Jump to content
  • 0
Guest gingembre

Will iran and saudi arabia go into war?

Rate this question

Question

18 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 1
7 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

2-Saudi and Iran will go to war indirectly via their proxies, it seems to be more likely than ever. Though it appears Saudi has far more international allies than Iran does. Iran only really has Russia, whilst Saudi has the USA and the entire west behind its back. 

All those allies haven't helped their cause in Yemen, Saudi Arabia will never directly attack Iran, it will remain a proxy war, and Saudi Arabia though they have all the weaponry and equipment, they have a fifth-rate army who are effectively useless in combat and air power wins you nothing unless accompanied by nukes, which unless someone is crazy won't happen, if they can't handle Yemen, them handling any other country is out of question. 

7 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

1-I have no clue why people are turning this into some religious/sectarian war, it isn't.

It is not purely sectarian, it has geopolitical elements, but there's no denying Saudi Arabia is the source of funding for extremism that preaches anti-Shia sentiments. I remember during the protests in Bahrain, when the Saudis sent their soldiers to crush the uprising, one of their soldiers saw a picture of the shrine of Imam Hussein, he tore it down, stepped on it, and you could see the hatred in his actions. There's no denying that Saudi Arabia is extremely anti-Shia. Just the other day btw, since you live in Britain you might know this,a Shia mosque in birmingham was vandalized with graffiti all over the walls saying you are polytheists and what not, I'd be very curious to know who did this, and I wouldn't be surprised if gulf money was sponsoring these mosques preaching anti-Shia sentiments that leads to actions such as these. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
31 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Saudi has the USA and the entire west behind its back.

They have the US under Trump, I highly doubt the Europeans (apart from the Brits maybe) want to get engaged in another quagmire in the middle east, I could be wrong but it seems to me that if it weren't for the US, Europe would be investing in Iran quite a lot by now, the big issue for them was the nuclear deal, and while they may not be fans of what Iran is doing, I highly doubt they want to get into another quagmire in the region that doesn't serve their own interests, especially if it turns into a direct confrontation. If anything I thought by decertifying the deal with Iran, Trump put himself in the camp of Israel and Saudi Arabia and alienated most of Europe and indeed, Russia and China. I don't know if there is appetite for more war amongst European leaders. What do you think? I also have to say, I was no fan of Obama, and I certainly did not approve of many things he did, but even he was smart enough to not go along with everything Saudi Arabia wanted, he did sell them a ton of arms to bomb Yemen, but he did negotiate with Iran over an issue that Saudi Arabia and Israel were heavily opposed to. Now it seems these countries have found someone who will bow to their every command. Both these countries require the presence of a hegemon i.e. the US backed by its hard military power in the region, I think a more rational US president would've known that Saudi and Israeli interests do not equal American interests, it seems that kind of thinking is beyond this current administration. While the US is unmatched in terms of hard military power, its ability to influence outcomes on the ground is increasingly diminished when its legitimacy is questioned because of not having popular support amongst the populations in many countries in the region. 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1
On 11/7/2017 at 10:00 AM, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

1-I have no clue why people are turning this into some religious/sectarian war, it isn't.

you have no clue. 

should stop the sentence at that.

when saudi sends their apes and they destroy shia mosques and kill the kufar rafidi it is not sectarian?

does it not make sense that the children of mouawiya are allied with the jews(zionists)? 

houthis, hizbullah and iran are in the haqq. they are true muslims fighting for oppression against the materialistic dajjal followers. 

[Edit]

@Mohamed1993

you disappoint me sometimes, I thought your bassira was bigger.

yes there will be a war. what, do you not believe in the appearance of the Imam a.s. what war do you think he will appear in? certainty not the Philippines 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

according to shia hadith about Imam Mahdi (atf) nowadays we must be patient but prepare for Reappearance of Imam Mahdi (aj) this war will happen after appearance of sufyani(la) & according to saying of Imam Ali(as) we must not who starting the battle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

This is not so much a matter of what Iran and Saudi want.

A Trump presidency is Netanyahu's best chance to re-shape the middle east. The memory of the Obama presidency is still fresh in his mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
10 hours ago, Guest gingembre said:

as asked above, who will you support

They’ve been at war with each other for years now. i.e. Syria and Yemen.

No Shia would or should ever support Saudi against Iran. You must not be a Shia since you’re asking that. It’s common sense. 

:einstein:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19 minutes ago, kirtc said:

what war do you think he will appear in?

What Hadith says he will reappear in a war? It says the state of the world will be really bad, I don't believe there's anything about a direct Saudi, Iran conflict necessary for imam Mahdi to reappear. There are even narrations as far as I've heard that say that Hejaz will be ruled by kings that rule for centuries, then decades, then years, then months, then days, before eventually the kingdom will collapse. This isn't consistent with a war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. It's more consistent with internal strife within the kingdom, which is what we're seeing. Who's right and who isn't, only Allah knows. I find it funny that you claim you thought my basirah was bigger, when really no one can predict when the imam reappear, that only Allah knows, and yes we have indications of signs of his reappearance, but no one knows for certain what necessarily will happen and what will not. What will happen before he reappears and what will happen after. What is a necessary precondition and what isn't. I've read different accounts of signs before the reappearance, some narrations are inconsistent with others, so who is to say what will and won't happen. 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

To be sure, there are important divides between the two sects—over questions of religious and political authority, rituals, jurisprudence, and other matters. But the notion of two hermetic blocs being locked in conflict today—a continuation of an unresolved “age-old” dispute within Islam—is patently false.

