Netanyahu: Iran a threat to the world.

[Castiel]

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

By people who rely on Wikipedia so assume I do...I write the stuff that people put into Wikipedia, I don't actually read it.

So you was on the ground in Iran-Iraq-Baluchistan Province and you overheard them or saw these things?

Without giving any details, that's about the size of it.

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

Which is the point, what is seen on the surface is only part of the story...the truth is far different. As the border clashes illustrate.

Like I said, you have your opinion...you won't change it, even if the ayatollah himself told you differently as that is your mo. So believe whatever you want.

 

[dowie]

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.

Yup, and the other borders in that region. They're supposed to be friendly with Iraq yet the guys at one border post were rather nervous about the Iranian fort thing 100 meters away, especially when we jokingly suggested we should head over to say hello and get a few friendly pics with the Iranian guys... Then again I'm sure things have improved significantly over the last 10 years.

 

[Craterloads]

By people who rely on Wikipedia so assume I do...I write the stuff that people put into Wikipedia, I don't actually read it.

Come on I'm sure I've seen you says it a valuable and legitimate resource not long ago

Without giving any details, that's about the size of it.

That's about as useless as saying "I know a guy, who knows a guy"

Which is the point, what is seen on the surface is only part of the story...the truth is far different. As the border clashes illustrate.

I'm not sure rather recent border spats due to terrorists actively helps your argument of Iran and Pakistan being traditional foes. nor does Iran blame the Pakistani government for the attacks but more their incompetence at reigning in on such groups who have committed a vast majority of their attacks within Pakistan's border. The vast amount of evidence shows the opposite from the 40s to the 80s both nations being allied in conflicts, recognition and mutual respect to one another. going as far as Pakistan helping Iran out early on in their nuclear drive.

Like I said, you have your opinion...you won't change it, even if the ayatollah himself told you differently as that is your mo. So believe whatever you want.

Opinion backed up by historical evidence, you on the other hand are playing the "my uncle knows a guy" card, seems you have taken the mo for yourself unfortunately in this discussion.

 

[Castiel]

Come on I'm sure I've seen you says it a valuable and legitimate resource not long ago

I said it can be a reasonable starting point in research for the layman, but use the references supplied.

That's about as useless as saying "I know a guy, who knows a guy"

Sure, that's why the respective armed forces are lobbing munitions at each other on a regular basis and the respective Govts supplying rival Shia/Sunni militants...I must be imagining it. Not to mention the whole sectarian Shia v Sunni rivalry that has plagued Iran-Pakistan relations since the beginning, that doesn't exist because you said so!

I'm not sure rather recent border spats due to terrorists actively helps your argument of Iran and Pakistan being traditional foes. nor does Iran blame the Pakistani government for the attacks but more their incompetence at reigning in on such groups who have committed a vast majority of their attacks within Pakistan's border. The vast amount of evidence shows the opposite from the 40s to the 80s both nations being allied in conflicts, recognition and mutual respect to one another.

It doesn't....it shows a complex political system underlined by years of partisan and sectarian division.

C

Opinion backed up by historical evidence, you on the other hand are playing the "my uncle knows a guy" card, seems you have taken the mo for yourself unfortunately in this discussion.

Err, one of your own source even said the same as I did. And I don't know a guy...I am the guy.

Before 1979 when everyone was pretty much shocked by Pakistani recognition of Irwn and its subsequent (now lapsed) crackdown on a to-Shia militants, the relationship between the Pakistan and Iran people's was always strained by this sectarianism, particularly in Pakistan...I haven't even mentioned the Arab-Persian issues inherent in the border regions and beyond.

http://humanitarianlibrary.org/sites/default/files/2014/02/Moonis Ahmar-1.pdf
http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol4-issue4/D0441926.pdf

 

[Craterloads]

I said it can be a reasonable starting point in research for the layman, but use the references supplied.

So you don't have a problem with wiki, I thought so.

Sure, that's why the respective armed forces are lobbing munitions at each other on a regular basis and the respective Govts supplying rival Shia/Sunni militants...I must be imagining it.

Source? Some evidence showing Pakistan is supplying militants to attack Iran and vice versa. Not to mentions Iran has made it clear they are not blaming the Pakistani government for the attacks rather there effort in dealing with them effectively.

