WOW:Syria militants attack Hezbollah positions in Lebanon: FSA

[Hack-Hook]

Are Iranians not Arabs? At least their rulers are. To be an Ayatollah, one has to trace ancestry to Quraysh, an Arabian tribe.

I wonder how you reached such nonsense ?
look at this list , these are Shia Grand ayatollahs that we are following in Iran , look at them 3 are Seyed and their ancestry reach to holy prophet , but 7 are not and have no relation to the holy prophet .

پايگاههاي اینترنتی مراجع عظام تقليد

look the one withe the Black Ammameh (Dastar or turban or whatever you call it) are seyyed , the ones with white one are not

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Hasani
5- Jordan has refused to arm the rebels, Jordan will earn $3 billion a year from the pipeline and be totally dependent on Iraqi oil. The KSAs oilfields are too far from Jordan to build a pipeline.*

Apart from my personal view, Jordanian official view is absolutely in favor of ousting Bashar as Syrian regime and the Jordanian one relations have always been cold since the 60s, but it looks at the Syrian crisis in the long run with logic, Syria could turn into a slaughter house based on ethnic and sectarian colors and yet into the partition of Syria and this what Jordan has been warning against for two years. The regime here understand that Syria could turn into a haven of Qaeda, and this is the last thing Jordan wants as it could pose a grave danger to it's national security and would drag global powers into Syria. Therefore, Jordan tries to push for a solution that include ousting the regime. However, FSA got smuggled weapons through Jordan in the past as well as fighters, and the gov turned a blind eye on them.

As for Iraq part, the pipeline will not change Jordanian pro GCC policy, as Iraq needs it more than Jordan, noting that oil will start to get produced in 2015-2017.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

I wonder how you reached such nonsense ?
look at this list , these are Shia Grand ayatollahs that we are following in Iran , look at them 3 are Seyed and their ancestry reach to holy prophet , but 7 are not and have no relation to the holy prophet .

پايگاههاي اینترنتی مراجع عظام تقليد

look the one withe the Black Ammameh (Dastar or turban or whatever you call it) are seyyed , the ones with white one are not

OMG, we do have Prophet's family tree BTW, and this blood linage to the prophet was refuted.

 

[Alshawi1234]

Apart from my personal view, Jordanian official view is absolutely in favor of ousting Bashar as Syrian regime and the Jordanian one relations have always been cold since the 60s, but it looks at the Syrian crisis in the long run with logic, Syria could turn into a slaughter house based on ethnic and sectarian colors and yet into the partition of Syria and this what Jordan has been warning against for two years. The regime here understand that Syria could turn into a haven of Qaeda, and this is the last thing Jordan wants as it could pose a grave danger to it's national security and would drag global powers into Syria. Therefore, Jordan tries to push for a solution that include ousting the regime. However, FSA got smuggled weapons through Jordan in the past as well as fighters, and the gov turned a blind eye on them.

As for Iraq part, the pipeline will not change Jordanian pro GCC policy, as Iraq needs it more than Jordan, noting that oil will start to get produced in 2015-2017.

Yes even Iraq supported ousting Bashar as well, But not by force and burning Syria. Iraq does not need Jordan more than vice versa, it's about mutual interest, yes Jordan is a GCC Allie, but that alliance is harming Jordan in many cases and could threaten an armed rebellion because of what's going on Syria. Remember the suicide bombing against a wedding by alqaeda a few years ago, that is what Jordan is up against.
Iraq already exports 20k bpd to Jordan at a discount price. Egyptian gas has become unreliable. Anyways I think all relations should be based on mutual interest and not sectarian lines. But the GCC and Iran have forced everyone to make all the relations based on ethnic standings. The attitude of Hassani is a good example of what I mean.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Yes even Iraq supported ousting Bashar as well, But not by force and burning Syria. Iraq does not need Jordan more than vice versa, it's about mutual interest, yes Jordan is a GCC Allie, but that alliance is harming Jordan in many cases and could threaten an armed rebellion because of what's going on Syria. Remember the suicide bombing against a wedding by alqaeda a few years ago, that is what Jordan is up against.
Iraq already exports 20k bpd to Jordan at a discount price. Egyptian gas has become unreliable. Anyways I think all relations should be based on mutual interest and not sectarian lines. But the GCC and Iran have forced everyone to make all the relations based on ethnic standings. The attitude of Hassani is a good example of what I mean.

