Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Enlightened Follower

Why are Iraqis so hateful towards Iran?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

The Arba'een rally is a good instance to prove the OP's question is based on a wrong basis.

On 11/4/2019 at 8:09 AM, Enlightened Follower said:

In the recent protests Iraqis online are blaming Iran for everything even the buildings they’re burning themselves, many Shia Iraqis are even putting posters of Saddam.

This shows that these are not all Iraqis who are anti Iran, but groups like ba'this who like criminals like Sadam.

Generally, criminals (Sadams, Pahlavi's, Netanyahu's, Bin Salman's, Rajavi's, Trump's, Baghdadi's and ...) and those who like them hate Iran and Islamic Republic. Why should we dislike this fact?

14fc8354f157174e41e368c22542794d8109e8ce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think picking the views of a few individuals to label an entire community can be misleading. Going by this logic, I could ask, why do Iranians hate Iraqis so much? My basis:

I) Some of ex inlaws would curse Arab zuwwaar to Mashhad anytime they saw them or talked about them, and once when I asked, she responded "because they killed our people during the war".

2) At an international conference on Islamic Tourism I attended in Mashhad in 2011, there was a paper presented by two Iranian researchers, part of which discussed alarming statistics on how Arab and Iraqi zuwaar are treated the worst despite being the ones who spent the most and brought greatest financial benefit during ziyarah trips.

It is misguiding to take the views of some ultra nationalistic individuals or those who have had some bad experiences to reflect the views of an entire country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprised by their behaviour, hatred for Iran and Imam Khamenei is imbedded in there hearts. I don’t know why, maybe they are still upset from the Iran-Iraq war defeat, or maybe the Shirazis just have a strong influence there. Then they feed there kids with propaganda, and the kids grow up thinking Iran is the boogeyman of the Shia world.

Shias need to be a united force not enemies, look at Shias in Iran-Lebanon how united and strong they are, why can’t Iraqis join this powerful alliance? Israel/America and Isis can’t touch us, they are scared of us. But Iraq? Always being bullied.

Every time anti-Iran Shias go to ziyarah in Iraq, they should remember without Iran’s help Karbala and Najaf would be isis strongholds by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2019 at 4:51 AM, Adam++ said:

Talk about a fitnah thread! Do moderators or admins still run this site? This thread's intended purpose is to reinforce old sterotypes and perpetrate division.

Brother, this happens all the time; at least once a year. Sometimes it is Iraq vs Iran, sometimes Arab vs Iran, Sunni vs Shia or India vs Pakistan. Members need to know which people support disunity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Shias this" and "Shias that" is the problem. Iraq is not a Shi'a country. Iraq needs a government that looks out for the interests of all Iraqis equally no matter what sect or race (Sunnis, Shias, Kurds are all national brothers), not simply do what is in "Shi'a interests" (which is a false term anyway, because supporting the nasibis in Hamas is not a Shi'a interest).

"Shi'a interests" for some members here means follow whatever Iran says, well too bad for you guys Iraqis don't believe in this.

Most Iraqi Shias are followers of Sayyed Sistani, and he said this:

"No person or group, no side with a particular view, no regional or international actor may seize the will of the Iraqi people and impose its will on them,"

He also said this to President Rouhani when he met with him:

His Eminence, welcomed the steps to strengthen Iraq’s relations with neighbouring countries based on mutual interests, respect for sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs.

9 hours ago, kamyar said:

The Arba'een rally is a good instance to prove the OP's question is based on a wrong basis.

This shows that these are not all Iraqis who are anti Iran, but groups like ba'this who like criminals like Sadam.

Generally, criminals (Sadams, Pahlavi's, Netanyahu's, Bin Salman's, Rajavi's, Trump's, Baghdadi's and ...) and those who like them hate Iran and Islamic Republic. Why should we dislike this fact?

14fc8354f157174e41e368c22542794d8109e8ce

The biggest ba'athists and nasibis are those who mourned Saddam's (la) death aka Hamas. Yet your country loves them and sends them cash. The other ba'athist is Assad.

And not everyone who wants "Iran out" is a ba'athist. Ba'athism is dead and is in the garbage can forever.

We want all out, Iran, Saudi, America and whoever else. ALL countries out. Iraq alone.

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is another thread asking if anyone else believes there are nefarious actors driving the anti-lRI activities currently observed in lrak.

