentacles spread through Asia Minor, to Kievan Rus (Ukraine and Ural Russia) and finally into Europe.

When you make that connection, you would understand why that little piglet israel exerts such tremendous influence with these countries.
 
.
Israel's wet dream.

Gulf States vs. Iran
Gulf States vs. Turkey
Turkey vs. Iran
Syria & Libya destabilized

All Muslim nations are encouraged to fight and rival each other while Israel grows increasingly secure.

@TheImmortal


No one cares for Israel when arabs are to busy backstabbing one another and Iran is in the middle backstabbing any muslim nation they can find to backstab.

Israel is to busy building alliances the world over from Africa to South America and building upon their immense scientific progress. Israel is no friend of Pakistan but at the same time they are def not an enemy either. Just because they make a few bucks selling weapons to India as does every other nation does not mean that they are anti pakistan...infact Israeli/Jewish-Americans have spoken out in support of Kashmir far more than even Pakistanis have! and what are arab-americans busy doing?

Sure when Pakistan has a GDP of 3 trillion+ then im all for challenging Israel and doing what we can to support Palestinians, but until then Id rather work with Israel to get to that point and if by then we can open their hearts to make peace then that is the best victory in itself ie winning the war without firing a single shot.

Think rationally with the mind that Allah has given you and let go of your false emotions for a ummah
 
.
Israel's wet dream.

Gulf States vs. Iran
Gulf States vs. Turkey
Turkey vs. Iran
Syria & Libya destabilized

All Muslim nations are encouraged to fight and rival each other while Israel grows increasingly secure.

@TheImmortal

Israel isn’t some magical mastermind. If it was, it would be able to fix its economy and it’s demographics.

Israel has a substantial amount of its population in poverty. Its has an arabization problem where Arabs are becoming a greater part of the population and in the future will be the majority.

Israel on its current path is not sustainable.

So I dismiss these Israeli mastermind conspiracy theories. They can’t even take care of their own country.
 
.
well you can find many videos on youtube from erdogan his speeches. no need for Iran to make any propaganda.

Iran is not losing anything still we have the biggest influence in the region and it won't change i think you would wish so but won't happen.

it is funny how people from pakistan forget that pakistan was the main supply line for nato to attack afghanistan and unsing pakistan as a logistic hub to send their troops weapons food etc.
but you always scream about muslim unity when it comes to other countries where was your mulsim unity when isis beheaded sunni and shia muslims in iraq and syria.
What about you while you sported America in Iraq and Afghanistan to topple the Sadam and against Taliban Muslim regime Sporting non Muslim against Muslim and above all that was our strategy to fight America in Afghanistan and we did it successfully you always worked against Muslims this is the history
 
.
What about you while you sported America in Iraq and Afghanistan to topple the Sadam and against Taliban Muslim regime Sporting non Muslim against Muslim and above all that was our strategy to fight America in Afghanistan and we did it successfully you always worked against Muslims this is the history

if u read all my post u will find the answer to that.
 
.
Each and every post related to Iran is attacked by proud citizens of countries who do nothing other than sitting down and watching their toe nails as the world burns all around us. They call cowardice and inactivity due to lack of competence as well as ability as "STRATEGIC".

Yes I got banned for pointing out how many muslims were In death camps in a communist country where the very practice of religion is Banned and is Prosecutable. And ill probably be bannned again . Mr Krash or whatever his name is will then send an explanation saying how I shoudnt violate forum rules to keep the forum "PRODUCTIVE".

This Forum has become a BIASED joke where One group is given a free pass to violate every written rule whilst the others cant even communicate with Freedom in their own Country's Thread. LMAO.

So if you are there MR. KRASH (not bothering tagging cuz i have better things to do with my time) or whoever you are, I wanna let you know that I have zero respect for you. And you can Ban me again with some other or the same excuse. I JUST DONT CARE ANYMORE. Cuz i dont feed from the bottom. I go by the Motto " Its better to die on your feet, than to live crawling on your knees".

So feel free. Cuz im done with these games of you people. ADIOS.
 
