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

9 hours ago, Sumerian said:

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

I wil have no problem that parties representing Hassan Nasrallah or others should exist and I think iranian autorithies also would have no problem with that.

9 hours ago, Sumerian said:

But they cannot make a political party about that. lol

You want wich kind of parties exactly ? Ethnic parties ? Secularist parties ? What the point to allowing such stupidities ?

9 hours ago, Sumerian said:

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

Do I really have to repeat again and again what I said ? This is really becoming boring.

Share this post


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

I wil have no problem that parties representing Hassan Nasrallah or others should exist and I think iranian autorithies also would have no problem with that.

Nasrallah? What? I said can a non-WF al-aama party exist in Iran. Answer is no.

10 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

You want wich kind of parties exactly ? Ethnic parties ? Secularist parties ? What the point to allowing such stupidities ?

Never said anything about secular or ethnic. I asked about parties that don't agree with Khomeini's view of WF and revolutionary goals, can they exist in Iran? No.

10 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

Do I really have to repeat again and again what I said ? This is really becoming boring.

Lol yea let's help Hamas because maybe they will help us in a war by furing a few fireworks at Israel. Good strategy lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I sympathise with Iraqi people in their view of criticising Iran. 

Iran seems to have prioritised Islamic Unity over Shia Unity. Their policies reflect this unfortunately. 

For example, they are ready to partner with Sunnis from all schools of thought (even nawasib Hamas), but they instantly marginalise any Shia who doesn't agree with WF policies. E.g. labelling British Shias as cia/mi6 funded agents, interfering in the affairs of Iraqi Shias, etc.

Hopefully Iran changes it's stance to a more tolerant model, especially putting Shias first and foremost. 

Edited by Kaya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karbala tribal leaders apologize to Iran over consulate attack

https://en.abna24.com/news//Karbala-tribal-leaders-apologize-to-Iran-over-consulate-attack_986505.html

November 7, 2019 - 6:28 PM News Code : 986505 Source : Press TVLink:  Karbala tribal leaders apologize to Iran over consulate attack  

Heads of tribes in Karbala have apologized to the Iranian nation and government over a recent attack against the Islamic Republic’s consulate in the holy Iraqi city.

2 hours ago, Kaya said:

Honestly I sympathise with Iraqi people in their view of criticising Iran. 

Iran seems to have prioritised Islamic Unity over Shia Unity. Their policies reflect this unfortunately. 

For example, they are ready to partner with Sunnis from all schools of thought (even nawasib Hamas), but they instantly marginalise any Shia who doesn't agree with WF policies. E.g. labelling British Shias as cia/mi6 funded agents, interfering in the affairs of Iraqi Shias, etc.

Hopefully Iran changes it's stance to a more tolerant model, especially putting Shias first and foremost. 

Salam , Islamic Unity has more value than Shia Unity  also we never be partner of Nawasib ,although Hamas is very pan Arabist party but they are not Nawasib that you talk without evidence about it also Iran doesn't "marginalise  any Shia who doesn't agree with WF " but against cults that are attacking other Muslims like as Sunnis based 'divide &conquer' policy of London & Israel anyway WF idea is dominant in Iran that also this cult supports WF but just through it's Marja &his family like as monarchy that this cult is more radical than ISIS that if they had same power &support of foreign countries  like as ISIS ,we would see a bloody purge between Shias by them &then a bloody war against othermuslims in favor of Israel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ashvazdanghe Brother, I have agreed with you on many other posts, but I must disagree on this one.

Do you believe in the Qu'ran? If you do, please reflect on this verse:

"O you who have believed, avoid much [negative] assumption. Indeed, some assumption is sin. And do not spy or backbite each other. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his brother when dead? You would detest it. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is Accepting of repentance and Merciful." 49:12

The verse says that backbiting a brother is similar to eating his flesh. And the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) have also instructed us to avoid talking evil about a believing brother unless it is extremely necessary (e.g. they committed murder, theft, etc.).