B) Lobbing munitions at one another is a rather recent development with Iran building a border wall and the decision being made in 2007 well after 9/11. Again doesn't fit with the traditional foe argument.

C) "The militants who attacked Iran are ethnic Baloch, an Iranian (the Baloch language is related to Persian) Sunni ethnic group that lives in the eastern Iranian province of Sistan and Baluchestan and the western Pakistani province of Balochistan. Baloch militants have been attacking Iran from both Pakistan and from inside of Iran for several years, but these attacks have been increasing lately. The militants are organized into several groups including Jundallah and Jaish ul-Adl."

This is an issue inside iran and outside, the same groups Pakistan and iran were fighting together in the 80s and both blamed India and the US.

It doesn't....it shows a complex political system underlined by years of partisan and sectarian division.

Only if your blind and like to ignore all the evidence. It only became an issue in the 80s and not much one at that with the Pakistani government choosing to ignore calls from within to cool ties.

Err, one of your own source even said the same as I did. And I don't know a guy...I am the guy.

Only with you own spin on it, nothing anywhere near iran-pakistan being traditional enemies. And i'm sorry but that isn't good enough, anyone anywhere can claim anything, hence why its encouraged to back claims up with evidence, "not trust me mate"

Question - Do you personally believe Iran and Pakistan are traditional foes?

Edit: Your linked articles are to do internal sectarian conflict in Pakistan, B) the other states

They were having smooth relation with Shias in the early 1980s.

Which corresponds to what i was saying and not inline with the traditional foes argument.

 

[Castiel]

snip

As there is pretty much no way you read those academic papers illustrating the traditional (ie millennia old) sectarianism and tribal rivalries in the regions under discussion, your post is irrelevant. I even stated the amazed reaction to normalisation of the Pakistani govt to Shia relations and the crackdown on Sunni militants after the Iranian revolution (1979-80) which you even point to.

You are wrong, you won't ever admit it...but you are nonetheless. What it matters so much to you anyway who knows...but in any case I agree with Xordium and so do the half a dozen PhDs in those two academic papers I supplied. You cannot seem to separate governments from the people.

Here are others, also outlining Irans involvement in Shia militancy both today and historically.

http://www.usip.org/publications/pakistan-s-resurgent-sectarian-war
http://fffp.org.pk/pakistans-sunni-shia-violence-and-its-links-to-the-middle-east/
http://www.todayszaman.com/op-ed_is...st-its-sunnis-by-ali-riza-gafuri-_278878.html

Here is an entire book on the nature of Iran and Pakistan' " outward friendship, secret enmity" which we trying to explain to you...

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...onepage&q=iran and pakistan sectarian&f=false

This is indicative of the ebb and flow of the complex political and cultural situation in the region...political expediency changes and while the cultural enmity between the common people remains, it is often superseded by bigger concerns, such as the Soviets...once they disappeared thousand year old enmities resurface and so on...this is what Xordium is talking about.

It's not a 'spin' it's just how it is.

 

[Craterloads]

As there is pretty much no way you read those academic papers illustrating the traditional (ie millennia old) sectarianism and tribal rivalries in the regions under discussion, your post is irrelevant. I even stated the amazed reaction to normalisation of the Pakistani govt to Shia relations and the crackdown on Sunni militants after the Iranian revolution (1979-80) which you even point to.

I'm sorry but doing a Sliver doesn't help you much at all, if you would like to quote extracts to support your arguments please feel free and it is the normal thing to do. Just don't expect other to sit a watch a 20min videos or read lengthy PDF documents.

Amazed reaction is a little exaggerated, given the normalised relations upto that point within the country. The point argued is Iran and Pakistan being traditional enemies which you have done very little to support. In fact you have gone on to dismiss an entire source because it disagrees with your views which is kind of surprising given your known reliance on wiki. not to mention the common theme among various sources mind you. What you should be doing is challenging the sources claims with opposing evidence, which I guess it is hard to do given it is documented history so not surprised.

You are wrong, you won't ever admit it...but you are nonetheless. What it matters so much to you anyway who knows...but in any case I agree with Xordium and so do the half a dozen PhDs in those two academic papers I supplied. You cannot seem to separate governments from the people.

