Turkey & Iran and Iran and Arabs (The Political Differences)

[FriendOfPakistan]

First, some corrections:

1- Azarbaijan is the proper name only of a region in northwestern Iran, south of Aras river, historically speaking. The area of that ex-Soviet republic was mostly composed of two regions - under the Qajar dynasty which ruled Iran and were themselves from Azarbaijan (Iran) - Arran and Shirvan. Even Azari Kings of Iran did not name that region Azarbaijan. How did the name get changed ? There was a brief period of Turkish occupation of that land (around 1914-1918 I think), and the Turks suggested renaming that place to Azarbaijan. The Soviets continued and encouraged that policy. The Soviets briefly occupied Azarbaijan (Iran) after WWII and installed a puppet regime. Their policy was to reunite "North" with "South".

2- Are you implying Azarbaijan is in bondage ? They fought the Ottomans again and again - never wanting to be a part of it. If they are in bondage, they themselves chose to prefer Iranian identity to any other. And it is because historically and genetically they are overwhelmingly related to other parts of Iran. They are simply (linguistically) turkified Iranians.

Kurdistan is much more likely to separate from Turkey. If there was a democratic vote, I bet > 50% of Kurds would vote to separate from Turkey. In Iran, Azarbaijan, I doubt even 5% would vote for separation.

what is the chances of Southern Azerbaijan becoming free ?

 

[PERSIAN GOD KING]

First, some corrections:

1- Azarbaijan is the proper name only of a region in northwestern Iran, south of Aras river, historically speaking. The area of that ex-Soviet republic was mostly composed of two regions - under the Qajar dynasty which ruled Iran and were themselves from Azarbaijan (Iran) - Arran and Shirvan. Even Azari Kings of Iran did not name that region Azarbaijan. How did the name get changed ? There was a brief period of Turkish occupation of that land (around 1914-1918 I think), and the Turks suggested renaming that place to Azarbaijan. The Soviets continued and encouraged that policy. The Soviets briefly occupied Azarbaijan (Iran) after WWII and installed a puppet regime.

2- Are you implying Azarbaijan is in bondage ? They fought the Ottomans again and again - never wanting to be a part of it. If they are in bondage, they themselves chose to prefer Iranian identity to any other. And it is because historically and genetically they are overwhelmingly related to other parts of Iran. They are simply turkified Iranians.

Kurdistan is much more likely to separate from Turkey. If there was a democratic vote, I bet > 50% of Kurds would vote to separate from Turkey. In Iran, Azarbaijan, I doubt even 5% would vote for separation.

My friend, just leave them. they are bunch of anti Iranian people.

 

[ASQ-1918]

Yes we fought Ottomans but not in the name of "Iran", stop falsifying history. Safavids were not Iranian and Safavid Empire were not equal to Iran. I hope you do know that Persians were not even allowed into Safavid armies, there was a reason why the Safavid military language was Azerbaijani Turkish and not Persian. Regarding Safavid wars with Ottomans, it was basically a Shia-Sunni war.

Yeah right.

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

It is not about "them", "him" or "her", but about informing and educating everyone on the forum, exposing falsifications / propaganda, and presenting (verifiable) historical, and scientific (e.g. genetics), facts.

My friend, just leave them. they are bunch of anti Iranian people.

 

[silko]

Kurdistan is much more likely to separate from Turkey. If there was a democratic vote

HAHAHAHAHA god one...

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

Yes we fought Ottomans but not in the name of "Iran", stop falsifying history.

First, I am talking about Azarbaijan, not your republic. Your republic was given to Russians, together with Armenia and Georgia, by Azarbaijanis, while Azarbaijan was kept in Iran. Surely, your people did not fight the Russians hard enough, did not care, and so ended up outside Iran.
Second, Safavids were all about unifying Iran, and preserving it from being absorbed by Ottomans and Arabs. The could have named it "Turkistan" or "Azarbaijan", but no they named their empire "Iran". Read up a bit more ...

Safavids were not Iranian and Safavid Empire were not equal to Iran.