Yet, l believe this rabid anti-IRl opinon should go in this thread. My apologies if y'all don't agree.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/is-iraqs-military-moving-to-protect-its-people-from-Iran/ 

The article asserts:

-"stinging rejection" of Khomenei

-lran in lrak is like the Mongols in 1258 C.C.

-"foreign saboteurs"

-"a crystal clear struggle between lraq's people and lran's despots"

-"lraqi soldiers will have to choose"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sumerian said:

"Shias this" and "Shias that" is the problem. Iraq is not a Shi'a country. Iraq needs a government that looks out for the interests of all Iraqis equally no matter what sect or race (Sunnis, Shias, Kurds are all national brothers), not simply do what is in "Shi'a interests" (which is a false term anyway, because supporting the nasibis in Hamas is not a Shi'a interest).

"Shi'a interests" for some members here means follow whatever Iran says, well too bad for you guys Iraqis don't believe in this.

Most Iraqi Shias are followers of Sayyed Sistani, and he said this:

"No person or group, no side with a particular view, no regional or international actor may seize the will of the Iraqi people and impose its will on them,"

He also said this to President Rouhani when he met with him:

His Eminence, welcomed the steps to strengthen Iraq’s relations with neighbouring countries based on mutual interests, respect for sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs.

The biggest ba'athists and nasibis are those who mourned Saddam's (la) death aka Hamas. Yet your country loves them and sends them cash. The other ba'athist is Assad.

And not everyone who wants "Iran out" is a ba'athist. Ba'athism is dead and is in the garbage can forever.

We want all out, Iran, Saudi, America and whoever else. ALL countries out. Iraq alone.

Sumerian I just want some clarification.

What do you mean by "Iran out" ? You want to expel iranian embassies and diplomats ?

For Hamas I would be partially agree with you even if I think that such things are not so easy and not so "black and white" like many people said in this forum.

About Assad being a baathis I find this a little off topic because this is true that Assad is part of Baath but is it really neccessary to remember that despite being both members of Baath Assad and Hussein were ennemies and Assad helped Iran during Iran-Iraq war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a corollary to the post^^^^^just above.

https://www.reuters.com/article/Iraq-electricity/update-1-Iraq-imports-7-gigawatts-of-electricity-from-Iran-says-official-idUSL8N27M5OK 

From another source, 7% of lraq's gas is piped in from lran and that 1.2Gw goes into Gwadar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Sumerian I just want some clarification.

What do you mean by "Iran out" ? You want to expel iranian embassies and diplomats ?

Iranian influence and puppet politicians/parties/militia. Idc about embassy.

2 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

For Hamas I would be partially agree with you even if I think that such things are not so easy and not so "black and white" like many people said in this forum.

No it is black and white. Hamas are Saddamists.

2 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

About Assad being a baathis I find this a little off topic because this is true that Assad is part of Baath but is it really neccessary to remember that despite being both members of Baath Assad and Hussein were ennemies and Assad helped Iran during Iran-Iraq war?

So you are not against Ba'athism as an ideology, you are against Ba'athism that is against you, but Ba'athism that supports you, you are supportive of it.

They were enemies because both of them were fighting over influence in Arab world. Had nothing to do with Hafez being principled against Saddam.

I am personally against all Ba'athism and I consider it a joke.

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sumerian said:

We want all out, Iran, Saudi, America and whoever else. ALL countries out. Iraq alone.

Shias Even in Shia narrations said that Iraq won't see peace until after reappearance of Imam Mahdi (aj) that even his reappearance Iraqis still need support of Iran. &Yemen for getting rid of Sufyani (la) that recent treats of Iraqi proxies shows why they must suffer from corruption & Unrest untill entering of Imam Mahdi (aj) with his help of his Army that made from Iran &Yemen proxies that he still must does purge in Iraq after defeating Sufyani (la)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

So you are not against Ba'athism as an ideology, you are against Ba'athism that is against you, but Ba'athism that supports you, you are supportive of it.

They were enemies because both of them were fighting over influence in Arab world. Had nothing to do with Hafez being principled against Saddam.

I am personally against all Ba'athism and I consider it a joke.