.
What about you while you sported America in Iraq and Afghanistan to topple the Sadam and against Taliban Muslim regime Sporting non Muslim against Muslim and above all that was our strategy to fight America in Afghanistan and we did it successfully you always worked against Muslims this is the history

You started this so dont be bitter, You know nothing about the countless times Saddam used chemical weapons on Iran during The war. Go and Google. You think you can just show up nd talk nonsense nd get away? dont be mad wen ur own country is called out for its action, cuz you dont bother while accusing others.

Saddam was a western puppet who had all the backing of the west as well as soviet union. Then he got sized up by his buddies in the gulf war. He was a vicious tyrant who killed innocents mercilessly all for his own glory. How many ppl died of his use of chemical weapons? do u have any idea? dont come here calling that man a muslim or watever. SADDAM isnt even a human being, let alone a muslim.

And btw wen you come to other contry's thread and accuse them , be ready to have it back about your own beloved Nation.
 
.
You gotta be kidding me. All the scientific progress was made due to your scientist not due to the Ayatollahs. Most of the reforms that were put in place by the Shah took time so by the time the Ayatollahs took over they were getting benefits of those policies.

This is a specious argument. Policies conducted prior to 1979 no longer have any bearing on whatever progress is being made forty years after the Revolution!

Also, scientists don't just spring up from nothing. State policy in the field of public education as well as research and development (especially if these sectors aren't privatized) is what generates a scientific workforce. And in this department, the Islamic Republic has done a tremendously better job than the ousted monarchy. A simple look at the number of universities and research centers opened prior to the Revolution and afterwards will speak for itself.

In some 58 years of Pahlavi monarchy, 16 universities were opened. When Iran's first modern university opened in Tehran, Kabul (Afghanistan) already had its own.

Today, after 40 years of governance by the Islamic Republic, the number has jumped to:

* 92 universities. That is, 76 of them inaugurated after 1979 - versus 16 over 58 years of Pahlavi rule (38 years of which under the last shah Mohammad-Reza Pahlavi).

* At least 512 branches of Payame Noor University accross Iran.

* More than 500 branches of Islamic Azad University all over the country.

The latter two instutions have by the way allowed for a huge democratization of higher education in Iran, which is now offered in the remotest corners and towns of the country (including all those inhabited by linguistic or religious minorities), whereas prior to the Islamic Revolution, universities were mostly an elite affair to which only a tiny segment of society had de facto access.

Today 5 million Iranians are enrolled in universities. Prior to the Revolution, that number was only in the tens of thousands.

So whatever way one looks at it, the comparison is decisively and by a large margin in favor of the Islamic Republic.

It's noteworthy how you would consider public policy as a key factor in scientific growth during the shah era, but would deny it when it comes to the Islamic Republic. That contradiction in your statements is apparent.

Iran would be the Japan of the middle east had it not been for its theocracy.

Iran would most likely resemble other oil-dependent US client states, much rather than Japan.

No one cares for Israel when arabs are to busy backstabbing one another and Iran is in the middle backstabbing any muslim nation they can find to backstab.

Islamic Iran hasn't been "backstabbing" any Muslim country, specially not those that have had no enmity towards her.

Also, no Muslim nation has sacrificed as much for the sake of Islamic causes as Iran: from Tehran's assistance to the Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance against zionist occupation (which requires a mighty dose of courage, given that resisting the zionist regime is extremely costly in terms of sanctions, international pressures, being exposed to destabilization and regime change attempts and so on), to its unparalleled support for Bosnian Muslims (who are of Sunni confession, by the way), to its key role in ending the ISIS fitna, to its sponsorship of a myriad of Islamic movements (Shia and Sunni) accross the world since 1979, etc.


well , you must ask yourself , how much of our history before Islam is reached us . all of our history that have survived is through our enemies or stories and they were only intrested about kings and military . even today if you look at the history book of our children you can see how much the writers are interested in kings and wars and how they are interested in scholar and artists and philosophers . just recall the history book you were taught at school , you had to memorize the must insignificant and corrupt degenerate called king of one of the insignificant dynasties in our worst times , but atthe time tens of tens of schoolar and scientist that were living at the the time were not even mentioned .