Don't forget that Jordan was the first that warned against "Shia crescent", no offense but you know this word is not sectarian but rather a warning of Iranian influence spread, I think you know that Abdullah The Second doesn't think in a sectarian mentality. However, I don't know what to say to the rest of your post, I know that we both (Sunnah and Shia) have been demonizing eachothers for years, and we could blame eacchothers all day long, but the truth is that I do believe in is that GCC problem is with Iran not Shia, Iran is the root of the problem.

 

[r3alist]

Be careful of the arab bedouin arab who outwardly professes islam, but inwardly cannot think beyond his tribe.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Be careful of the arab bedouin arab who outwardly professes islam, but inwardly cannot think beyond his tribe.

Hiding behind Islam to achieve political goals by messing up Muslim countries made Muslims strongly oppose the so called Ummah for the next 1000 years.

 

[Jamaal Yelmaaz]

Don't forget that Jordan was the first that warned against "Shia crescent", no offense but you know this word is not sectarian but rather a warning of Iranian influence spread, I think you know that Abdullah The Second doesn't think in a sectarian mentality. However, I don't know what to say to the rest of your post, I know that we both (Sunnah and Shia) have been demonizing eachothers for years, and we could blame eacchothers all day long, but the truth is that I do believe in is that GCC problem is with Iran not Shia, Iran is the root of the problem.

i agree with you..
the main problem is not driven from secterian...the core of problems driven from misusing and manipulating shiism by Persian expantionists to establish a Persian empire..
while only 10-15% of muslim are shias...on the other hand only 15% of whole Shias are Persians....But as it many times occured in the past, all signifacnt conflicts betwwen Sunnis and Shias muslim came out from Iran....

in 15-16 century many times iran had attempted to provoke Turkish Shia and Allawites tribes againist Othman empire.. when ever army of othmanis went on a campaign toward west againist Europeans iran had hit othmans in back by provoking Shias and allawites or directly attacking on east borders..

Now the history is repeating with the same method by iran..This time target is arab countries. All Arab counntries which Shias live in is under aggression of iran. Yemen, Bahrain, KSA, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria and Lebnon.. iran have triggered and now fueling sectarian conflicts in those countries to set up Maliki and Assad style of puppet shia arab governments in the service of a Nationalist Persian empire..

there is no any chance of success of iran in that expantionist strategy.. iran will lost in all these countries one by one when its time comes. firts in syria....
at the last, iran eighter will encounter with huge internal riots or Mollahs regime will divided by itself into some fractions...
i dont see any bright future for iran from horizons..

 

[al-Hasani]

As expected you were not able to disprove any of my points Alshawi1234. Well, it's hard arguing against recognized facts so that must be why.

It's very easy. Name me one single Shia that is against Iranian interference in the Arab world/that does NOT support the Mullah's and their fight against Islam (Sunni Islam the main and most important branch that is followed by 85 percent of all Muslims worldwide). There won't be one. That is why we Sunni Arabs and Sunnis overall must realize that we cannot trust them. They would rather sell themselves to Iran than staying truth to the Arab world. This is a tendency that I hear from non-Arabs as well who are complaining about the Shia minorities in their countries who are conspiring against the integrity of their homelands in favor of Iran. But the most tragicomically thing is that they will always be a minority and that there are only 4 majority Shia countries in the world one of which is tiny Bahrain that will forever be under KSA control. In fact I am a supporter of us annexing it likewise Qatar in the future since those two countries sometimes act above their weight and could be vulnerable against a possible Iranian attack - GCC or no GCC. Same people basically as well.

Yes, most of the Iranian Sadah are not genuine but we all know that.