The baath party if you search about Baath order you will find it was a great movement that created by British &Russian colonisers to erase Islam from Iraq to Palestine but Syrian leaders from Assad family just used it as a tool to achieve to power but they weren't loyal to Baath idea & despite great influence of Baath idea on Iraq & Syria the highest rank in Baath party (order of Baath) always from begining belonged to Kings of Jordan that current king of Jordan was the person that started so called war against Iran influence by calling that Iran wants to spread "Shia crecesnt" from Iraq to  Palestine (or Lebanon) to have influence in this region but his supporters from Arab countries failed to keep Syria & Iraq but based on Shia Narrations Sufyani (la) will emerge from within Jordan & Syria that will have support of Israel &Arab countries that looks like that Jordan has the best trained military officers to help Sufyani (la) while KSA will ask help of Sufyani (la) help because itself can't fight with Imam Mahdi (aj) & his little army inside KSA that after destroying half of Sufyani (la) Iran &Yemen proxies really will enter to Iraq for defeating his army & purging Iraq from his proxies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Iranian influence and puppet politicians/parties/militia. Idc about embassy.

If people want to follow some iranian religious personalities these are there choice after all.

15 hours ago, Sumerian said:

No it is black and white. Hamas are Saddamists.

I know but they are also anti-Israel.

15 hours ago, Sumerian said:

So you are not against Ba'athism as an ideology, you are against Ba'athism that is against you, but Ba'athism that supports you, you are supportive of it.

They were enemies because both of them were fighting over influence in Arab world. Had nothing to do with Hafez being principled against Saddam.

I am personally against all Ba'athism and I consider it a joke.

I just don’t care about it and I personally don’t like this ideology because this is racist ideology (at least in origin) but if you want to be against every countries in the world who don’t have the same ideology than you, you will just go nowhere and your country will just collapse in few months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

I know but they are also anti-Israel.

Just in their slogans Ba'athist are really racists that are proxies of Israel also Hamas suffers from pan Arabism but recently becomes more near to Iran after treason of their Arab supporters but they still afraid from Shia ideology &Iran so they still prefer a peace with Israel than being an ally of Iran .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

If people want to follow some iranian religious personalities these are there choice after all.

No that is not their choice. Even in Iran that is not how Government works. Would Iran allow another country to have its own militia and political party inside its borders? Would it allow the establishment of a party by a cleric that does not believe in wilayat al-faqih al-aama? Of course not. So it is "not their choice". Every Government in the world has laws that outlaw foreign influence. Why do you not grant the same right to Iraq?

1 hour ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

I know but they are also anti-Israel.

And? lol. So many scumbags are anti-Israel, doesn't mean you help them. Being "anti-Israel" does not automatically mean they are good people. There can be two evils fighting each other, as far as it looks like, giving money to Hamas is useless if not counter-productive. Again, that's Iran's choice to make, but don't act like supporting this group that fires puny little fireworks every 6 months at Israel is a "Shi'a interest".

1 hour ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

I just don’t care about it and I personally don’t like this ideology because this is racist ideology (at least in origin) but if you want to be against every countries in the world who don’t have the same ideology than you, you will just go nowhere and your country will just collapse in few months.

I never said Iran cannot ally with Assad, that is Iran's choice. I am saying don't call Iraqi protesters "ba'athis" (falsely) as a negative slur when your beloved friend in Syria is one of them. This was a response to the person who brought it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sumerian said:

No that is not their choice. Even in Iran that is not how Government works. Would Iran allow another country to have its own militia and political party inside its borders? Would it allow the establishment of a party by a cleric that does not believe in wilayat al-faqih al-aama? Of course not. So it is "not their choice". Every Government in the world has laws that outlaw foreign influence. Why do you not grant the same right to Iraq?

So if I understand well your point Iran is maybe after all right to do many news against shirazi followers which are against WF ? If I follow your logic I guess Iran should do the same and close the offices of all clerics in Iran who follow Iraqi scholars who are against WF ?

13 hours ago, Sumerian said:

And? lol. So many scumbags are anti-Israel, doesn't mean you help them. Being "anti-Israel" does not automatically mean they are good people. There can be two evils fighting each other, as far as it looks like, giving money to Hamas is useless if not counter-productive. Again, that's Iran's choice to make, but don't act like supporting this group that fires puny little fireworks every 6 months at Israel is a "Shi'a interest".