If so little of what pre-Islamic Iranian scholars and scientists produced was inherited by later generations, then the scientific progress made after the advent of Islam owes more to Iran's Muslim scholars.

well let be honest after 40 year of revolution still best of our student in industrial universities are planning to go west , just go and look at institute like Goethe institute and see when is the first open space to learn German language

Of course hostile western regimes never ceased their propaganda, in fact they intensified it a lot after 1979. Which is bound to affect numerous young Iranians who are led to believe in this idealized, out of touch image of the west as some sort of a "paradise" which they contrast with Iran. However compared to prevailing conditions under the previous regime, Iranian universities produce many more brilliant graduates.

just think about it how much of our Brain drain problem will be fixed if we make some advance in that field. and how much that can be translated in to scientific and social advancement . how much that can improve our economy . and how that can help us if some body want to sanction something here . how it can improve our management ecosysystem

The "brain drain" issue is much exaggerated by anti-Iranian media.

To begin with, Iran probably produces more high level graduates than her economy can absorb. The number of Iranian students is considerable, compared to other developing countries.

Then, even developed nations have lots of emigrants, many of them with higher education degrees - and unlike Iran, they are not subjected to the same kind of psy-ops and propaganda war.

For instance, 7.5 million south Koreans, 5.5 million Britons, 4 million Germans and nearly 2 million Frenchmen live outside their respective countries. In the case of the French, the percentage is comparable to Iranians, in the case of the Germans and British, it is higher, in the case of south Koreans it is considerably higher.

So yes, ideally those graduates who emigrate could have contributed to the country's advancement if they staid, true, but it's a rather common phenomenon not restricted to Iran.


What about you while you sported America in Iraq and Afghanistan to topple the Sadam and against Taliban Muslim regime Sporting non Muslim against Muslim and above all that was our strategy to fight America in Afghanistan and we did it successfully you always worked against Muslims this is the history

This is patently false: Iran did not extend any support whatsoever to Washington in its illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Especially since US president Bush jr. had held his infamous "axis of evil" speech in January 2002, whereby he classified Iran as a potential upcoming target of his so-called "war on terror".

In fact, Iran was the only country in the region which loudly and clearly condemned the US regime's attack and subsequent occupation of Iraq. Invading US forces weren't aided by Iran, but by the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar etc). The US military conducted all its strikes from bases located in those Arab states. Invading forces entered Iraq from Kuwait, not from Iran.

So this notion that Iran somehow helped the US topple Saddam is a myth that is often repeated by those inadequately informed, including on this forum unfortunately. Pretty much to the contrary, Iran was helpful to Iraq in the latter years of brutal US-imposed sanctions, when much of the smuggling of urgently needed goods (including drugs and food) into Iraq was came in from Iran.

Also, no Muslim country has sacrificed as much for the sake of Islamic causes as Iran: from Tehran's assistance to the Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance against zionist occupation (which requires a mighty lot of courage, given that resisting the zionist regime is extremely costly in terms of sanctions, international pressure, being exposed to destabilization and regime change attempts and so on), to its unparalleled support for Bosnian Muslims (who are of Sunni confession, by the way), to its key role in ending the ISIS fitna, to its sponsorship of a myriad of Islamic movements (Shia and Sunni) accross the world since 1979, etc.

By the way, the Iranian user above who replied to you, expressed his personal opinion. What he wrote about Saddam and the Taliban's attacks on Iran remain true and are aknowledged by the IR as well, however his conclusion regarding the Muslim umma does not reflect the view of Islamic Republic authorities.


SADDAM isnt even a human being, let alone a muslim.

Brother, please don't make takfir, even on a despicable tyrant like Saddam (whom I dislike as much as you). This could be sinful, therefore I'd suggest to make tawba. We are ordered to leave God and then the ulema (if they reach a universally shared consensus) decide whether someone is a Muslim or not. A Muslim too can commit horrible acts, unfortunately the history of Islam isn't entirely exempt of such examples.
 
Last edited:
.
This is a specious argument. Policies conducted prior to 1979 no longer have any bearing on whatever progress is being made forty years after the Revolution!

