We just gave the nation of Iraq to Iran (bad idea)

The Shiite majority in Iraq are Persian and by eliminating our hard*ss leader (Saddam) we have given that nation over to the Persian state. Once the dust settles the Iraqi Persians will join the Iranian Persians.

 

The Persians are an Iranian people who speak the Persian language and share a common culture and history.

Significant numbers of Persians also reside outside of Iran, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan, with the largest communities found in the United States, Germany, England, Canada, Kuwait, Turkey and UAE. Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, and the UAE also have large populations of Persian descendents, referred to as Ajamis. Smaller communities are also found in surrounding countries and the Arabian Peninsula.

Maybe you meant shiites????

 

There not many "Persians" living in Iraq, but there lot of Shiites, they majority. But they Arab, not Persian, only share religion.

 

Or maybe it's best said this way:

Please don't confuse Danr with facts. Boy, watch the pictures come now!!!:whistle:

 

A large portion of the world's Shi'a live in the Middle East. They constitute a majority in Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Iraq, and especially Iran, where 90% of the population is Shi'a, giving it the highest population of Shi'a Muslims of any country in the world[4]. In Lebanon Shi'a form a plurality, and they remain as significant minorities in Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan, Turkey and Yemen. Among the smaller Persian Gulf states, Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates also have significant Shi'a minorities, as does the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia.
(from wiki)
The Persian language is Farsi, my point is that the majority Shi'a population of Iraq share more than a religion in common with the Iranians, they share a common culture that streches back as far as any culture on earth. They are one people and now we (the US) have made the Iraqi Persians (Shi'a) and the Iranian Persians (Shi'a) one nation. I do agree however that there are small enclave populations of groups like the Zoroastrians, but they are not very relevant.

Keep an eye on that Sistani guy if you want to see this unfold (he like many Iraqi's is a Persian and has an eye on a greater Persia).

 

my point is valid if you think aboutit, a greater Persia is emerging out of this mess. Put the BS aside for a change (although I admit I have been guilty of a little BS myself).

 

Gets facts from wikipedia, that says enough. Study something more significant and reliable for argument please.

 

why do you nit pick the source, wiki is convienient, (I can not scan pages out of books to post). The point is that guys like Sistani are eyeing an expanded Persian state that joins Iran and Iraq, and they will be in a position to do it soon.
This is a valid point and will likely come to pass (Wiki or not).

 

Well for begin, this information posted, and not accurate by users. For instance I make up all kinds cr*p about your country and post and you take it as truth.

Read insted news, do search of bbc.co.uk, one of best news service anywhere in world ~ and might find in language you understand.

 

You are bogged down in unimportant details. What about an expanded Persian state, that is a big world changing idea whose time has come.

 

Get your information from reliable source, educate yourself then come back and make point. Until then you sound like trailer trash of Jerry Springer.

 

Just because they happen to share the same form of the Muslim religion doesn't mean they'll become one state. Egypt and Syria tried that once, and it failed. Historically, the Dutch and Scots are Calvinists, and they've never united. And a country like Indonesia - which has both the world's largest Muslim population AND the largest number of Reformed Christians - has made a pretty good go of it in the world. And how about India, which has many religions, and even more languages, and is the world's largest democracy? To make a successful nation-state, a people must have a conciousness that they're a nation. The Shi'a in Iraq and the Shi'a in Iran don't share that conciousness.

 

Egypt, Syria and Yemen Arab Republic united under UAR in 1958-1961, this was Gamel Abdel Nassar's arab nationalism, he had many followers in Arab world during that time, because of radio program broadcast all over there.

But Arab nationalism not good for local culture, so Syria and Yemen drop out. They were country only in name but not in practical sense.

Anywhere people are concentrated and devided by traditions there be some conflict, but not all result of wars and destruction, but political tension say in Quebec and Canada.

 

apparently you are afraid of my superior intellect.

 

surrealist poetry?

 

Iraq itself is an imposed construct, and there are historic periods that include current Iraq as part of Persia.

 

Anyway, back to what I think the original topic was. Iran has a lot of young people that do indeed like America. They do not like their repressive leaders and would like a normal non-antaginistic relationship with the US. I'd like to see someone emerge from the Middle East that could take care of the many problems that we and the rest of the western world keep getting pulled into or jump into willingly. Looking at the violence in Iraq it is hard to imagine that there is anyone in the whole country capable of anything other than revenge, fanaticism, and power mongering. Iran has many moderates and many resources that, if there was a national will, could reshape the Middle East. Unfortunately, the corrupt and fanatical elements lead with an iron fist and are unlikely to give up power anytime soon. Maybe being forced to take a leadership role in the region just might be the catalyst that puts the fanatics of Iranian politics in their place. Or possibly, it could embolden them and consolidate their position and spread more unrest over the region. One way to find out I guess.

 

Except for Egypt and Iran (and maybe Turkey, if you consider them the Middle East, which I do not), you could make a pretty good case that EVERY nation in the Middle East is an imposed construct. There are also historic periods when Israel was part of the Persian Empire. Are you suggesting that Israel should/will be joined to Iran? Ahmadinejad won't have any problems with that, although he probably won't treat them like Darius did.

Before mocking Krasnaya Vityaz too much, you might want to get his signature translated. You might find he agrees with you on certain things.

 

I tried joking with the dude but he is pretty touchy and seems a bit full of himself