Iran shoots down another Turkish/Azarbaijani drone

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Well, I just showed you material which tends to document that the number of Azaris loyal to Iran and to the Islamic Republic is significantly greater than the amount of ethnicist Azaris. This means that should some conflict of interests arise between Iran and the Republic of Azarbaijan (and you have insisted there is such a conflict indeed), then a decisive majority of Azari Iranians will stay loyal to Iran over Baku.

Iran is an integrated nation with a pronounced national identity, as well as a firm sense of common citizenship beyond linguistic or confessional lines (the former being relative anyway, since as said the majority of Iranians being of mixed linguistic origins, they can't be crammed into a single "ethnic" category). Hence people there won't primarily go by their linguistic affiliation(s) when faced with political choices.

Consider this Iranian propaganda if you want. For my part, I will say you're exaggerating the prevalence of ethno-linguistic communalism among Azari Iranians.

You believe everything Iranians say, verbatim. It is like talking to official IRG spokesperson.

Sad to see a Pakistani who takes Iranian propaganda more than Iranians themselves.

Situation on the ground is different than how you portray. This situation is going to have repercussions in Iran for a long time. To support Armenia was against the national interest of Iran.

You still will have to choose between loyalty to Pakistan or loyalty to Iran. With the Afghan peace process in full swing and Taliban falling into the reins on power, Tehran will begin adopting an extremely harsh line with Pakistan.

Balochistan proxies are already coming from Iran, namely BLF, but India is also arming and training BLA from Chabahar. It is very possible that a limited war may happen between Pakistan and Iran over Chabahar, esp if a China, Pakistan war begins and India starts pumping terrorists from there.

If Pakistan and Iran go to war, who will you support. Will you still defend Iran?

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

None of these wars were started by Iran. Nor is Iran responsible for them taking so-called "sectarian" turns (which is itself essentially an erroneous perception, since these wars are neither fought for sectarian reasons, nor are the forces at play strictly separated by sectarian lines).



The Iranian government has consisently been promoting and advocating Islamic unity.

KSA, UAE and Iran are equal partners in destruction of the Arab world on the basis of sectarianism. This poisonous curse which Rasulullah saws warned us about is national policy of both factions.

In this greater Middle East region, it is only Turkey, Azerbaycan, and Pakistan who have adopted a non-sectarian policy. This makes the three the only responsible states in the region.

Iran has directly caused misery, death, and dishonor to millions Syrians, Iraqis, and Afghans. Now it is trying to do the same to Azeris.

It will have to answer for those crimes.

 

[Surenas]

In this greater Middle East region, it is only Turkey, Azerbaycan, and Pakistan who have adopted a non-sectarian policy. This makes the three the only responsible states in the region.

First of all, you are not part of the Middle East. Not historically, geopolitically, geographically or what ever notion there is.

Second, how laughable to say that Pakistan, as the number one backer of the Taliban, which has killed thousands of Shia Hazara's for decades now, has adopted a non-sectarian policy.

Iran has directly caused misery, death, and dishonor to millions Syrians, Iraqis, and Afghans. Now it is trying to do the same to Azeris.

Iran did not invade Iraq; did not covertly organize and support rebel groups that have destroyed Syria on behalf of their foreign patrons; and certainly did not play a role in the Afghan war as Pakistan has done. There is a reason why Pakistan is hated among all ethnic groups in Afghanistan.

It will have to answer for those crimes.

Nah.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

You were known as nothing back then. IVC was not a political entity; no continuing line of national identity in Pakistan's history whatsoever. Not even a series of indigenous political states that could reasonably be classified as your country's forbearers.

Yes, our pre-Islamic history was that of turbulent change and various migrations, but we have had our moments.

IVC made great advances in city planning, astronomy, mathematics, science, and culture. Most of all, it created the base for eventual Afghan and Pakistani states.

While Alexander conquered all of Persia fairly easily, he met his match with Porus at Jhelum, who he recognized as his equal.

Greek-Buddhist kingdoms of Taxilla and Gandhara were known throughout the ancient world as centers of learning and scientific advancements. In Afghanistan, Alexandria was a famoua city before it was destroyed by Iranic Saka armies from Altay mountains.