Also, scientists don't just spring up from nothing. State policy in the realm of public education as well as research and development (especially if the formerly mentioned sectors aren't privatized) is what generates a scientific workforce. And in this department, the Islamic Republic has done has done a incomparably better job than the ousted monarchy. A simple look at the number of universities and research centers opened prior to the Revolution and afterwards will speak for itself.

In some 58 years of Pahlavi monarchy, 16 universities were opened. When Iran's first modern university opened in Tehran, Kabul (Afghanistan) already had its own.

Today, after 40 years of governance by the Islamic Republic, the number has jumped to:

* 92 universities, i. e. 76 of them inaugurated after 1979 - versus 16 during 58 years of Pahlavi rule, 38 years of which under the last shah Mohammad-Reza Pahlavi.

* At least 512 branches of Payame Noor University accross Iran.

* More than 500 branches of Islamic Azad University all over the country.

The latter two instutions have by the way allowed for a huge democratization of higher education in Iran, which is now offered in the remotest corners and towns of the country (including all those inhanited by linguistic or religious minorities), whereas prior to the Islamic Revolution, universities were mostly an elite affair to which only a tiny segment of society had de facto access.

Today 5 million Iranians are enrolled in universities. Prior to the Revolution, that number was only in the tens of thousands only.

So whatever way one looks at it, the comparison is decisively and by a large margin in favor of the Islamic Republic.

By the way, it is noteworthy how you would consider public policy as a key factor of scientific growth when it comes to the shah era, but deny it with regards to the Islamic Republic. That contradiction in your statements is apparent.



Iran would most likely resemble other oil-dependent US client states, much rather than Japan.



Islamic Iran hasn't been "backstabbing" any Muslim country, specially not those that have had no enmity towards her.

Also, no Muslim nation has sacrificed as much for the sake of Islamic causes as Iran: from Tehran's assistance to the Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance against zionist occupation (which requires a mighty dose of courage, given that resisting the zionist regime is extremely costly in terms of sanctions, international pressures, destabilization and regime change attempts and so on), to its unparalleled support for Bosnian Muslims (who are of Sunni confession, by the way), to its key role in ending the ISIS fitna, to its sponsorship of a myriad of Islamic movements (Shia and Sunni) accross the world since 1979, etc.




If so little of what pre-Islamic Iranian scholars and scientists produced was inherited by later generations, then any scientific progress made after the advent of Islam owes more to Iran's Muslim scholars.



Of course hostile western regimes never ceased their propaganda, in fact they intensified it a lot after 1979. Which is bound to affect numerous young Iranians who are led to believe in this idealized, out of touch image of the west as some sort of a "paradise" which they contrast with Iran. However compared to prevailing conditions under the previous regime, Iranian universities produce many more brilliant graduates.



The so-called "brain drain" issue is much exaggerated by anti-Iranian media.

To begin with, Iran produces more high level graduates that her economy can absorb. The number of Iranian students is considerable, compared to other developing countries.

Then, even developed nations have lots of emigrants, many of them with higher education levels - and unlike Iran, they are not subjected to the same kind of psy-ops and propaganda war.

For instance, 7.5 million south Koreans, 5.5 million Britons, 4 million Germans and nearly 2 million Frenchmen live outside their respective countries. In the case of the French, the percentage is comparable to Iranians, in the case of the Germans and British, it is higher, in case of the south Koreans it is much higher.

So yes, ideally those graduates who emigrate could have contributed to the country's advancement if they staid, but it's a rather common phenomenon not restricted to Iran.




This is patently false: Iran did not extend any support whatsoever to Washington in its illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Especially since US president Bush jr. had held his infamous "axis of evil" speech in January 2002, whereby he classified Iran as a potential upcoming target of his so-called "war on terror".

In fact, Iran was the only country in the region which loudly and clearly condemned the US regime's attack and subsequent occupation of Iraq. Invading US forces weren't aided by Iran, but by the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf (Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar etc). The US military conducted all its strikes from bases located in those Arab states. Invading forces entered Iraq from Kuwait, not from Iran.