Pure propaganda, based on your distorted belief that Azarbaijanis are not Iranian. Iranians can be Turkic speaking as well as Persian speaking. And, the order of Safavis originated in Gilan (Caspian Sea coas) and then spread to Ardabil - near the border with Gilan - and rest of Azarbaijan. Shah Ismail (founder) was raised bilingual in both Persian and Azeri. He named himself Shah of Iran, not Shah of Azarbaijan. In fact, the Caspian coast of Iran (Gilan, Mazandaran - who are not Turkic speaking) was a stronghold of Shiism in Iran, and the only part of Iran that resisted the Arab armies for centuries.

I hope you do know that Persians were not even allowed into Safavid armies,.

Not so.
Qizilbash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Kizilbash were a coalition of many different peoples of predominantly (but not exclusively) Turkic-speaking Azerbaijani background.
The non-Turkic or non-Turkish-speaking Iranian tribes among the Kizilbash were called Tājiks by the Turcomans and included:[9][10]

Tālish
Siāh-Kuh (Karādja-Dagh)
Lur tribes (for example the Zand)
certain Kurdish tribes
certain Persian families and clans

 

[Alienoz_TR]

@ friendofpakistan

Azerbaijanis are partly from Anatolian Turkmen descent, rest are Iranian Turkmens whether you like it or not. Qyzylbash were heterodox Muslims, almost all of them were Oghuz Turks. Because they were wearing red Bo:rk, they were called red heads.

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

There were some Turcomans (Shiites) from Eastern Anatolia who joined the Qizilbash, and some settled in Azarbaijan, or took refuge there - but not in huge numbers. They were mostly warriors, and there was no mass migration. But you are right, that element is there.

Same with earlier Turkic incursions into Azarbaijan. Not huge in numbers, to replace the indigenous population, but mostly warrior class.

In the end, genetic studies have shown Iranian Azarbaijanis are more similar to other Iranians genetically, than any one else, except they have more genetic influence from the Caucasus than most other parts of Iran (Gilan has genetic links with Caucasus also, though they are not Turkic speaking).

I am not saying there is no Central Asian / Siberian genetic influence - after all Mongols had their capital in Tabriz - but there is very little of it showing up in genetic studies. Which means that while language changed to Turkic, the genetic makeup was not significantly altered - whether one likes that, or not.

@ friendofpakistan

Azerbaijanis are partly from Anatolian Turkmen descent, rest are Iranian Turkmens whether you like it or not. Qyzylbash were heterodox Muslims, almost all of them were Oghuz Turks. Because they were wearing red Bo:rk, they were called red heads.

 

[Alienoz_TR]

What is reason of language change? Could be that they are actually Turks?

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

What is reason of language change? Could be that they are actually Turks?

The phenomenon has been observed and documented even in the 20th century, in Iran. Some Persian speaking villages neighboring Turkic speaking villages became Turkic speaking over time.

During the attacks by Alexander, the area of Azarbaijan was called Media-Atropatene. Atro-Pat in modern Persian is (old Persian Atar= modern Persian Azar) Azar-Pad or Azar-Bad (arabized - arabs do not have P letter, so it becomes B - Pat = Pad) which means "Keeper of Holy Fire" (Zoroastrian reference).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atar

Azar-Bad-Gan means " Of Atropat" ... it became arabized to Azar-Bad-Jan (G sound does not exist in Arabic, J is substituted).

Atropatene - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(look up the map on the RHS which shows where it is located)

Atropat was the ruler of that region (documented by Greek geographer/historian Strabo):
http://rbedrosian.com/Classic/strabo11d.htm

MEDIA is divided into two parts, one of which is called the Greater Media. Its capital is Ecbatana, a large city containing the royal seat of the Median empire. This palace the Parthians continue to occupy even at this time. Here their kings pass the summer, for the air of Media is cool. Their winter residence is at Seleucia, on the Tigris, near Babylon.

The other division is Atropatian Media [Media Atropatene]. It had its name from Atropatus, a chief who prevented this country, which is a part of Greater Media, from being subjected to the dominion of the Macedonians. When he was made king he established the independence of this country; his successors continue to the present day, and have at different times contracted marriages with the kings of Armenia, Syria, and Parthia.

