Netanyahu: Iran a threat to the world.

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 17:40

thep02 said:
Eratz Israel, much much bigger.

That is Zionism, not necessarily Israel...currently there is a Zionist regime in power.

dirtychinchilla · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:01

I think that they want what the Nazis wanted; their own pure state.

Sho · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:13

More like, Israel a threat to the world.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:14

Xordium said:
Seems to me that if they are surrounded by one country they really don't get a long with it's the other way - Pakistan.

Xordium said:
Pakistan has always been a traditional foe.

Are you sure? I have always thought they were historical allies rather than traditional foes. Not even sure the terms historical or traditional are best suited either way given Pakistan's a relatively young nation and Iran's been around for a long time.

Given Iran was the first country to internationally recognise Pakistan's sovereign status in 47 and vice versa Pakistan was one of the very first countries to to recognize the revolutionary regime in Iran after the revolution in 79. Iran also supported Pakistan militarily and politically during Pakistan's conflicts with India and supports Pakistan's stance over Kashmir.

Pakistan, whilst remaining "neutral" during the Iraq/Iran war still managed to supply Iran with stinger missiles and were pro Iran even with the arm twisting of the US and Arab states.

At worst they had strained relations over Afghanistan during the 90s but relations normalised shortly.

Would hardly count as a traditional foe?

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:21

Don't believe what Wikipedia tells you. Iran and Pakistan have been throwing stuff at each other for decades. Border disputes and mortar Fire across the border are very common.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:27

Castiel said:
Don't believe what Wikipedia tells you. Iran and Pakistan have been throwing stuff at each other for decades. Border disputes and mortar Fire across the border are very common.

They may be but that hardly qualifies as them being "traditional foes" As far as I can tell they had issues over Afghanistan and some sectarian stuff in Pakistan and a few other bits here and there but have relatively had a stable mutually beneficial relationship.

http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2014/03/03/iran-pakistan-complicated/

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:29

Craterloads said:
They may be but that hardly qualifies as them being "traditional foes"

http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2014/03/03/iran-pakistan-complicated/

That link pretty much backs up xordium.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:31

Castiel said:
That link pretty much backs up xordium.

It does, care to expand?

As far as I can tell they had issues over Afghanistan and some sectarian stuff in Pakistan and a few other bits here and there but have had relatively stable and mutually beneficial relationship.

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:35

Craterloads said:
It does, care to expand?

As far as I can tell they had issues over Afghanistan and some sectarian stuff in Pakistan and a few other bits here and there but have had relatively a stable mutually beneficial relationship.

Essentially on the surface they hold diplomatic and trade concessions with each other while underlying they are shooting at each other every chance they get. India is a major sticking point as Iran have a closer relationship with India, particularly now.

Like it said its complicated. The complication being what's seen on the surface isn't the whole picture.

Iran has a stable relationship with pretty much everyone and are simu not very belligerent.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:37

Castiel said:
Essentially on the surface they hold diplomatic and trade concessions with each other while underlying they are shooting at each other every chance they get. India is a major sticking point as Iran have a closer relationship with India, particularly now.

Like it said its complicated. The complication being what's seen on the surface isn't the whole picture.

Iran has a stable relationship with pretty much everyone and are simu not very belligerent.

Indeed, its complicated. "Traditional foes" isn't, which was what I was questioning.

Xordium · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:42

Craterloads said:
Are you sure?

Yep. Historical and traditional as per people of the respective regions. Iran hasn't been around that long either. That region is about the people, their culture and the religions the borders mean nothing.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:44

Xordium said:
Yep.

Care to expand, traditional foes is quite strong language and if anything they have been shown to be allies from the late 40s till the 80s even helping each other in military conflicts.

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:44

Craterloads said:
Indeed, its complicated. "Traditional foes" isn't, which was what I was questioning.

No, that is exactly what it means. They are traditionally antagonistic toward each other...that they also hold diplomatic and trade agreements in common doesnt alter that..it makes it complicated.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:47

Castiel said:
No, that is exactly what it means. They are traditionally antagonistic toward each other...that they also hold diplomatic and trade agreements in common doesnt alter that..it makes it complicated.

In their brief relationship they have been the opposite, rather a warm and helpful relationship.

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 19:52

Craterloads said:
In their brief relationship they have been the opposite, rather a warm and helpful relationship.

If you are blind. They have been fighting a war since Pakistan was formed, particularly in Baluchistan.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 20:00

Castiel said:
If you are blind. They have been fighting a war since Pakistan was formed, particularly in Baluchistan.

The same war Iran was helping Pakistan with?

It was after visiting Iran in 1973 that President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto dissolved Balochistan's provincial government. When the operation was begun, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran and Bhutto ally, feared a spread of the greater ethnic resistance in Iran. The Imperial Iranian Army began providing Pakistan with military hardware and financial support.[4] Among Iran's contribution were 30 Huey cobra attack helicopters and $200 million in aid. The Pakistan government declared its belief in covert Indian intervention just like the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. However, India claimed that it was fearful of further balkanization of the subcontinent after Bangladesh and stated it had not interfered. After three days of fighting the separatists were running out of ammunition and so withdrew by 1976.

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 20:04

Craterloads said:
The same war Iran was helping Pakistan with?

While supplying the rebels on its own side and giving weapons to Pakistani elements fighting Sunnis on their side...and this has been going on for decades.

Look, you have whatever opinions you have, but I can tell you from experience what actually goes on, and Xordium is from the region.

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 20:09

Castiel said:
While supplying the rebels on its own side and giving weapons to Pakistani elements fighting Sunnis on their side...and this has been going on for decades.

Look, you have whatever opinions you have, but I can tell you from experience what actually goes on, and Xordium is from the region.

Pakistan has repeatedly accused India, and occasionally the U.S., of supporting Baluch rebels; both countries have denied the charge.[44][45] Iran has accused America of supporting Jundallah "for years"; the US government, which officially recognizes Jundallah as a terrorist organization, has denied this charge also

Seems like they have worked together rather than fighting each other but if you can provide some evidence to your above statement that would be great.

So am I hence why I questioned the "traditional foe" line, as it hasn't been something I've picked up on all my life or from family members from the region in all there lives.

For heavens sake you don't

Iran-Pakistan relations have had a distinct characteristic over the past five decades and Islamabad’s clandestine transfer of nuclear technology and materials to Iran underlines its significance.

to a traditional foe!!

Castiel · 11 Mar 2015 at 20:32

Craterloads said:
Seems like they have worked together rather than fighting each other but if you can provide some evidence to your above statement that would be great.

So am I hence why I questioned the "traditional foe" line, as it hasn't been something I've picked up on all my life or from family members from the region in all there lives.

For heavens sake you don't

to a traditional foe!!

Well, on the ground it's somewhat different from Wikipedia. That might not fit with your opinion, but it's the facts nonetheless.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...town-in-retaliation-for-militant-strikes.html

Craterloads · 11 Mar 2015 at 20:37

Castiel said:
Well, on the ground it's somewhat different from Wikipedia.

Given you are occasionally jokingly referred to as Mr Wikipedia, I'm surprised

So you was on the ground in Iran-Iraq-Baluchistan Province and you overheard them or saw these things? You've not really provided any evidence contrary apart from hinting at some sort of secret knowledge that must be taken at face value.

I'm using various sources and the overwhelming sentiment is quite simply Iran-Pakistan are not traditional foes, far from it in fact.

Edit: I've already mentioned spats at the borders but I'm not sure that qualifies or enhances your point (your link) within the broader context of the discussion of Pakistan being a traditional foe.