So this notion that Iran somehow helped the US topple Saddam is a myth that is often repeated by those insufficiently informed, including on this forum unfortunately. On the contrary, Iran was helpful to Iraq in the latter years of brutal US-imposed sanctions, when much of the smuggling of urgently needed goods (including drugs and food) into Iraq was originating from Iran.

Also, no Muslim country has sacrificed as much for the sake of Islamic causes as Iran: from Tehran's assistance to the Palestinian and Lebanese Resistance against zionist occupation (which requires a mighty lot of courage, given that resisting the zionist regime is extremely costly in terms of sanctions, international pressure, destabilization and regime change attempts and so on), to its unparalleled support for Bosnian Muslims (who are of Sunni confession, by the way), to its key role in ending the ISIS fitna, to its sponsorship of a myriad of Islamic movements (Shia and Sunni) accross the world since 1979, etc.

By the way, the Iranian user above who replied to you, expressed his personal opinion. What he wrote about Saddam and the Taliban's attacks on Iran remain true and are aknowledged by the IR as well, however his conclusion regarding the Muslim umma does not reflect the view of Islamic Republic authorities.




Brother, please don't make takfir, even on a despicable tyrant like Saddam (whom I dislike as much as you). This could be sinful, therefore I'd suggest to make tawba. We are ordered to leave God and then the ulema (if they reach a universally shared consensus) decide whether someone is a Muslim or not. A Muslim too can commit horrible acts, unfortunately the history of Islam isn't entirely exempt of such examples.

You are Pakistani yet your kind are known backstabbers and your agenda is serve the Ayatollahs of a foreign enemy of Pakistan. We know what lanaats your kind passes behind our backs. Dont worry once the ISI and Pakistani nation wakes up all the Iranian terrorist in Pakistan serving in Iran will be taken care of.
You started this so dont be bitter, You know nothing about the countless times Saddam used chemical weapons on Iran during The war. Go and Google. You think you can just show up nd talk nonsense nd get away? dont be mad wen ur own country is called out for its action, cuz you dont bother while accusing others.

Saddam was a western puppet who had all the backing of the west as well as soviet union. Then he got sized up by his buddies in the gulf war. He was a vicious tyrant who killed innocents mercilessly all for his own glory. How many ppl died of his use of chemical weapons? do u have any idea? dont come here calling that man a muslim or watever. SADDAM isnt even a human being, let alone a muslim.

And btw wen you come to other contry's thread and accuse them , be ready to have it back about your own beloved Nation.

You have read propaganda online and have fallen for it without using your own mind. Sure Iraq used Chemical weapons to target innocent civilians but how is that different from Iran bombing innocent civilians in Iraq? Sure Iraq killed many of its own people ie kurds, shia sympathizers of iran, etc... but Iran also butchered many of its own citizens including kurds, arabs in iran, communist, etc...

Iran only tricks you by pretending to be anti-israel but tell me what has Iran really done against Israel? all their proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Palestine are either killing innocent muslims or propagading their cult to others.

Israel is laughing at your kind.
 
.
You are Pakistani yet your kind are known backstabbers and your agenda is serve the Ayatollahs of a foreign enemy of Pakistan. We know what lanaats your kind passes behind our backs. Dont worry once the ISI and Pakistani nation wakes up all the Iranian terrorist in Pakistan serving in Iran will be taken care of.

I have a very peculiar personal history, which sets me apart even from the average Pakistani with sympathies for Iran. I grew up among Iranians, and have had more to do with Iran than with Pakistan - and this wasn't a result of personal choice at all, but of circumstances going back to when I was a newly born. Yet I'm not dismissing my "racial" origins.

But what gives you the right to label people "lanatis" or "terrorists" because of their opinion? Is that the "tolerance" secularists usually boast about...?

Also, I was perfectly courteous and respectful in my reply, yet sadly you resorted to unwarranted ad hominems. I'll let this go, but next time I shall report completely unprovoked personal attacks.

You have read propaganda online and have fallen for it without using your own mind. Sure Iraq used Chemical weapons to target innocent civilians but how is that different from Iran bombing innocent civilians in Iraq?