So how come you make a comment such as this without even giving it a thought that you are marginalizing and isolating thousands of Shia brothers - who all believe in Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), believe in Rasool Allah (sawa) and the wilayah of the Ahlul Bayt (AS):

 

11 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

but against cults

10 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

also this cult supports

10 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

'divide &conquer' policy of London

12 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

but just through it's Marja &his family like as monarchy

12 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

this cult is more radical than ISIS

12 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

like as ISIS

 

How can you talk like this so easily about a Shia maja and thousands of his followers? You are calling them a cult, saying they are similar to ISIS, and saying that they are controlled by the West and Israel. I've heard other Iranians say that they are not even Muslim....

Are all of them paid by Israel? Do none of them truly believe in the Qu'ran and Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام)? How can you make statements like this so easily?? Please think about the Qu'ran verse above...

This serves as the perfect illustration why the Iranians are losing the respect of Shia's across the world (e.g. Iraq). If someone believes in Tawhid, Wilayah, Shariah, Islamic Government etc. but only denies one of the policies of Iranian WF, then you instantly isolate and insult such people. So sad honestly... 

 

 

21 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Islamic Unity has more value than Shia Unity

Yes because you are capable of being extremely tolerant of Sunnis - who do not even believe in the Wilayah of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) and have been killing Shias for hundreds of years - but when it comes to being tolerant of your Shia brother you start calling them a 'cult', 'worse than ISIS', 'not even Muslim'.

Please change course to Shia Unity! And you can also have Islamic Unity, no one is forcing you to hate Sunnis, but please set your priorities straight. WE are going to be the ones standing together when Imam Mahdi (عليه السلام) appears.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2019 at 10:46 PM, Mohammadi_follower said:

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

:salam:

I see nationalism as a good thing as long as it does not closing doors to your friends. 

Iraqis playing the Iran out card are just like those Lebanese who blame Hezbollah for being an Iranian state in the state, while Hezbollah always acted in the interest of Lebanon's sovereignty : South liberated, Daesh out, etc...

 

Share this post


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

The verse says that backbiting a brother is similar to eating his flesh. And the Imams of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) have also instructed us to avoid talking evil about a believing brother unless it is extremely necessary (e.g. they committed murder, theft, etc.).

you are experts in usin victim card when you can't respond to logic :hahaha:

Share this post


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

How can you talk like this so easily about a Shia maja and thousands of his followers? You are calling them a cult, saying they are similar to ISIS, and saying that they are controlled by the West and Israel. I've heard other Iranians say that they are not even Muslim....

Are all of them paid by Israel? Do none of them truly believe in the Qu'ran and Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام)? How can you make statements like this so easily?? Please think about the Qu'ran verse above...

This serves as the perfect illustration why the Iranians are losing the respect of Shia's across the world (e.g. Iraq). If someone believes in Tawhid, Wilayah, Shariah, Islamic Government etc. but only denies one of the policies of Iranian WF, then you instantly isolate and insult such people. So sad honestly... 

 The defining aspect of our time and a blessing in disguise is that Shia Islam has become powerful enough to enter the social and political arena. Now that we have risen, our enemies outside and within are making themselves known through all the fitna's that are occurring. We have the guidelines and the principles to know where truth lies and where falsehood lies. 

On one side we have the zionist global empire, their supporters (direct and indirect), and we have Shia's leading the resistance against them. This path manifested itself with the Islamic revolution in Iran and has expanded outwards, including Sunnis and non Muslims who support them. On the other side, we have the Zionist global empire, lead my the western powers, with follower within Muslim world, including Sunnis and Shia's.

The most dangerous of them all, are the Shia's who supported them, acting as munafiq fifth column as enemies within. Islam has always been defeated by the enemies within. In Iran for example we have a munafiq, westernized president (Rohani) and parliament, bent on selling the county out to the western powers though the negotiations (first nuclear, then trying out for missiles, regional influence, energy independence, cultural secularism). Outside of Iran, we have Shia munafiq groups seeking out the divide and conquer strategy (Shia's vs Sunnis), while ignoring the zionists, backed and supported by the zionist empire, as part of the 30 years war strategy (attempted at first phase by Isis movement). 

A group or someone being Shia is meaningless, unless we know where they stand in the grand scheme of this global movement. Do they side with the zionists (knowingly or unknowingly) or with the anti zionist resistance movement.

Share this post


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

Nasrallah? What? I said can a non-WF al-aama party exist in Iran. Answer is no.