Again the argument Iran-Pakistan are traditional enemies is false. I have supplied you with plenty of evidence which you have chosen to ignore because it doesn't fit within your views. I've listed a catalogue of events between the two friendly nations from the very inception of Pakistan, to conflicts with pak/ind - Iraq-Iran, to the revolution and events in Baluchistan to the nuclear assistance Pakistan provided to Iran. You have made numerous erroneous claims like iran-pakistan have been fighting a war over Baluchistan which again is patently false given they have worked along the issue effecting them both and both blamed the same "enemies". your evidence amounts to recent border spats over extremists attacks which isn't exactly uncommon for the area not to mention many of the attacks are from within Iran's own borders. you finally resorted to "trust me mate" when challenged for evidence.

You then provided to lengthy documents about sectarism in Pakistan, one which even states relations were good till the 80s between Pakistani sunni/shia. None of this amounts to Pakistan and Iran being traditional foes. Not a single line supports the claim being challenged, but go ahead and quote if you want....

What it matters to me, I saw an erroneous claim being made which I questioned with contradicting evidence. What that has to do with you I don't know.

What you are saying is in the broader context of sunni vs shia, Pakistan and Iran have shown for decades they can work past this and have done so and are still doing.

 

[Castiel]

I'
What it matters to me, I saw an erroneous claim being made which I questioned with contradicting evidence. What that has to do with you I don't know.

You are wrong. The claim was that there is significant enmity between the Iranian and Pakistani people's and that this has been indicative in the region historically.

This is true, I have given a range of academic supporting evidence for the position. You appear to be relying on some misconception that I rely on Wikipedia???? Which I didn't dismiss, I said it doesn't deal with the position being conveyed. The page itself even makes it clear by stating that it has some issues...in other words the information is not reliable. That is Wikipedia saying it, not me.

This is the point, historical (as in before Pakistan existed) the region was renowned for sectarianism, tribalism and internecine conflict...this has never gone away...the government's of Iran and Pakistan, who while largely being cordial toward each other, largely due to Pakistan needing allies against India and Iran needing a buffer against Soviet imperialism, that underlying enmity of its people, particularly from Irans side remains...today, with the end of the Cold War, which dominated the Pakistan-Iran relationship and the move of Uran toward friendship with India and the traditional problems of Pakistabs friendship with Saudi Arabia and Iran's hatred of Saudi...we are seeing a resurgence of these old enmities and neither government, particular Iran is invested in suppressing it like they once were.

http://www.meforum.org/2119/pakistan-and-irans-dysfunctional-relationship

There is significant difference between strategically held and ever shifting relations and the historical relationships of the people's themselves. Another book that expands on what I am telling you:

http://www.vijbooks.com/book/164/Dr...istan-A-Strategic-Analysis/9789380177656.html

This article also shows that Iranian-Pakistan relations, even politically have been strained for almost 45 years

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/10/iran-pakistan-border-gas-pipeline.html#

Very strange that you cannot see this, even in the face of such evidence and common history of the Shia/Sunni issues and history of the Persian/Indian regions, especially with regard to ancient Persian/Arab rivalry and the spread of Islam into Persia from the areas which Pakistan now resides...anyway you seem to not recognise Shia-Sunni or tribal enmity as existing so there's not much else to say really.

I, for the most part, agree with Xordium...however I do not agree that they are the biggest issue...I feel the enmity between Iran and Saudi is a bigger destabiliser, and that will also impact of Pakistani-Iranian relations, in fact it has already with regards to Pakistani help with Irans nuclear ambitions.

 

[B&W]

The Shia/Sunni and farsi/pashtun rivalries spoil the cordial ties the governments of both countries display on the surface.

I think they need to grow up tbqfh. They'd make a good alliance. We should gang up to beat the real enemy, the Arabs.

 

[Craterloads]

Everything you have provided with a quick gloss talks about the relationship between 1947 to now, so this historical foe isn't talked about. Or sectarianism within Pakistan which is redundant, we know it's there but has become worse post 1980s.

Which of the links you have provided talks about the historical indifference between Pakistanis (Indians) pre 1947 and Iranians? Not to mention iran was predominately Sunni till the 1600s.