When did Iran bomb civilians in Iraq? Apart from token ballistic missile strikes by Iran - and even these were both in response to and far fewer in numbers than Iraq's BM attacks on Iranian cities, I don't know of instances were Iran bombed civilians in the war. Also this was an inherent problem with export-version SCUD-type BM's back then, they simply lacked precision. However, I know of no documented case where Iran's air force for example targeted Iraqi civilians.

Besides, I never talked about Iraq in my conversation with you.

And also, how is this "backstabbing" a Muslim nation? For God's sake, Saddam attacked Iran not the other way around. And Iran owed him nothing for it to constitute "backstabbing".

Last but not least, do you believe Saddam was a friend to Pakistan? I don't think so, which is why Iran received some low profile aid from Islamabad during the war (like Pakistani medics treating Iranian troops etc).

but Iran also butchered many of its own citizens including kurds, arabs in iran, communist, etc...

Again, I didn't mention Saddam butchering his people.

But since you're comparing, Iran never undertook an operation comparable to the chemical bombing of Halabja, killing thousands of Iraqi civilians in one go.

The communists you're talking about were members of armed groups which conducted attacks against the state (or plotted with foreign powers to topple the system). These Kurds, Arabs and so on were part of separatist armed groups which were likewise fighting a government accepted by the overwhelming majority of Iranians (including Kurdish and Arab Iranians).

Iran only tricks you by pretending to be anti-israel but tell me what has Iran really done against Israel? all their proxies in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, and Palestine are either killing innocent muslims or propagading their cult to others.

Sure, the Iranian-backed Lebanese Resistance did "not" fight and kick out zionist occupiers between the '80s to early 2000's. It did "not" defend Lebanon in 2005 during 33 days of intense bombings by zionist forces (which martyred between 5 to 10 times more civilians than Hezbollah fighters).

Hamas and Islamic Jihad "aren't" opposing Isra"el" either.

And Isra"el"i pressures and aggression against Iran, including through their lobbies in Washington D. C., which resulted among other things in subjecting Iran to the most severe sanctions regime witnessed in history, or their support for anti-Iranian "ethno"-separatist threatening to balkanize the country, are completely unrelated to Iranian policy (now I'm not saying that Tel Aviv won't backstab their own clients, they do, however they first need their true opponent i. e. Iran out of the way, to which effect they enroll their clients).
 
Last edited:
.
I have a very peculiar personal history, which sets me apart even from the average Pakistani with sympathies for Iran. I grew up among Iranians, and have had more to do with Iran than with Pakistan - and this wasn't a result of personal choice at all, but of circumstances going back to when I was a newly born. Yet I'm not dismissing my "racial" origins.

But what gives you the right to label people "la'natis" or "terrorists" because of their opinion? Is that the "tolerance" secularists usually boast about...?

Also, I was perfectly courteous and respectful in my reply, yet sadly you resorted to unwarranted ad hominems. I'll let this go, but next time I shall report completely unprovoked personal attacks.



When did Iran bomb civilians in Iraq? Apart from a token ballistic missile strikes by Iran - and even these were both in response to and far fewer in numbers than Iraq's BM attacks on Iranian cities, I don't know of instances were Iran bombed civilians in that war. Also that was an inherent problem with export-version SCUD-type BM's back then, they simply lacked precision. However, I know of no documented case where Iran's air force for example targeted Iraqi civilians.

Besides, I never talked about Iraq in my conversation with you.

And also, how is this "backstabbing a Muslim nation"? For God's sake, Saddam attacked Iran not the other way around. And Iran owed him nothing for it to constitute "backstabbing".

Last but not least, do you think Saddam was a friend to Pakistan? I don't think so, which is why Iran received some low profile aid from Islamabad during the war (like Pakistani medics treating Iranians etc).



Again, I never made a rant about Saddam butchering his people. But since you're comparing, Iran never undertook an operation comparable to the chemical bombing of Halabja, killing thousands of Iraqi civilians in one go. The communists you're talking about were members of armed groups which conducted attacks against the state (or plotted with foreign powers to overthrow it). The Kurds, Arabs and so on were part of separatist armed groups which were likewise fighting a government accepted by the overwhelming majority of Iranians (including Kurdish and Arab Iranians).