It was actually Saudi Arabia’s counterreaction to the Iranian Revolution through the mobilization of anti-Shi‘a Salafism during the 1980s and beyond that had a more determinative effect on sectarianism.

I'm not sure I agree it was in response to the Iranian revolution that Saudi became more sectarian, a lot of academics argue that the royal family was put into power by the brits as a sectarian force that would make it easier to rule through divide and conquer. There's no doubt it escalated after the revolution, but it was present before, just less obvious. I remember Ammar Nakshawani talking about how when he went to Saudi Arabia, they handed him a bag, it contained a tape which talked about how the 1979 revolution was a "Kafir, Zionist" revolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Simply put sect is used as a tool to further both Iran's and Saudi's state interest in the region.

and what is that? 

What interest does saudi have in Syria?
What interest does it have in Iraq?
If you tell me money, then I'll tell you they already have all the money they want.
So again I ask you what are the interests exactly?
I doubt you know the answer, because if you did, you wouldn't be posting the stuff you post. 

If you call Iran an expansive empire, then I ask you.. when Hizbullah liberated Lebanese Christian/Druze and Sunni villages in Lebanon. Why would they leave them and give them back to their owners? Why not take them? If Iran was expansive, why not invade Iraq after saddam?

So what does Iran want? What does Saudi want?

Here is another question... 
Do you think the sunni-shia conflict just disintegrated? What is the sunni-shia conflict? 

It is the fight between Haqq Imam Ali a.s and the dunya loving materialistic mouwiya is it not? Do you think there is no longer materialistic self proclaimed kings masquerading as leaders of the muslim world?

Can you say that maybe king saud is equivalent to that figure?
So why does it come as a surprise to us when the leader of the Shia Iran is their ultimate enemy? The only problem is like Imam Ali .as said to one of the soldiers that didnt want to fight him neither join him "you have seen the haqq, but you failed to recognize the battel"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -2

1-I have no clue why people are turning this into some religious/sectarian war, it isn't. Simply put sect is used as a tool to further both Iran's and Saudi's state interest in the region. It is merely a by-product IMO. This is a good article that explains my point: http://carnegie-mec.org/diwan/74633?lang=en

2-Saudi and Iran will go to war indirectly via their proxies, it seems to be more likely than ever. Though it appears Saudi has far more international allies than Iran does. Iran only really has Russia, whilst Saudi has the USA and the entire west behind its back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -2
On 11/7/2017 at 11:08 AM, kirtc said:

you have no clue. 

should stop the sentence at that.

when saudi sends their apes and they destroy shia mosques and kill the kufar rafidi it is not sectarian?

does it not make sense that the children of mouawiya are allied with the jews(zionists)? 

houthis, hizbullah and iran are in the haqq. they are true muslims fighting for oppression against the materialistic dajjal followers. 

[Edit]

@Mohamed1993

you disappoint me sometimes, I thought your bassira was bigger.

yes there will be a war. what, do you not believe in the appearance of the Imam a.s. what war do you think he will appear in? certainty not the Philippines 

Why do you always respond to me in anger and personal attacks? If you don't like me personally, then kindly ignore me. 

Also why do you always nitpick in what I state? You chose to read that and not the rest? I said right after:

Quote

Simply put sect is used as a tool to further both Iran's and Saudi's state interest in the region. It is merely a by-product IMO. This is a good article that explains my point

Hence when you state this:

Quote

when saudi sends their apes and they destroy shia mosques and kill the kufar rafidi it is not sectarian?

This doesn't contradict my point on sectarianism being a by-product. This exactly relates to the point Saudi uses sectarianism to further its state interests. It's not a case that Saudi is inherently sectarian, it can increase and decrease the sectarian levels in its country through the shiekhs. 

Quote

To be sure, there are important divides between the two sects—over questions of religious and political authority, rituals, jurisprudence, and other matters. But the notion of two hermetic blocs being locked in conflict today—a continuation of an unresolved “age-old” dispute within Islam—is patently false.

It was actually Saudi Arabia’s counterreaction to the Iranian Revolution through the mobilization of anti-Shi‘a Salafism during the 1980s and beyond that had a more determinative effect on sectarianism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Let's ask Mr. Science/Ms. Nature . At what age you have designed their physical bodies to start getting attracted to each other for procreation?
    • At one of these meeting, is it possible to ask, listen beloved friends, I have a question. This verse in the quran, النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنْفُسِهِمْ ۖ  [Shakir 33:6] The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, 
      [Pickthal 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the believers than their selves,
      [Yusufali 33:6] The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, What is your understanding, since we are gathered here for a Unity meeting, lets really unite and learn from each other. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his progeny) used it, as a question at Ghadir Khum and asked  "Then the Messenger of Allah continued: "Do I not have more right over the believers than what they have over themselves?"   People cried and answered: "Yes, O' Messenger of God." "For whoever I am his Leader (mawla), 'Ali is his Leader (mawla)." No Muslim disagrees till this point?  So, this should be a easy thing for you, only thing you are asking,  in which capacity do you see the Prophet Muhammad( peace be upon him and his progeny) as Mawla?  What is your understanding of " Greater Right " or as per the verse 33:6 "greater claim on the faithful than they have on themselves, " You are only reciting the Qur'an and asking for their valued opinion and understanding.  Why would this not be possible? 
    • بسمه تعالى السلام عليكم What’s the علة of praying with a louder voice during Fajr, Maghrib and Isha, and a lower during Thuhr and Asr?
    • Alaikas Salaam brother,  Namaz means Salaat.  You can list all the words you didn't understood InshaAllah we'll reply. 
    • specifically, primary/high school, do you think males and females should be schooled separately ?
×