POLL: Will Syria + Iraq be able to beat the insurgents?

[Superboy]

I think so because they have superior manpower and superior weaponry.

 

[TheNoob]

I think so because they have superior manpower and superior weaponry.

Hardly possible.

The main powers supporting one govt is against the other.

 

[Tipu7]

I think so because they have superior manpower and superior weaponry.

Idiot

 

[New Resolve]

The only way to beat them is for SA and Iran to set aside their stupid little sectarian fest and join forces, but thats not going to happen so we are in for a long winter, Game of Thrones style.

 

[بلندر]

The only way to beat them is for SA and Iran to set aside their stupid little sectarian fest and join forces, but thats not going to happen so we are in for a long winter, Game of Thrones style.

in our eyes , KSA is just source of ISIS and AL Nusrah ...

 

[Abii]

The only way to beat them is for SA and Iran to set aside their stupid little sectarian fest and join forces, but thats not going to happen so we are in for a long winter, Game of Thrones style.

There are too many Pakistanis, Afghans and random Arabs willing to fight for both Iran and Saudi for either country to let things go. There are Pakistanis all over the region on behalf of the Saudis and Afghans and random Arabs all over Lebanon/Iraq/Syria fighting on behalf of Iran's mullahs. Plus 3000 years of fighting between Iranians and Arabs isn't going to stop tomorrow. It's more likely that it'll go for another 3000 years. The question is, will you guys stop doing the fighting for Iran and Saudi. When that happens, the fighting will stop.

As far as OP's question is concerned, the answer is simple: Iraq will obviously survive, but Syria will eventually either dismantle or there will be an invasion. The country is done for. Nothing's left. It's in IR's favor that the war continues for the foreseeable future however. Another few years should do it.

 

[PDF]

Maybe Not now. But they will eventually beat them after some time.

 

[lowish]

Iraqi army is horrendously incompetent and shows little to no will to protect areas that are no interests from a Shia perspective, and the Syrian army has been seriously damaged and tired from a vicious, brutal war, the only thing that keep on the war on the side of the Axis are irrelgular militas, but they are not strong or organized enough to end the war.

 

[Superboy]

in our eyes , KSA is just source of ISIS and AL Nusrah ...

Where else do you think insurgents get their arms from? The black market? Give me a break.

Iraqi army is horrendously incompetent and shows little to no will to protect areas that are no interests from a Shia perspective, and the Syrian army has been seriously damaged and tired from a vicious, brutal war, the only thing that keep on the war on the side of the Axis are irrelgular militas, but they are not strong or organized enough to end the war.

Syrian army is doing quite well compared to its Iraqi counterpart. Whereas Iraqi army lost the second biggest city Mosul, Syrian army is in control of the western half of the second biggest city Aleppo. In addition, the pro Baathist first biggest city Damascus, third biggest city Homs, fourth biggest city Hama are all fully under control of Syrian army. The Iraqi army has recently regained Tikrit from insurgents but the fight had been long and brutal.

 

[Superboy]

Dadash, during the Shah era (one of the least darkest periods of our history) we had no perfect relations with the Arab world, it was also not that bad either. It were very normal ties, there was no sectarian hate. The day these Shia mullahs came into power everyone in Iran went nuts and became very uniranian and radical islamist, a bunch of koon nashoor clerics played with the feelings of millions of Iranians and the results were the 8 years war with Iraq. The war with Iraq also started because of mollah interference in Iraq, they started huge propaganda against baath regime and started to create trouble for the shia areas in Iraq. Radicalization of the region is mainly because of the mollahs.

The Iranian monarchs are to blame for all this. Iran was a Sunni state. It was the Safavids who force converted Iran from Sunni to Shia, only because of their rivalry with the Ottomans.

Safavid dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a matter of fact, Iran is very secular compared to some of its neighbors, even compared to Iraq where Shia ideology is particularly strong. Women in Iran don't have to wear headscarf, can go to university, can work at professional jobs. Iran is also known for producing the first woman who got Nobel prize in math.

Iranian Becomes First Woman To Ever Win The "Nobel Prize" Of Mathematics | IFLScience

So is Suleimanni directing both the Iraqi army and the Syrian army against insurgents?

 

[Abii]

Dadash, during the Shah era (one of the least darkest periods of our history) we had no perfect relations with the Arab world, it was also not that bad either. It were very normal ties, there was no sectarian hate. The day these Shia mullahs came into power everyone in Iran went nuts and became very uniranian and radical islamist, a bunch of koon nashoor clerics played with the feelings of millions of Iranians and the results were the 8 years war with Iraq. The war with Iraq also started because of mollah interference in Iraq, they started huge propaganda against baath regime and started to create trouble for the shia areas in Iraq. Radicalization of the region is mainly because of the mollahs.

I'll disagree with you on the bold part. I would call it a catalyst, but not a reason. Same thing with the Iraq war. Akhoonds coming to power and poking their nose where it didn't belong was a catalyst for the war, but not the main reason. You're right, if the disgusting revolution hadn't happened, there wouldn't have been a war, but that idiot Saddam was just as retarded as the akhoonds and just as bad in politics. He started a direct conflict when he could have financed terrorism in Iran through the MEK or something. Both sides were politically brain-dead.

 

[Superboy]

Iran's ayatollah and mullahs have nothing to do with being more Islamic. Ayatollah is required to link Mahdi to people. There are Shias who do not have ayatollahs because they do not have Mahdi. In Yemen it's like that.

 

[Abii]

Iran's ayatollah and mullahs have nothing to do with being more Islamic. Ayatollah is required to link Mahdi to people. There are Shias who do not have ayatollahs because they do not have Mahdi. In Yemen it's like that.

Is there a point hiding there somewhere?

 

[IR-TR]

The Iranian monarchs are to blame for all this. Iran was a Sunni state. It was the Safavids who force converted Iran from Sunni to Shia, only because of their rivalry with the Ottomans.

Safavid dynasty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a matter of fact, Iran is very secular compared to some of its neighbors, even compared to Iraq where Shia ideology is particularly strong. Women in Iran don't have to wear headscarf, can go to university, can work at professional jobs. Iran is also known for producing the first woman who got Nobel prize in math.

Iranian Becomes First Woman To Ever Win The "Nobel Prize" Of Mathematics | IFLScience

So is Suleimanni directing both the Iraqi army and the Syrian army against insurgents?

The GCC Arabs never even accepted Iranians as muslims. Even if they were hardcore Sunnis, or converted to hardcore Sunnis today, Iranians will still be 'majoos'; sun worshippers. So no, that's not the answer. The answer is for Iran to get rid of those sanctions, develop it's economy and country, and let anybody who think religion is the most important thing in life suck a fat one. Simple as that.

 

[بلندر]

The GCC Arabs never even accepted Iranians as muslims. Even if they were hardcore Sunnis, or converted to hardcore Sunnis today, Iranians will still be 'majoos'; sun worshippers. So no, that's not the answer. The answer is for Iran to get rid of those sanctions, develop it's economy and country, and let anybody who think religion is the most important thing in life suck a fat one. Simple as that.

some idiots trying to change history ....