Sure, the Iranian-backed Lebanese Resistance did "not" fight and kick out zionist occupiers between the '80s to early 2000's. It did "not" defend Lebanon in 2005 during 33 days of intense bombings by zionist forces (which martyred between 5 and 10 times more civilians than Hezbollah fighters).

Hamas and Islamic Jihad "aren't" opposing Isra"el" either.

And Isra"el"i pressures and aggression against Iran, including through their lobbies in Washington D. C., which resulted among other things in subjecting Iran to the most severe sanctions regime witnessed in history, or their support for anti-Iranian "ethno"-separatist threatening to balkanize the country, are completely unrelated to Iranian policy (now I'm not saying that Tel Aviv won't backstab their own clients, they do, however they first need their true opponent i. e. Iran out of the way, to which effect they enroll their clients).
[/QUOTE]

Iran never killed innocent civilians in Iraq??? you gotta be kidding me... their militias have been butchering sunnis on a daily basis since 2003 in Iraq. During the iran-iraq was Iran did many missile/airstrike, and artillery strikes on civilians targets. Iran even used human wave attacks with hundred of thousands of children. So you claim they dont have blood of their hands by brainwashing kids to run into iraqi machine guns????


Iran is butchering innocents in Syria (over 100k+) and has ruined that country. Iran has butchered mutliple sunnis/arabs/kurds in their country since 1979. Look at the situation of sunnis in Iran today where they do not even have a sunni mosque in Tehran which has a sunni population of 2 million. Iran is a snake that only can attack weak victims but cannot do anything against US/Israel/Pakistan etc...

You have serious mental issues and biases due to such an "upbringing" which understandably was out of your hands. I never said Saddam was innocent but he is an angel compared to the Ayatollahs.
 
.
Iran never killed innocent civilians in Iraq??? you gotta be kidding me... their militias have been butchering sunnis on a daily basis since 2003 in Iraq.

Any and all inter-communal killings in Iraq were triggered by the so-called "Islamic State"'s 2006 bombing of the Al-Askari shrine, which is holy to Shia Muslims.

Prior to that, no Shia Iraqi group had engaged in killing civilians. As for Iran, she never directed nor ordered her allies to commit revenge killings even after the 2006 attack.

It's just that when you have a terrorist organization openly declaring war on your community (elderly, women and children included), bombing holy sites as well as civilian places on a near daily basis, to some extent revenge killings won't be evitable, whether carried out by pro-Iranian or other Shia Iraqis not necessarily loyal to Iran.

Try sending a group of people to Mecca, among whom you recruit a handful of terrorists; have these terrorists first blow up the Kaaba (nauzubillah), followed by attacks on civilian locations (such as busy markets) every day for several years in a row, then see what happens not just to the terrorists but also to the people they stem from, and whether or not Saudi rulers will be able to fully control their subjects in such a horrible event.

During the iran-iraq was Iran did many missile/airstrike, and artillery strikes on civilians targets.

No, it didn't. Substantiate your claim with evidence.

Iran even used human wave attacks with hundred of thousands of children. So you claim they dont have blood of their hands by brainwashing kids to run into iraqi machine guns????

They were volunteers and did not need to be brainwashed. Also these were not little children but usually in their teens. Iranians are very patriotic and religious people, so in case their homeland is attacked, the average teenager is guaranteed to be strongly motivated to join the frontlines, propaganda or not.

Iran is butchering innocents in Syria (over 100k+) and has ruined that country.

Sorry, but no. Show us some hard evidence that Iranian forces engaged in such actions in Syria. Iran's is not in command of every unit of the Syrian armed forces.

Iran has butchered mutliple sunnis/arabs/kurds in their country since 1979.

Many Shia lost their lives too. What's with the attempt to paint Iranian authorities as somehow biased against minorities, which isn't grounded in truth?

But as said, we're talking about terrorists groups here, not about ordinary civilians. They took up arms against a government which happened to result from a popular revolution, and therefore enjoyed (and enjoys) the support of a great majority of its citizens. We're certainly not talking about random civilians being deliberately targeted!

Look at the situation of sunnis in Iran today where they do not even have a sunni mosque in Tehran which has a sunni population of 2 million.

That's a complete fabrication.