 

[jinxeD_girl]

oh bhayya....the mughals did not have a free lunch here...we may have been settled but that did not take away our courage one bit....the reason why we got defeated was not because we lacked courage and dropped pants when we saw the turks or arabs approaching...but because we were divided, fought against each other and did not recognize who was our true enemy...anyway no excuses..coming to history....the mughals did not rule over a peaceful india...there were always rebellions, revolts and it was only their alliance with the rajputs (who were hindus btw) through marital bonds that helped them in that....

that is the real reason why the mughals could rule a part of india....i hope you got to know many new facts here..

I still don't know why moderators and admins allow you Indians on this forum unchecked.... maybe they are just trying to make money or trying to increase their Alexa rankings.. but it is really annoying and irritating.. and it really gets overwhelming.. If I am arguing with one Indian, the whole Indian brigade jumps like cockroaches... and of course you can't take part in discussion when it is 1 person versus 10...

No one cares about South Indians here... Pakistanis don't even spend 1% of their time thinking about South Indians, who ruled them, what religion they are, if they are muslims or hindus or aliens.. I don't think any Pakistani cares... South Indian culture, dress, language etc are alien to us...

 

[jinxeD_girl]

OMG, look at this thread, esp users like jinxed girl and others have stooped such low, to racial religious, sactarian slurs, go get education illeterates, skin tone doesnt matter, what matters are the brain cells and surely you guys are very low on that

bihari punjabi or kashmiri or UP doesnt matter, i request mods to close this stupid thread, enough is enough

Who said that Brain cells is the only thing which matters? If that was the case.... there would be no countries, no ethnicities, no religions and we would be living happily as one human race.. If race, ethnicity, nationality doesn't matter then what is the purpose of this thread anywayz or what is the purpose of this forum... ? It looks like it DOES matter, that we create defence forums like these...

Stop the hypocrisy

 

[jinxeD_girl]

Mostly the Gulf Arabs have a problem with Iran Arabs from Egypt(my home country), Libya, Jordan we have no problems with Iran however Due to the Arab Dictators treating the shia's unfairly it's pushing them to Iran so I think we should treat our shia's Better, Iran can go whichever way it like doesn't matter, as for Turkey they have their own agenda so let them purse it.

Are North African countries really Arab countries? I know you guyz speak Arabic, but were you guyz Arabs before Arab invasion? I know many Lebanese who claim they are not Arabs, but Phoenicians.. And aren't North African countries like Morocco etc populated by Berbers instead of Arabs... ?

What is the definition of Arab anywayz? Someone who speaks Arabic or is it something racial? Somalia and Sudan are considered Arab countries, but to me they are more African than Arab.. so I am confused as to who would be considered as Arab?

 

[A1Kaid]

T

Are North African countries really Arab countries? I know you guyz speak Arabic, but were you guyz Arabs before Arab invasion? I know many Lebanese who claim they are not Arabs, but Phoenicians.. And aren't North African countries like Morocco etc populated by Berbers instead of Arabs... ?

What is the definition of Arab anywayz? Someone who speaks Arabic or is it something racial? Somalia and Sudan are considered Arab countries, but to me they are more African than Arab.. so I am confused as to who would be considered as Arab?

Yes, North African Maghreb are Arab countries as Arabs migrated to NA after the Islamic conquest. As for Egypt I don't think they were originally Arabs but simply Egyptians or Egyptos as it was once called but Egypt is Arabnized so it is considered Arab. As for Somalia they are not ethnically Arab simply linguistically they speak Arabic, they are ethnic Africans. Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt are all ethnically Arab countries today and during the time of the Rashidun Caliphate spread into NA.

 

[A1Kaid]

As for Azerbaijan, lay this debate to rest they are ethnically Turkic people and even speak Turkic their ancestral language, they originate from Central Asia and migrated westward as the Oghuz Turks did and settled nearby Anataloa in this case the Caucuses. Iranians claiming they are Iranic, claims there is genetic proof of this yet have shown none of it need to come to realization that most Azeris are Turkic. If you ask an Azerbaijani they will even tell you they are a Turkic.

So lay this debate to rest.