Never said anything about secular or ethnic. I asked about parties that don't agree with Khomeini's view of WF and revolutionary goals, can they exist in Iran

 

Brother most theologians agree with the concept of WF. So what's the point to allowing other kind of partis in Iran where 90 %of the population is Shia Muslim? 

 

7 hours ago, Sumerian said:

 

Lol yea let's help Hamas because maybe they will help us in a war by furing a few fireworks at Israel. Good strategy lol

It looks you are stubborn on this point so I think this is useless to continue. 

Share this post


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

Brother most theologians agree with the concept of WF. So what's the point to allowing other kind of partis in Iran where 90 %of the population is Shia Muslim? 

Nope, you again missed the point. I didn't say wilayat al-faqih, I said Khomeini's view of wilayat al-faqih. Can a scholar carrying a different interpretation (as is the case with many Najafi scholars) create a party in Iran?

4 hours ago, Mohammadi_follower said:

It looks you are stubborn on this point so I think this is useless to continue. 

If you think so.

Share this post


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

Nope, you again missed the point. I didn't say wilayat al-faqih, I said Khomeini's view of wilayat al-faqih. Can a scholar carrying a different interpretation (as is the case with many Najafi scholars) create a party in Iran?

 

I amnot an expert about this. If the concept of preserving a state ruled by Shia Islamic laws is conserved I think this is not impossible however it is true that would have difficulties to emerge.

Share this post


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

I amnot an expert about this. If the concept of preserving a state ruled by Shia Islamic laws is conserved I think this is not impossible however it is true that would have difficulties to emerge.

Well that's my point, if Iran wants to intervene and share its own ideology than other people from other countries, like Najafi scholars, should be allowed as well.

Share this post


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

Well that's my point, if Iran wants to intervene and share its own ideology than other people from other countries, like Najafi scholars, should be allowed as well.

I don't think it is a problem in Iran to say you are for wf but want a different application of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

The defining aspect of our time and a blessing in disguise is that Shia Islam has become powerful enough to enter the social and political arena.

I agree, this is a blessing and hopefully Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) allows it to continue. I support up to 90% of the Iranian policies in the region.

7 hours ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

We have the guidelines and the principles to know where truth lies and where falsehood lies. 

Unless a person is talking about the Qu'ran and the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), then why say they know truth and falsehood, at the expense of all other people who would be labeled as ignorant? 

If someone thinks they are better than everyone else just because they are following one set of policies (e.g. Iranian WF) then this can lead to arrogance. And imposing those policies on others can lead to oppression. 

7 hours ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

The most dangerous of them all, are the Shia's who supported them, acting as munafiq fifth column as enemies within.

Why label anyone who does not agree with you as munafiq? Isn't the path of tolerance much better?

Even in the Qu'ran it says "To you your religion, to us our religion." And this was revealed about the mushriks, so how come some people have no tolerance whatsover when it comes to SHII'I BROTHERS. 

7 hours ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

Islam has always been defeated by the enemies within.

Let's look at the root cause rather than secondary characteristics.

Islam was defeated because they abandoned the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Because they abandoned the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Nothing other than this. This is the root cause of the tragedy of the Muslim world today, and the reason for all their troubles and trials.

And why did they do that? Among other things, they chased utopian dreams of a united Islamic front - of course not united upon the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) but united upon falsehood. 

Anyway, let's focus on the main topic. Which is this - no one can have any diverging opinion with Iranian WF, but Iran can impose it's ideology on others (e.g. Iraq). Isn't this unfair? And no one can have their militia in Iran, but Iran can have their militia in Iraq for example.

As it has been proven in this thread, just couple of posts above, Iranians think Islamic Unity is more important than Shia Unity. Then how come they are surprised when there is protests in Iraq? Iranians themselves abandoned the idea of an alliance with the Shia across the world.

And, as history testifies, they will get back-stabbed by those whom they seek unity with, and will come back to request help from their Shia brothers who they so easily abandoned. 

Share this post


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

I don't think it is a problem in Iran to say you are for wf but want a different application of it. 

Haha yes not a problem at all, except that they label you a cult, enemies from within, worse than ISIS, and say that you are not even Muslim.