In pre-modern Pakistan, the Iranic nomads from the Altay mountain region and Tarım basin kept migrating into Pakistan. Saka, Kushans, and thr Hepthalites all had vast empires and left a permanent imprint on Pakistani culture.

When Islam entered Pakistan, we really found our stride. That history is probably known to you as we had defeated Persia several times and even held Eastern Iran for a long time. Same can be said of Afghan empires which did the same.

We don't need religious lessons from those who have never played a significant role in Islamic history. You were always at the receiving end of Islamic doctrine and teachings; mostly through the contributions of Persians scholars.

When Azeris converted Persia to Shia Islam under the Safavis, those Sunni Iranians left came to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Here later on, Sunni Islamic scholarship flourished. Our empires which ruled Hindustan too, became to centers of learning of Hanafi fiqh and Sufism.

Also in the Persian Sunni Islamic golden age, most of our famous scholars of fiqh, tasawwuf, and various other disciplines were from Afghanistan and Central Asia, not Persia.

For this reason alone, you should do best to adopt a posture that suits the appropriate and relevant role that your people has played. Which basically means to watch how the Middle East operates and gives, so that you can adopt these little things in the process. Like a true follower does.

You will have to accept Pakistani ascension sooner or later. Realities have changed since Kurush and Daryush.

Nations which are arrogant and have false pride are usually the first to false easily to invaders.

Look at the Sassasani empire, how easily it fell to Arab armies. Then later Khwarezm Shah, Banu Abbas to the Mongols. Food for thought.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

There is a reason why Pakistan is hated among all ethnic groups in Afghanistan.

Lol. Keep telling yourself that. Pakistani role in Afghanistan is the major one. Iranian role is diminished. I know it is a sour point, so I won't push it

Afghanistan has mostly been united with Pakistan in history, so our cultures are very similar. Ahmad Shah Baba Abdali is the pre-modern architect of both our nations and our present borders.

 

[Surenas]

Yes, our pre-Islamic history was that of turbulent change and various migrations, but we have had our moments.

IVC made great advances in city planning, astronomy, mathematics, science, and culture. Most of all, it created the base for eventual Afghan and Pakistani states.

While Alexander conquered all of Persia fairly easily, he met his match with Porus at Jhelum, who he recognized as his equal.

Greek-Buddhist kingdoms of Taxilla and Gandhara were known throughout the ancient world as centers of learning and scientific advancements. In Afghanistan, Alexandria was a famoua city before it was destroyed by Iranic Saka armies from Altay mountains.

In pre-modern Pakistan, the Iranic nomads from the Altay mountain region and Tarım basin kept migrating into Pakistan. Saka, Kushans, and thr Hepthalites all had vast empires and left a permanent imprint on Pakistani culture.

You are deliberately evading my argument. Let me say it again: there has never been such thing as a IVC as a political entity. To argue that it stands at the basis of Afghan and Pakistani states is ludicrous.

No line of national identity; not a series of political states that have centred around Pakistan; no cultural or even linguistic legacy. Nothing more than a phantom.

When Islam entered Pakistan, we really found our stride. That history is probably known to you as we had defeated Persia several times and even held Eastern Iran for a long time. Same can be said of Afghan empires which did the same.

No such thing ever happened. You never managed to defeat Persia.

When Azeris converted Persia to Shia Islam under the Safavis, those Sunni Iranians left came to Afghanistan and Pakistan. Here later on, Sunni Islamic scholarship flourished. Our empires which ruled Hindustan too, became to centers of learning of Hanafi fiqh and Sufism.

Like I said, always at the receiving end of others.

Also in the Persian Sunni Islamic golden age, most of our famous scholars of fiqh, tasawwuf, and various other disciplines were from Afghanistan and Central Asia, not Persia.

Afghanistan was Persia for centuries, at least most part of it. Central-Asia too. You obviously don't know what you are talking about.

They weren't your famous scholars. You are nothing. Your modern-day identity does not have a historical link.

You will have to accept Pakistani ascension sooner or later. Realities have changed since Kurush and Daryush.

There is no historical base for Pakistan's supposed geopolitical ascension. There have been three great civilizational and political centres in Asia: Persia, India and China. Considering the fact that you're not part of India any more, there is no reasonable argument to make that Pakistan will manage to take a seat at the big boy's table.

