Iran Tries to Reassure Gulf States

reply to post by SLAYER69

ETA: That's my whole point. You don't know. Now go back and read your reply. AUTOMATIC damnation of the CIA/MI6 and or Mossad.

Knee jerk reaction eh?

Foreign agencies involvement in Iran is a well documented FACT..
Iran's nuclear weapons program is a rumour with no facts..

I'll stick with the facts unless you have something else to share..

reply to post by mayabong


Did you notice the date on the link I posted?

* JULY 8, 2010

That was a while ago. Before the present "wiki leaks" So now what?

reply to post by backinblack


I was just pointing how quick people are to react without knowing what the question was or is.


Go back and reread.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by backinblack

 

I was just pointing how quick people are to react without knowing what the question was or is.

Go back and reread.

No probs mate..But I did read it correctly..
I'm just saying it's hard to really know whats going on with the known fact of foreign involvement..

And most Arab countries are reliant on the US so will usually bend to their opinion..

Personally I think Iran has the same excuse Israel has for building it's defences..
They have enemies all around them..

reply to post by backinblack



It's all good.
I posted and worded it in that manner for a specific reason. I just wanted to demonstrate how quickly people sometimes choose sides without knowing what the question is.




Now the fun part is next. We will see how many reply without reading this far.
I love watching people make assumptions.

Iranian is not Arabian; Arabian is not Persian.

Originally posted by abecedarian
Iranian is not Arabian; Arabian is not Persian.

You know how many times I cringe when I hear people pop off as if they know what they're talking about regarding the ME and have no clue what the distinction between the two is.

reply to post by antar


That is so true Antar.
The US has a large Iranian population who have chosen to live here.

reply to post by SLAYER69


My friend SLAYER69, how about this from the 1980's,,, you know the time in history when the Peace Loving Muslims took control of Iran. I would have assumed, Islam being a Peace Loving Religion, that it would have been, forgive and forget. Surprise, Surprise!
In 1988, the Ayatollah decided to dissolve the category of “political prisoners” by dispatching them to death or setting them free. Each prisoner was asked, “Are you Muslim, and do you perform your daily prayers.” Many held fast to their beliefs, and were hung the same day.

In the prisons, the prosecutors asked those who had confirmed their faith in Islam to prove it by performing the required daily prayers. If they refused, they would receive twenty lashes for each of the daily five sets of prayers—a total of one hundred lashes every twenty-four hours. Both male and female prisoners were subject to this daily regimen of whippings. One judge told the prisoners that the punishment for a female infidel was death under prolonged whipping. Female members of the Mojahedin—an anti-clerical Islamic organization—were executed for continuing to support their exiled leaders.

In contrast to the early years of the Ayatollah’s regime, the executioners stopped publishing the body counts for their daily activities in 1988. An official veil of secrecy shrouded the ongoing massacre, and the rulers denied that mass killings continued to take place inside the prisons. Many scholars accept the estimate of 4,500 to 5,000 dead for the entire country that year, although some have alleged that the figure was much higher—as many as 10,000 to 12,000. Opposition publications abroad, however, claimed a national death toll of 30,000, including scores of intellectuals and journalists.
The source was: internationalwarcrimesreport.wordpress.com...

Reminds be of my home country of China, the 60's.

April 20, 2006
How are relations between Iran and its Arab neighbors?

Strained, experts say. "Their mutual resentment goes back a thousand years," says Fariborz Makhtaria, professor at the Near East South Asia Center of the National Defense University, referring to the early rift between Shiites and Sunnis over who should inherit the leadership of the Muslim community after Mohammed's death in AD 632. In the 1960s and 1970s, Iran's shah began to assert Iranian influence in the region and even briefly declared Bahrain a part of Iran. The overthrow of the shah in 1979 did not improve relations. Most Arab states sided with Iraq during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War to prevent a Shiite-led revolution from spreading.

Others struck bilateral security agreements with the United States. Iran began to see Arab regimes, particularly Saudi Arabia, as tacit supporters of U.S. foreign policy. "The Iranians have come to believe they cannot rely on Arabs even though they're Muslims," Makhtaria says. "That's why they want a homegrown deterrence—because Iran doesn't have any friends in the region." Arab states, meanwhile, view Iran's intentions in the Middle East with suspicion, particularly its interference in southern Iraq. They are concerned the United States and Iran are purposely keeping the Arabs sidelined on Iraqi negotiations.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Interesting post..It shows the disscontent was obvious well before any nuclear programs..
It also highlights the US involvement an Arab countries..