To see proof of this, just read this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Kaya said:

Haha yes not a problem at all, except that they label you a cult, enemies from within, worse than ISIS, and say that you are not even Muslim.

To see proof of this, just read this thread.

Are you not a little "exaggerating"? As far as I know many scholars could talk in Iran without having the same opinion of the actual application of WF we have actually in Iran. 

Edited by Mohammadi_follower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mohammadi_follower said:

Are you not a little "exaggerating"? 

Have you never heard these terms used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Kaya said:

Let's look at the root cause rather than secondary characteristics.

Islam was defeated because they abandoned the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Because they abandoned the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). Nothing other than this. This is the root cause of the tragedy of the Muslim world today, and the reason for all their troubles and trials.

And why did they do that? Among other things, they chased utopian dreams of a united Islamic front - of course not united upon the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) but united upon falsehood. 

Anyway, let's focus on the main topic. Which is this - no one can have any diverging opinion with Iranian WF, but Iran can impose it's ideology on others (e.g. Iraq). Isn't this unfair? And no one can have their militia in Iran, but Iran can have their militia in Iraq for example.

As it has been proven in this thread, just couple of posts above, Iranians think Islamic Unity is more important than Shia Unity. Then how come they are surprised when there is protests in Iraq? Iranians themselves abandoned the idea of an alliance with the Shia across the world.

And, as history testifies, they will get back-stabbed by those whom they seek unity with, and will come back to request help from their Shia brothers who they so easily abandoned. 

It is correct that Islam was defeated because they abandoned Ahlul Bayt. The same is happening now, except that followers of Ahlul Bayt have social and political power and their enemies have disguised themselves as the followers of Ahlul Bayt. This is what being a munafiq is. If they didn't pretend to be Shia's then they wouldn't be munafiqs and not a threat. 

I use the example of Iran, cause it's an obvious betrayal of the path of Ahlul Bait and siding with the enemies of the Islam. If its not obvious for you, then you need to re-evaluate your understanding of the world around you. This is not the matter of not following a certain ideology and preferences. This is the very definition of Haq vs Batil. This is why we need basirat, so we can tell truth from falsehood and not be fooled by anyone who just calls themselves Shia. The enemeis of Islam have realized that they must create fake Shia scholars and fake Shia movements. 

1 hour ago, Kaya said:

As it has been proven in this thread, just couple of posts above, Iranians think Islamic Unity is more important than Shia Unity. Then how come they are surprised when there is protests in Iraq? Iranians themselves abandoned the idea of an alliance with the Shia across the world.

Iran's policies are clear, alliance and support for those who are against the zionist empire. If any Shia movement is working with CIA, Mossad, MI6 or any other western intelligence agencies to create divide and conquer strategy in the region, then Iran will take action against them. Shia resistance are the ones that fought and defeated the extreme wahabi movements, not these other Shia groups, which then led to Wahabi ideology being officially removed from Sunni religion.

Shia unity is being implemented by the resistance movement, hence we have Shia's from all over the world siding and being supported by the Shia resistance against the zionists and their supporters. The Shia's not part of this, are the ones siding with the zionists and hence are siding with enemies of Allah. As Imam Ali has said: 

"Do not seek to know the Truth (al-Haqq) according to other people. Rather first come to know the Truth — and only then will you recognize Its people."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

Iran's policies are clear, alliance and support for those who are against the zionist empire. If any Shia movement is working with CIA, Mossad, MI6 or any other western intelligence agencies to create divide and conquer strategy in the region, then Iran will take action against them.

Brother, please if you are sincere, contemplate on the hadith below from Kafi. In this hadith, some Shias disassociate from others just because they do not say the same things (I.e. they disagree on something). Then the Imam (عليه السلام) clarifies and says: "If they love and support us, do you still disassociate from them?". Meaning that the criteria for our unity should be based on love for the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), not any other secondary issues. Please read the hadith brother:

shiachat_2.PNG.9f4e75591a8470c1ae931cfee2ba8ade.PNGshiachat_3.PNG.defc8f70c5457b123ed978a002e2b904.PNG

 

Isn't it sad that Iran associates with some Sunnis who hate the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), but Iran associates with them just because they are very active in their fight against Zionists?