You didnt get my point. I didnt said "Being against Israel equal being great". I wanted to say that Israel is our biggest ennemy so even if we don’t like many things in Hamas they are better than zionists. And like I said before me too I don’t really like Hamas and sometimes me too I would like Iran stop to support them. But they could be usefull if never a conflict against Israel really happen.

13 hours ago, Sumerian said:

I never said Iran cannot ally with Assad, that is Iran's choice. I am saying don't call Iraqi protesters "ba'athis" (falsely) as a negative slur when your beloved friend in Syria is one of them. This was a response to the person who brought it up.

Well this is not me who said that so I think we don’t need to continue on this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

So if I understand well your point Iran is maybe after all right to do many news against shirazi followers which are against WF ? If I follow your logic I guess Iran should do the same and close the offices of all clerics in Iran who follow Iraqi scholars who are against WF ?

Personally I don't care if Khamenei wants to open offices in Iraq and spread his ideology of wilayat al-faqih, he already does so in the West and even in Gulf countries like Kuwait. 

But an office is not a militia or a party. You seem to miss the point: for us office isn't the problem, Militia is the problem. Party is the problem. 

Answer me: why is Iran allowed to have proxies (parties and militias) in other countries but other countries cannot have proxies in Iran? Why this double standard?

1 hour ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

You didnt get my point. I didnt said "Being against Israel equal being great". I wanted to say that Israel is our biggest ennemy so even if we don’t like many things in Hamas they are better than zionists. And like I said before me too I don’t really like Hamas and sometimes me too I would like Iran stop to support them. But they could be usefull if never a conflict against Israel really happen.

I find supporting them useless and there is not even a strategic reason for Iran to support them. They are a zero threat to Israeli Forces. At best they can cause minor infrastructure damage, militarily it is a weak group. Besides, most of the money that goes to Hamas goes to the leadership of Hamas, which is one of the most corrupt leaderships in the world. They go party with that money in the hotels of Istanbul and Doha. Look how rich Hamas leaders are and how poor Gazans are. They are thieves.

I also wouldn't rely on an "ally" that backstabbed their own ally in 2011, remember when they declared support for revolution in Syria? They are sellouts.

But if Iran wants to continue to support them, that's their choice. 

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Answer me: why is Iran allowed to have proxies (parties and militias) in other countries but other countries cannot have proxies in Iran? Why this double standard?

It was Iraqi choice too nobody specially Iran forced them to make party with Iran or accept WF like as Iran that whole Shias don't accept WF so part of Iraqis accept WF & being Ally of Iran .

11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

find supporting them useless and their is not even a strategic reason for Iran to support them. They are a zero threat to Israeli Forces. At best they can cause minor infrastructure damage. Most of the money that goes to Hamas goes to the leadership of Hamas, which is one of the most corrupt leaderships in the world. They go party with that money in the hotels of Istanbul and Doha. Look how rich Hamas leaders are and how poor Gazans are. 

You many time said such baseless claim but Hamas still receives most it's financial support from Arab countries specially KSA that offered to them more funding in case of accepting Jerusalem as capital of Israel but this time Hamas rejected more fundings by KSA but they still receive much of their financial support from KSA that like as Iran & Iraq ,Hamas suffers from heavy financial corruption between it's leaders from KSA funding not Iran ,if Iran was investing like as KSA in Iraq all Iraqis won't stand against Iran but authorities in Iran also are corrupted specially by great wealth .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 9:36 AM, Sumerian said:

Personally I don't care if Khamenei wants to open offices in Iraq and spread his ideology of wilayat al-faqih, he already does so in the West and even in Gulf countries like Kuwait. 

But an office is not a militia or a party. You seem to miss the point: for us office isn't the problem, Militia is the problem. Party is the problem. 

Answer me: why is Iran allowed to have proxies (parties and militias) in other countries but other countries cannot have proxies in Iran? Why this double standard?

Like I said previously I would prefer to see armed groups and political groups which are in favor of WF staying in Iraq. Now if there is a popular vote of Iraqi saying they don’t want that I would accept that.

On 11/7/2019 at 9:36 AM, Sumerian said:

I find supporting them useless and there is not even a strategic reason for Iran to support them. They are a zero threat to Israeli Forces. At best they can cause minor infrastructure damage, militarily it is a weak group. Besides, most of the money that goes to Hamas goes to the leadership of Hamas, which is one of the most corrupt leaderships in the world. They go party with that money in the hotels of Istanbul and Doha. Look how rich Hamas leaders are and how poor Gazans are. They are thieves.