To the Shia Pakistani troll r3alist I only have this to say:



The Arabian Peninsula is one of the most beautiful and historical regions in the world and is the area of the world that was first inhabited outside of Africa if we are to believe science. Yemen's history alone is older than that of any Iranian. Recently a ancient town in Yemen was discovered in a valley in the mountains that was found to be nearly 15.000 years old. Arabs who are Semitic people have the oldest cultures anyway and all Semitic people are originally from the Arabian Peninsula including all the ancient Semitic civilizations/peoples. Moreover Hejaz is one of the oldest regions that is situated perfectly between Arabia Felix (Southern Arabia), Africa and Levant. Large parts of the Levant have been traditionally inhabited by ancient Arab civilizations.

 

[al-Hasani]

i agree with you..
the main problem is not driven from secterian...the core of problems driven from misusing and manipulating shiism by Persian expantionists to establish a Persian empire..
while only 10-15% of muslim are shias...on the other hand only 15% of whole Shias are Persians....But as it many times occured in the past, all signifacnt conflicts betwwen Sunnis and Shias muslim came out from Iran....

in 15-16 century many times iran had attempted to provoke Turkish Shia and Allawites tribes againist Othman empire.. when ever army of othmanis went on a campaign toward west againist Europeans iran had hit othmans in back by provoking Shias and allawites or directly attacking on east borders..

Now the history is repeating with the same method by iran..This time target is arab countries. All Arab counntries which Shias live in is under aggression of iran. Yemen, Bahrain, KSA, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria and Lebnon.. iran have triggered and now fueling sectarian conflicts in those countries to set up Maliki and Assad style of puppet shia arab governments in the service of a Nationalist Persian empire..

there is no any chance of success of iran in that expantionist strategy.. iran will lost in all these countries one by one when its time comes. firts in syria....
at the last, iran eighter will encounter with huge internal riots or Mollahs regime will divided by itself into some fractions...
i dont see any bright future for iran from horizons..

That's pretty much spot on. They tried to stir trouble up in Yemen where my mother is from and they failed miserable. Houthi case. They rejected them since the Houthis (a minority in Yemen who live in the Northwest close to KSA (Najran) are closer to Yemeni Sunnis of the Shafi'i fiqh than the Shia Twelvers in Iraq/Iran. So they failed there. So their only remaining playing fields are Syria which they are about to loss very soon (matter of time), tiny Southern Lebanon and Southern Iraq. They will always fail in Bahrain so their future under the Mullah's and their policies are looking really bad for them. Not to mention all their neighbors who are all Sunnis apart from Azerbaijan. But Azerbaijan is Turkic country that is at odds with Iran and which is actively claiming Northern Iran as their territory (the Azeri areas). Anyway they play no role since they are the most secular country and under total Russian dominance. Even in terms of culture and outlook. So they will not pose any threat to the Sunni establishment actually they could prove to be a asset in transforming Iran. It's just a matter of time before all those non-Persian areas declare autonomy/independence. The Kurdish and Baluch regions are de facto acting on their own largely and are not under full control.

Anyway we have nothing to worry about. Syria for them and keeping Al-Assad and the sect members (Alawis) in power is 1000 times more important for Iran than the Sunni establishment. Much, much more. That's why I am surprised that Iran has not send troops. If they can't do that they can only dream about attacking the Arabian Peninsula and Turkey and the Sunni Muslim world.

What is certain is that we will still control the Islamic world as we have always done. We don't even need to do anything since Iranians themselves will distance themselves from the Mullah's whom many consider alien and a Arab product.

So whatever happens we will always win. Either Iran will be invaded by the West (let them do the dirty job we can assist them if needed although I doubt this will happen before the world economy improves/Iran gets closer to getting the atomic bomb) and thus the Mullah regime will be removed or the Mullah's will themselves destroy their country like they are slowly doing now and turn into a Western protectorate that does not engage in religious matters outside the borders and thus we will rule as always.

 

[al-Hasani]

Well @al-Hasani

Russians are playing wisely in my point of view.