 

[Surenas]

Afghanistan has mostly been united with Pakistan in history, so our cultures are very similar. Ahmad Shah Baba Abdali is the pre-modern architect of both our nations and our present borders.

Are you now trying to take credit of a Pashtun (Iranic) warlord as well, that is generally regarded as the founder of Afghanistan and even wrote poems in Persian?

A bit pathetic, don't you think?

 

[SalarHaqq]

You believe everything Iranians say, verbatim. It is like talking to official IRG spokesperson.

Ok, please show what comment of mine was lifted from official Iranian statements. I never heard any IRGC person (or other Iranian official for that matter) make the specific points I made in my last post to be honest.

But more importantly, please show where I was wrong. I did my best to illustrate my argument with documentary evidence, much like you tried when posting that video.

Sad to see a Pakistani who takes Iranian propaganda more than Iranians themselves.

I'm not basing myself on official statements here, but on what I read, see and understand, as well as on extensive personal experience and research.

Situation on the ground is different than how you portray.

May I ask how you arrived at this conclusion? What are the sources of your data concerning the situation on the ground in Iran?

To support Armenia was against the national interest of Iran.

First I have yet to see proper evidence that Iran is supporting Armenia. Let's be honest, so far none was produced here.

Secondly Iran is threatened by a zio-American project to promote "ethnic" separatism among her population. This is well documented (in case you doubt it, evidence can be provided). Now if the government in Baku turns out to have any hand in this, then it will not be in Iran's national interest to side with the Republic of Azarbaijan.

If Pakistan and Iran go to war, who will you support. Will you still defend Iran?

No. But I also don't share your pessimism about the probability of such a war anytime in the near future (or even in the longer term).

KSA, UAE and Iran are equal partners in destruction of the Arab world on the basis of sectarianism. This poisonous curse which Rasulullah saws warned us about is national policy of both factions.

In this greater Middle East region, it is only Turkey, Azerbaycan, and Pakistan who have adopted a non-sectarian policy. This makes the three the only responsible states in the region.

Iran has directly caused misery, death, and dishonor to millions Syrians, Iraqis, and Afghans. Now it is trying to do the same to Azeris.

- Syria: Iran has come to the aid of her ally, the Syrian government. That's a politically motivated decision, not a sectarian one. And the main role Syria is playing in Iran's network of alliances, is to act as a land bridge between Tehran and the Mediterranean, where Iran's interests are twofold: to support and supply Lebanon's Hezbollah, as well as the Palestinian Resistance. The first is a Shia organization but has been formed with the goal of resisting zionist aggression and occupation. The second is Sunni. So yet again, not a sectarian policy by Iran.

Misery and death are unfortunately part of wars. But I have seen no evidence of the Iranian military directly killing, injuring or expelling millions of Syrians. The fact is that in the Syrian war, the military to civilian casualty rate is around 1:1. That's not a sign of targeted onslaught against civilians. Plus, Iran does not control every unit of the Syrian armed forces. And it's not as if their opponents were any less brutal in their ways.

When it comes to sectarianism in this war, clearly the Turkish- / Isra"el"i- / Saudi- / Qatari- and western-backed opposition has been those with the more sectarianist outlook. The Syrian government being secular it's by definition not a sectarianist entity. It's not interested in religious discussions to be sectarianist. Moreover the pro-government camp has a multi-confessional composition, as opposed to the anti-government forces.

- Iraq: Iraq was destabilized, invaded and destroyed by the zionist-controlled US regime, not by Iran. Iran played no role in the invasion. The Iraqi state was given a sectarian and ethnic make over not by Iran, but by US vice-regent Paul Bremer and the US-sponsored Iraqi constitution. Sectarian types of killings were triggered by IS and its bombing of the Al-Askari shrine, again not by Iran. Iran didn't encourage nor direct any of her Iraqi allies to engage in revenge killings against civilians.

But the war against IS and later ISIS had to be fought nonetheless. In this war, Iran was eager to welcome any and all Sunni Iraqis willing to join her side. As a matter of fact, the Iraqi PMU, which were established with Iran's help, include Sunni brigades. I posted a very comprehensive, high quality academic research paper on the PMU's Sunni units in the Middle East section, where the author demonstrates that these Sunni brigades aren't just "for show" but intended to facilitate national integration and inter-communal raprochment.