I also wouldn't rely on an "ally" that backstabbed their own ally in 2011, remember when they declared support for revolution in Syria? They are sellouts.

But if Iran wants to continue to support them, that's their choice. 

Imagine for exemple there is a conflict and let say Hezbollah attack them in the north and Hamas attack them in the south. They could be useful for causing more trouble to israelis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, realizm said:

:salam:

I am disgusted by the level of intra Shia Fitna and how so many people fall for it.

Seems they already managed to kill us, great job guys.

It looks like nationalism is more important than religion for many people. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

                               ALL

by British & Russian^ colonisers to erase Islam

Corrected: All European colonizers want to erase lsIam --so they can advance the cause of Satanism ["preach to the whole world" https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Mark 16:15    Gospels say, Hezshaytan said "son of g.od"]

Edited by hasanhh
spellin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Like I said previously I would prefer to see armed groups and political groups which are in favor of WF staying in Iraq. Now if there is a popular vote of Iraqi saying they don’t want that I would accept that.

You didn't answer my question, why is Iran allow to establish armed groups and parties outside its country but other countries cannot establish such things inside Iran? 

7 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Imagine for exemple there is a conflict and let say Hezbollah attack them in the north and Hamas attack them in the south. They could be useful for causing more trouble to israelis.

If somebody backstabbed you once, I wouldn't rely on them again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/6/2019 at 4:33 PM, Hameedeh said:
On 11/6/2019 at 4:51 AM, Adam++ said:

Talk about a fitnah thread! Do moderators or admins still run this site? This thread's intended purpose is to reinforce old sterotypes and perpetrate division.

Brother, this happens all the time; at least once a year. Sometimes it is Iraq vs Iran, sometines Arab vs Iran, Sunni vs Shia or India vs Pakistan. Members need to know which people support disunity. 

Salam Uhty,  l don';t inderstand "which people support disunity".

As a general remark: Nobody is 100% to anyone else. As long as it not using foul/obscene language, l believe members and guests can get as challenging as they wish. Example: except for tactical hesitation, look at how unrelenting l am with the evilgelicals that post here on ShiaChat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three ltems:

1]

12 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

The baath party if you search about Baath order you will find it was a great movement that created by British &Russian colonisers

l have been aware of Ba'ath since school in the 60s. Do you -or anyone else, please- have a read discussing this?

2]

9 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Answer me: why is Iran allowed to have proxies (parties and militias) in other countries but other countries cannot have proxies in Iran? Why this double standard?

Persia/lran, like other countries, had negative, even murderous experiences with colonizers or under Status-of-Forces agrements.

3] l anticipate that when Mahdi goes active, instructed to move-out, there will not be a lot of the reactions y'all believe will happen. After he leaves Mekka, there will be Jews, a few Christians, other individuals and Muslims assembling around the Black Flag. A majority of Earth's population will go 'nuts' and gov'ts will send troops/forces to destroy it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

It looks like nationalism is more important than religion for many people. 

Alhamdullilah, 

I agree with this statement. Also a lot of religion disguised in with nationalism from afar and upfront. It’s easy to see even the best of those in here with their biases. This is why I feel like Imam Mahdi will have to clean up on all sides. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 6:05 PM, Sumerian said:

You didn't answer my question, why is Iran allow to establish armed groups and parties outside its country but other countries cannot establish such things inside Iran? 

You didnt get the point. Like I said these groups are not supposed to be "iranian", they are supposed to be "transnationalists". If that was iranian it would be artesh which would have a base outside Iran not pasdarans. Also these are iraqis who formed these groups not iranian expats. At the end like I said previously if most iraqis don’t want that just do a vote and made laws and that will be the end of the story.

On 11/7/2019 at 6:05 PM, Sumerian said:

If somebody backstabbed you once, I wouldn't rely on them again.

You would be a very bad politician.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

You didnt get the point. Like I said these groups are not supposed to be "iranian", they are supposed to be "transnationalists". If that was iranian it would be artesh which would have a base outside Iran not pasdarans. Also these are iraqis who formed these groups not iranian expats. At the end like I said previously if most iraqis don’t want that just do a vote and made laws and that will be the end of the story.