1) Fundamentally, the distinction between Sunni and Shia mosques is questionable. They are largely identical indeed, the only possible differences being the public call to prayer (where Shia Muslims add two additional lines compared to their Sunni peers), and whether the prayer leader is a Sunni or a Shia.

However, Iranian authorities never forbade Shia Muslims to pray behind a Sunni imam or vice versa. If some people have a problem with that, they are in no position to label the Iranian government as "sectarianist".

2) Even so, Tehran actually does actually have around 100 Sunni mosques, which are fully controlled by Sunnis, for a population of around 600.000 Sunni Muslims (and perhaps 800.000 or 900.000 Sunni Muslims in the Greater Tehran metropolitan area), not 2 million.

Sunni Muslims represent about 6%, perhaps 7% of Iran's population; Tehran has 9 million inhabitants, Greater Tehran about 15 million. Why do you expect the percentage of Sunni Muslims in the capital to be more than twice the national average?

And here is undeniable proof for the existence of Sunni mosques in Tehran:


The interview was conducted by an Albanian academic, Olsi Jazexhi, who visited Iran and is himself a Sunni Muslim.

The alim you can see in the video is the Sunni Muslim imam of Tehran's famous Sadeghieh-district Sunni mosque, which is entirely managed by Sunnis and even includes a center of learning for Sunni figh. This mosque is a large four storey building no less.

The same respected Sunni Muslim alim, at the beginning of the interview, confirms there are 100 Sunni mosques in Tehran.

He debunks the propaganda that claims Sunni Muslims are facing restrictions to their religious freedom in Iran. He goes on to explain that Sunni Iranians are absolutely free to praise the caliphs Abu Bakr, Omar and Osman, as well the Prophet's (sws) wife Aisha. In effect and for good measure, he praises them on camera for everyone to see.

When asked if they are free to teach their faith to students, the scholar replies that the only thing they're expected to refrain from is classifying their Shia Muslim brothers as kuffar.

Another video of a Sunni imam leading prayers at a Tehran mosque:


When it comes to Tehran's Sunni mosques, the sole practical limitations they face, is that their Sunni version of the azan should not be amplified outside the mosque. Within the premises of their mosques however, they have no problem at all performing their azan. And this only applies to Shia-majority regions: in the Sunni-majority areas of Iran, the Sunni azan is allowed to be audible everywhere.

See undisputable proof here:



You claim I am being misled by propaganda, yet here you are clearly rehashing a typical piece of anti-Iranian disinformation without having had the curiosity or objectivity to search by yourself for possible evidence to the contrary.

3) In the Sunni-majority areas of Iran, the number of (Sunni) mosques per inhabitant is superior to the number of (Shia) mosques per inhabitant in the country's Shia-majority areas!

4) Not only are there plenty of Sunni mosques, Iran is also home to numerous well-regarded Sunni Islamic centers of learning, which even attract foreign students.

A Sunni Muslim brother from Herat, Afghanistan studying Islam at Al-Mostafa University in Golestan province, Iran:

Shaykh Ismail Subhani from Azamiyeh madrasah in Bandar Torkaman speaks about Sunni Islam in Iran:

Now these are hardly things a government with a sectarianist bias against Sunni Muslims would do.

For someone claiming to be of secular persuasion, you appear to be quite receptive to propaganda issued by religious types (usually sectarianists) opposed to Iran.

Iran is a snake that only can attack weak victims but cannot do anything against US/Israel/Pakistan etc...

Iran is blessed with something that sets it apart from virtually every other state on earth, except for a few others such as North Korea, Venezuela and Cuba: the immense courage and fortitude it takes to challenge the zio-American imperial order head on.

Iran is not in a conflict with Pakistan.

You have serious mental issues and biases due to such an "upbringing" which understandably was out of your hands.

Qualifying holders of dissenting views as "mentally ill", where do I know this from? Ah yes, the USSR it was.

My upbringing caused me to stay respectful despite your ad hominems. That's not bad already.

I never said Saddam was innocent but he is an angel compared to the Ayatollahs.

That's a wholly erroneous assessment, devoid of historic veracity to those in the know of these topics.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom