You don't know Iran, the last time Iran was modern and progressive was 1978. The theocracies there turned it back. Theocracies in general whether democratic or not are the worstConsidering iran looks modern and progressive compared to islamic state and saudi arabia, i think the west is on the wrong side of the Sunni / shia conflict
You don't know Iran, the last time Iran was modern and progressive was 1978. The theocracies there turned it back. Theocracies in general whether democratic or not are the worst
You don't know Iran, the last time Iran was modern and progressive was 1978. The theocracies there turned it back. Theocracies in general whether democratic or not are the worst
Both of them know better that both won't engage in one to one war because both will lose. Iran uses militias to expand which is evident by Qasim Sulaimani presence in Iraq and Syria.I see the currently ongoing Saudi Arabia-Iran Cold War heating up in our near future.
You don't know Iran, the last time Iran was modern and progressive was 1978. The theocracies there turned it back. Theocracies in general whether democratic or not are the worst
Saudi is a different story they are a Monarchy,Slightly harsh statement, compared to Saudi Arabia I totally agree with him. And being half Iranian I do know Iran.
Though I agree completely that Theocracies are terrible and have ruined that country. I'm never going within a hundred leagues of Iran until they kick out those fucking mullahs.
Just compare Iran now with Yester Iran, it's weight completely shifted. If Iran is such modern and Progressive why Iranian are migrating to other places for work and fortune? The only people who have power and wealth in Iran are religious menAHAHAHAHA! Nice joke!
Wait, are you serious?
Just compare Iran now with Yester Iran, it's weight completely shifted. If Iran is such modern and Progressive why Iranian are migrating to other places for work and fortune? The only people who have power and wealth in Iran are religious men
Saudi is not a different story. The fact they are a monarchy means nothing. Religious weight of the guy at the top is immaterial if your women still can't drive, can't vote, can't even leave the house without a male chaperone. While in Iran women can and are members of parliament.Saudi is a different story they are a Monarchy,
While Iran is a theocracy, the real leader of the country has a Religious rank while in Saudi Arabia the king doesn't hold any Religious weight what so ever.
I often wonder what the ME would look like if the Ottoman Empire wasn't broken up and divided.
Anti Arab
Anti Turk
Anti Atharis
Anti Kurds
Anti Beloishies
You name it
Anti Arab
Anti Turk
Anti Atharis
Anti Kurds
Anti Beloishies
You name it
Everyone has there own sphere of influence. The Sunnis have shown just how kind they are towards Shia Muslims as evidenced in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc. This is nothing more than the only Shia power in the region telling the Sunnis that shit isn't going to fly no longer. Just sabre rattling.
I also think that the Iranian-Arab dichotomy is rather overstated and is more properly understood as a Sunni-Shia one. Modern Iran already contains parts of medieval Iraq (Khuzestan) and corresponding Arab populations, but they're largely Shia and tolerated because of it. It's also true that the parts of Iraq which are currently Shia were part of the Farsi cultural and political sphere for centuries - and this is largely the reason they became Shia to begin with.
Iran wanting to influence these regions is not unusual or even necessarily detrimental, given Iran is infinitely more stable than Iraq and relatively (big stress on the word relatively) progressive by the standards of the region.
Iran wanting to influence these regions is not unusual or even necessarily detrimental, given Iran is infinitely more stable than Iraq and relatively (big stress on the word relatively) progressive by the standards of the region.
What a great idea. Every country can reestablish their Empires!
Wahabis and Ottomans, niceIn a clear jibe at archrivals Saudi Arabia and Turkey, Younesi said Tehrans military involvement in the region is to protect the Iranian people against the Wahabis and Ottoman rule.
Wahabis and Ottomans, nice
Considering iran looks modern and progressive compared to islamic state and saudi arabia, i think the west is on the wrong side of the Sunni / shia conflict
Next they will be building a wall to keep out the Mongolians.
Iran is not progressive by standards of Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel, I think the standards of the region are higher than you're giving credit for.
These are all true, and I'd also throw in Kuwait to that group. However, Turkey, Israel and Lebanon have very little influence on the other countries in the region for historical reasons, and Jordan and Kuwait are hardly power players. From the Egypt-Iran-Saudi power triangle, Iran is the least bad.
I don't know much about Egypt's place in the "power triangle", I always saw it as Iran VS Saudi. All I know of Egypt's influence is that it their people spread the Arab Spring to the rest of the Arab World in a big way and they are the largest Arab country and are historically seen as the centre of Sunni Islam.
Getting talking points from Putin, I see.
b) the American public is tired of sending soldiers to the other side of the planet to fight in a war that doesn't really affect them.
Also, Western intervention is what made the Middle East into the volatile powder keg it is today. More Western intervention isn't going to help that. Not that it deterred anyone anyways.
Not while there's oil there. Oh, and Israel too, can't leave our nukes unattended.
That's not a news website, it's an Arabic institute in Iranian affairs, so most of their articles are studies.that's a real credible website you got there, liger05 levels of credibility
that's a real credible website you got there, liger05 levels of credibility
Borders in this region should have been drawn up differently by someone with a better understanding of the various factions anyway after WWI instead of Western nations. The entire region was set up for failure after WWI.
So, I think I already know the answer to this, but is there any possibility of the ME being able to get together and for a union similar to the EU?
Something like that already exists, but it's based on ethnic lines. There is the Arab League full of Arab countries and the International Organization of Turkic Culture full of the Turkic countries.
I totally forgot about the Arab League. I honestly don't even know what they do.
The biggest war in the Middle East after WW1 was the Iraq-Iran war over a border that had existed since Zand dynasty of the 18th century.
What a great idea. Every country can reestablish their Empires!
What a great idea. Every country can reestablish their Empires!
The Ottomans were partly the reason why Iran is a majority Shia country today. Being stuck between two Turkic powers and wanting to differentiate themselves, made the Safavid dynasty turn to Shia Islam during the 16th century. Prior to that, Persia was perhaps the most important region for Sunni Islamic thought and teaching. So Turkic/Persian rivalry caused the rise of Twelver Islam and the split of Persia from the Sunni world.To be honest I feel that in reality Turks and Iranians are "meh" towards each other. The Sunni VS Shia thing is just as much an Arab VS Persian thing as it is a religious divide.
Turks and Iranians are culturally closer than either are to Arabs, so even though Turks and Arabs are mostly Sunni, Turks and Persians are more in common due to historical ties.
Firstly Turkic/Iranian tribes lived around the same geographical area since antiquity. Also Turkic tribes ruled Iran for nearly a 1000 years cumulatively, and Turks became Muslim by way of the Persians so became Persianised in addition to religious conversion. A lot of idiosyncrasies in Turkish culture are due to Classical Persian influence. Indeed some scholars call the Ottoman Empire a Persian Empire (especially in its early to middle years where Persian was the preferred court language).
True. In terms of regional influence those are the three vying for it. Lebanon isn't that powerful relatively and Israel is strong but small and religiously different so aren't interested in that.
Turkey is the one heavyweight that could compete with the power triangle, but they don't seem as invested in any pan-Islamic influence and are more invested in pan-Turkism with a dash of specifically Turco-Islamism.
I don't know much about Egypt's place in the "power triangle", I always saw it as Iran VS Saudi. All I know of Egypt's influence is that it their people spread the Arab Spring to the rest of the Arab World in a big way and they are the largest Arab country and are historically seen as the centre of Sunni Islam.
I'm not anti Iran being half Iranian but I'm anti theocracy in general.DXB-KNIGHT is pretty much the anti-Iran liger05-light