Firstly,they have a naval base in Syria ie a perfect clientele in form of assad and they have little utility for sunni arab countries.Russia does not need your oil the have lots of energy resources themselves and are your rival in this field.You have nothing to offer to them in short term and they have very little chance of pulling sunni arab countries out of US orbit.

Secondly they could establish themselves as a firm protector of harangued dictatorships world over thus improving their geo-political influence.

Third, there is an old saying in economics by keynes-"In the long run,we are all dead".International relations are ephemeral.Iranians mob murdered Alexander Griboyedov, the czar’s ambassador to Persia, with his entire embassy staff in 1829 yet today Russia is biggest benefactor of Iran. Internetional relation depends upon zietgeist.It is in short and mid term interest of russians to support assad.

I agree with your analysis although they are committing a mistake although they have realized it already. Notice their strong support of Al-Asad (only due to geopolitical reasons as I mentioned before and you emphasize in the post I am quoting) in the first half year of the conflict but now they have even admitted and talked about a Syria without Al-Assad. This is basically a stab in the heart. Anyway Russia are not that important. They have no influence in the Arab world and will not have any since they are located far away and face their own regional problems. The most influential Arab countries will not change their outlook toward the West as long as they benefit the most from them. Russia, India and China are still far behind the West and will continue to be that in centuries to come. Cultural dominance from the West is sealed. Millions of Russians, Chinese and Indians are copying the Western life/science, outlook etc. and not the other way around. I don't see the world being dominated by Russian/Chinese/Indian mentality in the future especially not when those same mentalities are replaced by the Western one by local people themselves.

Russia cannot safe Al-Asad. If the Sunni world or Western world wanted to remove Al-Asad by any means and as soon as possible (which I think they should do) the Turkish army together with the Jordanian could remove him with the help of the Syrian opposition in a mater of weeks. Where would Russian help come from? They would need to come from either the Arabian Peninsula (never will happen), Egypt (never will happen), Turkey (same) or through the sea which will not happen either. So let them bark. Russia has acted way above it's weight since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In 30 years time the Russian population will DECREASE by 30 million. Russians are emigrating in huge numbers and most of the influential people live abroad. The most growing groups in Russia are the Muslims who are all Sunnis and tied to Turkey/Arab world. The governmental system has not changed since the Soviet Union and is hopelessly naive. Sure they still clinch to their military like a bigger version of North Korea but that will not save their long-term drought.

Instead of trying to oppose USA/NATO/EUROPE something they will always fail to do they should come to terms with their position and instead compete with USA/NATO in the Arab world which could improve their geopolitical influence in the region and benefit themselves in the end. But they are not doing it for the sake of 1 naval base in Syria.

So in their logic 21 Arab countries ≤ Syria which quite frankly is a drunk man's politics (quite fitting given that it is Russia) Well, whatever I have nothing against Russians or Russia per se but their involvement in Syria is slightly annoying since they are just delaying the inevitable which is a annoying habit and which will make them no friends/favors in the Arab world.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Oh my god, you are gifted man, how did you manage to write all those long posts at once? I just pity the ones who argue you

 

[anonymus]

I agree with your analysis although they are committing a mistake although they have realized it already. Notice their strong support of Al-Asad (only due to geopolitical reasons as I mentioned before and you emphasize in the post I am quoting) in the first half year of the conflict but now they have even admitted and talked about a Syria without Al-Assad. This is basically a stab in the heart. Anyway Russia are not that important. They have no influence in the Arab world and will not have any since they are located far away and face their own regional problems. The most influential Arab countries will not change their outlook toward the West as long as they benefit the most from them. Russia, India and China are still far behind the West and will continue to be that in centuries to come. Cultural dominance from the West is sealed. Millions of Russians, Chinese and Indians are copying the Western life/science, outlook etc. and not the other way around. I don't see the world being dominated by Russian/Chinese/Indian mentality in the future especially not when those same mentalities are replaced by the Western one by local people themselves.