But on the opposite side, Iran disassociates with some of Shia brothers just because they do not fully say the same things as Iran says.

Come on brothers, let's not be divided like this based on secondary issues. If someone loves the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), supports them, and follows the Qu'ran, that should be enough to love them and be united with them, no? Why label any such people as 'enemies', or insult them, or abuse them?

We can have major differences, as long as we are under the banner of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). This is the basis of Shia Unity, and a source of strength for the believers. And anyone who looks beyond this will be exposed to destruction, disappointment, and regret. 

Share this post


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

 

But on the opposite side, Iran disassociates with some of Shia brothers just because they do not fully say the same things as Iran says.

Come on brothers, let's not be divided like this based on secondary issues. If someone loves the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), supports them, and follows the Qu'ran, that should be enough to love them and be united with them, no? Why label any such people as 'enemies', or insult them, or abuse them?

We can have major differences, as long as we are under the banner of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). This is the basis of Shia Unity, and a source of strength for the believers. And anyone who looks beyond this will be exposed to destruction, disappointment, and regret. 

You are talking about unity with who? Yasser al Habib and Hassan hallayari? 

Share this post


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

You are talking about unity with who? Yasser al Habib and Hassan hallayari? 

I am talking about unity with any Shia, regardless whether they fully follow Iranian WF or not. Iraqi & British Shias included.

If anyone views this as being too unreasonable, than that is their opinion, and this is mine. 

Share this post


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

Isn't it sad that Iran associates with some Sunnis who hate the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), but Iran associates with them just because they are very active in their fight against Zionists?

But on the opposite side, Iran disassociates with some of Shia brothers just because they do not fully say the same things as Iran says.

Come on brothers, let's not be divided like this based on secondary issues. If someone loves the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), supports them, and follows the Qu'ran, that should be enough to love them and be united with them, no? Why label any such people as 'enemies', or insult them, or abuse them?

We can have major differences, as long as we are under the banner of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). This is the basis of Shia Unity, and a source of strength for the believers. And anyone who looks beyond this will be exposed to destruction, disappointment, and regret. 

We need to define what love of Ahlul Bayt means. How can one love Ahlul Bayt and yet love and support their enemies as well. Alot of Shia's fall in that category. How can we believe someone loves Ahlul Bayt just by them giving the label of Shia? Throughout history we have had CIA agents pretending to be clerics, starting movements... This is the entirety of recognizing believer from munafiq. If we cannot recognize that separation, we are doomed to repeat the Islamic history. 

Those who hate Ahlul Bayt are known as nasibis and Iran doesn't associate with them. They make themselves known when there is a fitna, as we the isis insurgence. Iran does not associate with them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

This is the entirety of recognizing believer from munafiq.

Do you have a way of knowing the reality of someone's heart? A way of telling who is munafiq and who isn't? 

Or is anyone who doesn't say the same thing as us called a munafiq? This is what the Imam (عليه السلام) was talking about in that hadith. 

What happened to covering the sins of other believers, overlooking their faults, etc?

I know people who follow the marja Sadiq Shirazi, and I would never call them a hypocrite, cia agent, or any other derogatory word. From what I see, they love the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) as much as anyone else. 

This is the real outcome of the divide and conquer strategy. A divided Shia community with pointless enmity spreading. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kaya said:

I am talking about unity with any Shia, regardless whether they fully follow Iranian WF or not. Iraqi & British Shias included.

If anyone views this as being too unreasonable, than that is their opinion, and this is mine.

Very simplistic world view. Iran as example, we have Shia's in cleric clothing who are working to bring the entire Shia movement under the control of the Zionists. They will sell out everything the country has and then set it up to be divided as part of the greater Middle East plan. Shia Islam will die a slow death if they have their way. They will try to accomplish on the behalf of the western empire, what they themselves could never accomplish directly. These Shia's are the enemies of Ahlul Bayt, even though they pray, and pretend to love them. These are the people, who will raise their sword against Imam Mahdi when he returns. 