No one said they are Iranian, but they are controlled and many of them were directly created by Iran, even though they are Iraqi.

You keep dodging the question. Can a foreign country create a political party or armed militia in Iran if it consists of Iranians inside Iran? Is that allowed or not? Yes or no. 

3 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

You would be a very bad politician.

Alhamdulillah for that. To be a good politician nowadays means to be a stealing thief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

No one said they are Iranian, but they are controlled and many of them were directly created by Iran, even though they are Iraqi.

You keep dodging the question. Can a foreign country create a political party or armed militia in Iran if it consists of Iranians inside Iran? Is that allowed or not? Yes or no? 

Leaders of Iran manage both a intern policy of Iran which is strictly national and an other one wich is transnational. 

This is forbidden in Iran because we have laws about this. If you want that just make laws with vote and thats it. By the way if such things would happen and the foreign county would have a similar ideology than Iran I would have no problem with that. 

11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Alhamdulillah for that. To be a good politician nowadays means to be a stealing thief.

At least you want to live in an anarchist style you need politicians to rule countries. Did you forget that the Prophet (saws) and Imams (عليه السلام) also manage to live and collaborate with bad people for the necessity of Islam? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Leaders of Iran manage both a intern policy of Iran which is strictly national and an other one wich is transnational. 

This is forbidden in Iran because we have laws about this. If you want that just make laws with vote and thats it. By the way if such things would happen and the foreign county would have a similar ideology than Iran I would have no problem with that. 

Alhamdulillah for finally admitting that Iraq has a right to have laws against foreign interference. 

34 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

At least you want to live in an anarchist style you need politicians to rule countries. Did you forget that the Prophet (saws) and Imams (عليه السلام) also manage to live and collaborate with bad people for the necessity of Islam? 

Since when is trusting an untrustworthy person in war is "good policy"? lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Alhamdulillah for finally admitting that Iraq has a right to have laws against foreign interference. 

If you want but I would find that very bad for Islamic unity.

11 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Since when is trusting an untrustworthy person in war is "good policy"? lol.

Because some people could change or could be useful at some moments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

If you want but I would find that very bad for Islamic unity.

Why is Islamic Unity in your view only centred around following Iranian ideology and interests? You do know there are major disagreements among ulama on this issue. 

Can an Iraqi Shi'a scholar from Najaf create a militia and political party in Iran consisting of Iranians who are not supportive of Sayyed Khomeini's version wilayat al-faqih? Of course not. 

But Iran is allowed to spread its ideology into Iraq. Double standards.

22 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

 

Because some people could change or could be useful at some moments.

So you want to fight a war with the hopes that "people could change"?

Edited by Sumerian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sumerian said:

Why is Islamic Unity in your view only centred around following Iranian ideology and interests? You do know there are major disagreements among ulama on this issue. 

Can an Iraqi Shi'a scholar from Najaf create a militia and political party in Iran consisting of Iranians who are not supportive of Sayyed Khomeini's version wilayat al-faqih? Of course not. 

But Iran is allowed to spread its ideology into Iraq. Double standards.

Personnaly I would have no specially problem with that.

It is also not so much  "iranian ideology". There are people in Iran who don’t care at all or are even against the concept of WF so you are again completely missing the point.

Also for the thousand time these are iraqis who created these groups. Now if iraqis want to be more nationalist than religious that would be their choice. Just do a popular vote for forbid these parties and thats it. Would I had to repeat that again ?

10 hours ago, Sumerian said:

So you want to fight a war with the hopes that "people could change"?

Just study a little about history and wars and you will see that sometimes ennemies could become allies for some specific events. I hope I had been clear this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Personnaly I would have no specially problem with that.

You don't, but Iran's Government does. So too bad. Double standard exists.

15 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

It is also not so much  "iranian ideology". There are people in Iran who don’t care at all or are even against the concept of WF so you are again completely missing the point.

But they cannot make a political party about that. lol

16 minutes ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Just study a little about history and wars and you will see that sometimes ennemies could become allies for some specific events. I hope I had been clear this time.

Lol anything can happen in a war, but it is foolish to rely on "chance" that other people will help you. Maybe they will, maybe they don't. You go into a war with the plan to win regardless of their involvement. That's war 101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji 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.


×
×
  • Create New...