Russia cannot safe Al-Asad. If the Sunni world or Western world wanted to remove Al-Asad the Turkish army together with the Jordanian could remove him with the help of the Syrian opposition in a mater of weeks. Where would Russian help come from? They would need to go from either the Arabian Peninsula (never will happen), Egypt (never will happen), Turkey (same) or through the Sea which will not happen either. So let them bark. Russia has acted way above it's weight since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In 30 years time the Russian population will DECREASE by 30 million. Russians are emigrating in huge numbers and most of the influential people live abroad. The governmental system has not changed since the Soviet Union and are hopelessly naive. Sure they still clinch to their military like a bigger version of North Korea but that will not save their long-term drought.

Instead of trying to oppose USA/NATO/EUROPE something they will always fail to do they should come to terms with their position and instead compete with USA/NATO in the Arab world which could improve their geopolitical influence in the region and benefit themselves in the end. But they are not doing it for the sake of 1 naval base in Syria.

So in their logic 21 Arab countries ≤ Syria which quite frankly is a drunk man's politics (quite fitting given that it is Russia) Well, whatever I have nothing against Russians or Russia per se but their involvement in Syria is slightly annoying since they are just delaying the inevitable which is a annoying habit.

They have a military base in Sevastopol from where they could send help.The could also help just by rearming Assad. As i have said , Assad is their only chip in middle east.It depends how desperate they are and the price USA could offer to buy their acquiescence. The outcome of this war would depend on many factors the most important of it would be whether NATO has an stomach for regime change or not and after that the desperation of SA ,Iran and Russia.

Here

Note: Dardanelles and bosphorous straits are International waterways under treaty of lausanne and International waterway under UNCLOS.So turkey could not block Russian ships without declaring war on Russia.

http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part3.htm

Most of the territory that is in FSA today is Sunni dominated.As they would push forward they would face much stiffer resistance than they had faced on their home turf where locals supported them.Also capturing of airfields would not count for much as Assad ensured that his airforce was dominated by alawites. And being a well armed minority faced with annihilation they are going to fight desperately.

Apart from Russia,Assad is the ace card for Iran also.While Russia may probably lose just a base,Iran would lose everything it has desired and worked for since 1979.It's dream of dominating Muslim world would come to naught. Hizbullah,isolated and embroiled in their own little sectarian war in Lebanon would wither away and perish and Iran's influence would just parry down to 1-2 countries.Worse would be a loss of face in it's identity war against Sunnis which ayatollah seem to be waging since 1979 even if not openly at least psychologically by calling GCC as western puppet and less of a muslims.Defeat of Assad would be a tacit defeat for Iran.

Unless Russia withdraws it's support the war is destined to end in bloody stalemate.Another possibility would be Iran somehow forging an alliance with Iraqi shias to run some kind of Arm and fighter train to supply Assad but it's effectiveness should be doubted as it could face resistance from Iraqi sunnis.

The willingness of NATO to intervene in situation could change the tide of conflict drastically but it looks pretty far fetched that they would do anything substantial in absence of Security council mandate which is not coming due to russian veto and chinese nonchalance.










Regarding Russian military,a comparison with NK would be blasphemous.Russia is 2/3 strongest military in world and apart from US(alone) or NATO,nobody could overcome it.And this demographic threat is overblown.Islam lose more people to conversion in Russia then it gains by higher birth rates.




Here: A Islamic source as a witness to its desperate plight
http://1muslimnation.wordpress.com/...eave-islam-for-russian-orthodox-christianity/








And the point related to West,science and India,China and Russia:Unless these countries embrace the western outlook in dealing with knowledge especially science,the higher degree of moral and materialistic development is impossible.The only country that would ever replace west would be nearly it's replica in core values (not superficial ones which are denoted by length of garments but more fundamental ones like tolerance to dissent).Countries are embracing western outlook because it works best among the system known to men currently.

 

[ARSENAL6]

can Iran Turkey and all the Muslim countries get along ?

 

[anonymus]

can Iran Turkey and all the Muslim countries get along ?

Short Answer :NO

Long Answer: Why people you consider traitor are hated more than your enemies?
Why did George Washington ordered a shoot at sight order for Benedict Arnold but not for any other British General?