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Interesting post..It shows the disscontent was obvious well before any nuclear programs..
It also highlights the US involvement an Arab countries..

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that Arabs and Persians have been rivals throughout history.

Especially since the Arabs are predominantly Sunnis while the Iranians are predominantly Shia

reply to post by backinblack


There has been bad blood in the region going back centuries. Yes Operation AJAX and all that. But there has been a sectarian conflict brewing in the region under the surface for a long-long time.


We have had Iranians training and supplying insurgents in Iraq extending that war needlessly a full two years or more in an attempt to influence the New Iraqi government which is struggling to deal with the centuries old Sunni and Shiite issues. Iran [Persians] supporting the Iraqi Shiites and the Saudis [ARABS] supporting the Iraqi Sunnis etc. Iran wants to have a major influence on the Iraqi Government and the Saudis don't like the idea of a Islamic democracy near it's Kingdom.

We've have Saudis and Pakistanis supporting the Taliban over in Afghanistan The Iranians are supposedly in Afghanistan to prevent the Pakistani and Saudis from supporting the Taliban while avoiding helping the US/NATO influence.

The more we dig the uglier it gets.

But normally we cannot get to this conversation because all too quickly we get the CIA/MI6/Mossad crowd jumping in and bringing up operation AJAX and the Shaw etc.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Looks like a lot of hands in the cookie jar..
A real mess..Maybe some are right to say everyone should back off and let them sort it out..
Who knows,,

reply to post by SLAYER69


How about, Attacks on neutral shipping, Crime against peace (Attacks against parties not involved in the war)
Iran attacked oil tankers from neutral nations in an attempt to disrupt enemy trade.

Using child soldiers in suicide missions, War crimes (Using child soldiers), Iran allegedly used volunteers (among them children) in high risk operations for example in clearing mine fields within hours to allow the advancement of regular troops.

Laid mines in international waters, Mines damaged the US frigate USS Samuel B. Roberts.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...

Now how about their recent elections, how many died?
Woman claims to have seen piles of corpses, as tension rises in Tehran over Rafsanjani speech.
Hundreds more people may have died in Iran's post-election unrest than the authorities have admitted, amid allegations that the death toll has been obscured by hiding victims' bodies in secret morgues.
Human rights campaigners say anecdotal evidence suggests the number of demonstrators killed in clashes with government forces after last month's poll was far higher than the official death toll of 20 and may amount to a "massacre".
Suspicions have been fuelled after one woman described seeing corpses piled on top of each other in a refrigeration depot while searching for a missing relative. Another woman was shown pictures of between 50 and 60 people, all said to have died, while searching for her son.
Source: www.guardian.co.uk...

Are these some of the acts that could have made their neighbors a little nervous?
I think so,,, how about what we know nothing about?
I know, it's all the CIA. MI5 and MOSSAD's Fault.

reply to post by guohua


To be brutally honest though, The US did support and facilitate the Iraq/Iran war.

However, you are right to point out the callousness of them running their own children across the battlefield ahead of troops in order to clear those mines.


That was uncalled for. They have a much larger population than Iraq and could have done it in another fashion. They were [killing two birds with one stone] Getting rid of the next generation of less desirable, uneducated and poor while clearing the battlefield.

That is their baggage.

reply to post by guohua


I don't dissagree with all you say but I will point out that I don't believe there is a country in the ME with a clean Human Rights sheet..That goes for many countries out side the ME also..

What we tend to forget is that these countries are not as advanced as many western countries and need time to evolve...
Let's remember it was not that long ago that the Whites in the US had slaves that they treated like animals, even hunting them for sport...
BTW, us here in Australia were no better in out treatment of the Aborigines...

reply to post by backinblack


Advanced?

How?

Wealth?

Technology?

Ideology?

Religion?

As far as many in the ME are concerned we are the less civil, less educated. They can buy technology with their oil wealth and as far as their religion it is the only TRUE form as far as many of them are concerned.


Remember this IS right where the "Cradle of civilization" is located.

reply to post by SLAYER69


lol OK...Definition of advanced certainly is open to opinion and I don't intend getting into that debate..

But the truth is still that it wasn't that long ago that western countries had appauling Human Rights laws..
Legal slavery and atrocities against many races...

reply to post by SaturnFX


I waited to reply to you.

My response.....