- Afghanistan: Iran and Pakistan weren't on the same sides of the civil war there so I'm not defending their choice, but to say they were pursuing a sectarianist policy in Afghanistan wouldn't be accurate since the majority of Iran's Afghan allies were and are Sunni Muslims.

Then over 70% of Azaris belong to the Shia denomination of Islam, if Iran sought to "cause misery, death and dishonor" on Azaris, as you claim, this would directly disprove your other accusation that Iran is pursuing sectarianist types of policies.

 

[Falcon29]

@SalarHaqq

You're spending your whole life on this forum advocating blindly for the Iranian regime yet if you went to Iran to ask for a Iranian girl they're gonna tell you to get your donkey shit *** out of here, you're pathetic.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Do not be so quick to create enemies with fellow Muslims, and go overzealously in pursuit of your alliances with Non-Muslim fascist states like . . . Serbia.

No offense, but here you're literally turning established historic facts on their head.

Serbia? During the Bosnian civil war, Iran is known to have assisted the Muslim side, not Serbia. In fact no other country, not even Turkey, extended that much aid to Bosnian Muslims as Iran did.

Alija Izetbegovic, Bosnia's then president, was an old time friend and ally of Iran. He spent years in jail in former Yugoslavia for visiting Iran in the early 1980's to participiate in a pan-Islamic conference. After the war, he publicly thanked Iran for its assistance.

Iran not only provided the Bosnians with any and all sorts and quantities of weaponry that they requested (arms were flown in by Iranian cargo planes via Turkey, as documented among others by Jane's Defence Weekly), Iran also helped set up and train an entire new brigade of the Bosnian armed forces (the 7th Brigade).

Iranian volunteers, including famous IRGC commander Saeed Ghasemi (who talks of it in TV appearances you can find videos of on YouTube), went there to fight for Bosnia. Several Iranians were martyred.

Massive humanitarian aid by Iran's Red Crescent Society reached the Sunni Muslims of Bosnia.

Again, Iranian policy proved to be anything but sectarian.


Iranian-trained and organized 7th Brigade of the Bosnian army:

IRGC's Hajj Ghasemi and his men in Bosnia:

Hajj Ghasemi in Bosnia among Bosnian Muslim forces:

Bosnia and Herzegovina–Iran relations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Bosnia and Herzegovina–Iran relations is historical and bilateral relationship between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Iran. Iran has an embassy in Sarajevo, while Bosnia has an embassy in Tehran.

Iran was one of the main supporters of the Bosnian side during the Bosnian War (1992–95).[1][2]

Foreign support in the Bosnian War - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Foreign support in the Bosnian War

• Iran, a predominantly Shia country, was one of the first Muslim countries to provide support for the Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks, who are mainly Sunni Muslim) in the war. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sent more than five (5,000 to 14,000 tons from May 1994 to January 1996 alone[1]) thousand tonnes of arms to the Bosnian Muslims.[2] IRGC also supplied trainers and advisers for the Bosnian military and intelligence service.[2] Several dozen Iranian intelligence experts joined the Bosnian Muslim intelligence agency.[3] The Iranian Ministry of Intelligence-supported mujahideen units trained selected Bosnian army units.[4] The Hezbollah (Lebanese Shia), supported by Iran, also sent fighters to the war.[5] In 1992, Iran with the help of Turkey smuggled arms to the Bosnian Muslims.[6] Reports of "hundreds of tons of weapons" shipped from Iran over a period of months appeared in the media in early 1995.[7] Iranian arms were shipped through Croatia.[8] Robert Baer, a CIA agent stationed in Sarajevo during the war, later claimed that "In Sarajevo, the Bosnian Muslim government is a client of the Iranians . . . If it's a choice between the CIA and the Iranians, they'll take the Iranians any day." By the war's end, public opinion polls showed some 86% of the Bosnian Muslim population expressed a positive attitude toward Iran.[9] According to the scholar Cees Wiebes, during the war “Turkey and Saudi Arabia were very willing to deliver weapons and to lure Alija Izetbegović away from Iran, but the orientation of the Bosnian government was far more towards Iran.”[10]

Serbian source:

Qassem Soleimani Shipped Weapons to Mujahideen in BiH

By TheSrpskaTimes
15.01.2020

Qassem Soleimani Shipped Weapons to Mujahideen in BiH | The Srpska Times

Anti-Radical Islam expert Dževad Galijašević said that Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, who was recently killed by the US, was also involved in equipping the mujahideen in the area of responsibility

thesrpskatimes.com

Please pay attention to this brother. I notice you sometimes makes claim about Serbia. I explaned why it wasn't factual once before. Hope this time around the solid evidence presented above will catch your attention.