We have many hadith stating that Shia clerics will wage war against Imam Mahdi upon his return. Such as:

Quote
From Mufathel Ibn Umar he said:I heard Abu Abdullah (عليه السلام) saying:”If the riser(Qa’em) stands, he will start with the liars amongst the Shias, and so he kills them.”
Ikhtyar Ma’rifat AlRijal AlToosi v.2 p.589, AlKashi p.253

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

Very simplistic world view.

To you your opinion, and to me mine. 

But unless Iran becomes more tolerant of diverse opinions within Shia Islam, events like the Iraqi protests will continue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Kaya said:

Do you have a way of knowing the reality of someone's heart? A way of telling who is munafiq and who isn't? 

We do now. This is the result of the Shia's rising up and entering the political and social arena. We now have fitna's, where munafiqs, thinking they can be victories, reveal their true intentions. Every few years fitna's occur in Shia world and the munafiqs become known. A good example is the 2009 counter revolution attempt in Iran, when they tried to create civil war through the claim of cheating in election, as part of the CIA's colour revolution attempt. There were prominent Shia's and clerics who showed their true colours by lying, deceiving and attempting to bring about the same result as what came about in Syria. 

This is not matter of preferences, sins, or flaws, this is complete enmity towards the followers of Ahul Bayt and siding with enemies of Ahlul Bait. No different than the roles of Omar, Abubakr at the time of the Prophet. Except that time, the munafiqs were successful and this time they're not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

We do now. This is the result of the Shia's rising up and entering the political and social arena. We now have fitna's, where munafiqs, thinking they can be victories, reveal their true intentions. Every few years fitna's occur in Shia world and the munafiqs become known.

Brother, is 'Shias' synonymous with Iran and its proxies? You seem to be using the word in this way. 

Are there no other Shias besides the ones in Iran? Do all the true Shias have the same exact beliefs as Iran?

Wallahi such a black and white model. Those with Iran are sincere followers of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام), and those Shias who have different beliefs are munafiqs and their prayers and charity is not accepted by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). 

Really? Are we not better than this? Will this world view not lead to extreme polarisation among Shias? 

I am against Zionism with passion. Also US imperialism should be combated. So partnership with Iran on these issues is possible. 

However, the main priority should be uplifting and helping Shias, not insulting or hurting them as much as possible. Any partnership must be based on tbis principle first. This is my humble opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Kaya said:

I am talking about unity with any Shia, regardless whether they fully follow Iranian WF or not. Iraqi & British Shias included.

If anyone views this as being too unreasonable, than that is their opinion, and this is mine. 

There are scholars who have representatives in Iran and don't have same views about wf than what we have have in Iran nowadays so I don't understand what you are taking about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kaya said:

I am against Zionism with passion. Also US imperialism should be combated. So partnership with Iran on these issues is possible. 

However, the main priority should be uplifting and helping Shias, not insulting or hurting them as much as possible. Any partnership must be based on tbis principle first. This is my humble opinion. 

I agree with what you'r saying. We only have problems with Shia's who are pro Zionism and pro US imperialism and support them knowingly, or unknowingly. If they're misguided and unknowingly following the Zionist agendas, then we try to guide/educate and use a soft approach in dealing with them. However, if they're working with the enemies of Ahlul Bayt deliberately, then we will see them as enemies as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, AliSaleh said:

we r playing them in world cup qulifiers in a few days and we will beat them

Superiority complex speaks volumes. 

For anyone to think that this geopolitical power struggle has anything to do with Shia or Muslim unity, would be as foolish as believing empowering women is by sexualising them.

You can't claim to promote Islamic values whislt supporting and protecting corrupt politicians. Full stop. 

Take your nosnese elsewhere. Iraq is not interested. 

This is also true with every other leech wanting to suck the blood out of Iraq. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Neither Iran nor Iraq are going to intercede for any of you when you are in your graves. The borders are man-made, the flags are man-made and the politics are often driven primarily by worldly considerations.

Fear Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and hold closely to the Qur'an and the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) because only this can save you.

Wallahu a'lam 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Shiawarrior313 said:

Throughout history we have had CIA agents pretending to be clerics, starting movements.

They do not need to because they work together already. ln the 19th and the first half of the 20th Centuries the missionaries were the primary source of foreign intelligence for the US and Europe. Contacts and Communications were maintained via the Navy.

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...