It contains Bosno-Serbian, Iranian and western sources at once - if the three sides confirm Iran's involvement in support of Sunni Muslims of Bosnia, then this really puts any doubts to rest.

 

[Blue In Green]

@SalarHaqq

You're spending your whole life on this forum advocating blindly for the Iranian regime yet if you went to Iran to ask for a Iranian girl they're gonna tell you to get your donkey shit *** out of here, you're pathetic.

Totally uncalled for (and false), I know plenty of Iranian women who date and marry outside of Iranian circles with the consent of their family and friends. I myself have been with Pakistani, Turkish, African and Asian women in the past (both in a friend and significant other capacity). Never once did my VERY Iranian parents object to who it was I was with, EVER.

Also all cultures and peoples have groups of women and men that look down at their own being with others different from themselves. This isn't a behavior endemic to Iranians, but hey you are our resident Anti-Iranian guy spouting BS left and right whenever it fits your agenda. So I won't even remotely try and stop you or change your behavior.

Really don't know where that ignorant comment came from but please keep your own false assumptions about entire other cultures/peoples out of here if you don't know what it is you're talking about. You aren't Iranian and neither are you an expert on Iranians, especially when it comes to interpersonal relationships they get into.

 

[Falcon29]

Totally uncalled for (and false), I know plenty of Iranian women who date and marry outside of Iranian circles with the consent of their family and friends. I myself have been with Pakistani, Turkish, African and Asian women in the past (both in a friend and significant other capacity). Never once did my VERY Iranian parents object to who it was I was with, EVER.

Don't know where that ignorant comment came from but please keep your own false assumptions about entire other cultures/peoples out of here if you don't know what it is you're talking about.

Edit: thought you were Salar...

Anyhow I was talking about him going to ask for an Iranian girl. Not other way around ....

 

[Blue In Green]

You are spending your time telling us about your great Islamic Iranian regime while sleeping with women(your own admission), get the fvxk out of here hypocritical moron.

Come and say that to my face tough guy lol. You are the one who talks out of his *** 24/7 about things you absolutely don't understand and just expect others to go along with it. I also live in the United States and I'm most definitely not some stooge for the Iranian government but go ahead and insinuate whatever it is you need to.

You're deluded beyond measure and a rabid anti-Iranian radical who seeks to shit on every thread in the Iranian section because your hatred for Iranians knows no bounds whatsoever. If you were even one bit of a man as you falsely think you are, you wouldn't be telling people blatant false hoods about entire groups of people.

Stop acting like a petulant child.

 

[Falcon29]

Come and say that to my face tough guy lol. You are the one who talks out of his *** 24/7 about things you absolutely don't understand and just expect others to go along with it. I also live in the United States and I'm most definitely not some stooge for the Iranian government but go ahead and insinuate whatever it is you need to.

You're deluded beyond measure and a rabid anti-Iranian radical who seeks to shit on every thread in the Iranian section because your hatred for Iranians knows no bounds whatsoever. If you were even one bit of a man as you falsely think you are, you wouldn't be telling people blatant false hoods about entire groups of people.

Stop acting like a petulant child.

I confused you for Salar, I don't have an issue with you.

And no you wouldn't do nothing, lmao.

 

[Blue In Green]

Edit: thought you were Salar...

Anyhow I was talking about him going to ask for an Iranian girl. Not other way around ....

Even then such an occurrence of him being outright rejected, especially in front of his face is an increasingly rare thing. Iranian families want their children to be successful and will often if not all the time, consent to any marriage that gives their child a bright and prosperous future.

If the man coming to ask for their daughters hand in marriage is well establish, well off, nice and family friendly, father type, etc... Then his background, race, ethnicity aren't as much of a factor.