What has sectarianism between peoples prior to nations being formed and the relationship between nations after that date.

Originally Posted by Xordium View Post
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.

Originally Posted by Xordium View Post
Pakistan has always been a traditional foe.

The facts is in a historical timeline

• Pakistan Formation - Iran first country to recognise pakistan
• Indo-Pak Wars - Iran aid Pakistan militarily and politically
• Iranian Revolution - Pakistan one of the first countries to recognise Irans Revolution
• Iran And Pakistan - Working together crack down on extremist groups
• Iraq-Iran War - Pakistan pro iran and support them militarily
• Boluchstan - both iran and Pakistan work together to quell independence groups
• Afghan - Soviet War - Both Iran and Pakistan work together supporting various groups
• Afghan - Soviet War - Rift as pakistans supports mujjadeen
• Frosty relations for a few years till normalistation in relations / economic and mlitaryu
• Pakistan Aids Iran with Nuke technology

What part of that screams traditional enemy, do you do these things with traditional foes?

http://www.meforum.org/2119/pakistan-and-irans-dysfunctional-relationship

Even your article talks about the relations slumping in the soviet-afghan war and a reasonable warm relations. And as above i'm struggling to see anything in the links you provided pre 1947 and them peoples being traditional foes. If they were foes im surprised they got along within Pakistan till the 80s given this heritage but perhaps they moved beyond it? I'm also pretty sure the Bhutto family were shia's too.

http://www.refworld.org/docid/3df4be8f8.html

 

[Castiel]

snip

You are missing the point, neither Xordium or myself are talking about how the government's entreat with each other on the surface, especially in the fa e if greater threats in the region (Cold War) ...but the people themselves.

Anyway, we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Castiel]

The Shia/Sunni and farsi/pashtun rivalries spoil the cordial ties the governments of both countries display on the surface.
)

At least someone understand the perspective under consideration.

 

[Craterloads]

You are missing the point, neither Xordium or myself are talking about how the government's entreat with each other on the surface, especially in the fa e if greater threats in the region (Cold War) ...but the people themselves.

Anyway, we will just have to agree to disagree.

Which one of your links? I can't see anything relating to this historical animosity?

Ive never come across a Pakistani or Iranian that displayed these views, we've established the governments like each other and have been historical allies.

So just need a link.

He named Pakistan, not the Iranians or pre Pakistan people's of India. Are you agreeing his statement was factually incorrect as written?

 

[Castiel]

Which one of your links? I can't see anything relating to this historical animosity?

Ive never come across a Pakistani or Iranian that displayed these views, we've established the governments like each other and have been historical allies.

So just need a link.

He named Pakistan, not the Iranians or pre Pakistan people's of India. Are you agreeing his statement was factually incorrect as written?

The papers I supplied and the two books talk about the region historically as well as more recently. Remember prior to 1947 the border was with India, not Pakistan..but the Enmities of Persian/Islamic/Indian/Hindu/tribal do not change because borders are redrawn or regions gain new names...look at the Pashtun to see that.

If you are saying that there is no Shia/Sunni or Persian/Arab enmity then fine, if that's your position, like I said we will have to agree to disagree.

And Xordium is talking about the problems rising their ugly heads today, with the enmities inherent in the region threatening to destabilise Iran-Pak relations between their governments, who are beginning to not even bother with the surface appearance any more.

 

[Craterloads]

Which papers? Of coarse not got access to the books but the opening page doesn't go prior to 47 and makes clear its a post 47 book. Can you quote me something backing up what you are saying in the context of this discussion pak/iran historically or the people's.

No I never claimed otherwise, it's blatenly obviouse there are issues between Sunni / Shia. I'm arguing that Pakistan and Iran are not historical enemies, which you now accept and are saying it's the indo/Iranians prior to formation of Pakistan.

Pakistanis or Indians of the region aren't arab So kind of moot talking about Arabs.

Which problems today? What have they to with them being traditional foes if we're talking about recent events? Cross border attacks? Aren't there cross border attacks from literally all sides and from all countries in the region and from with these countries themselves?

 

[Craterloads]

Dp

 

[Castiel]

Which papers? Of coarse not got access to the books but the opening page doesn't go prior to 47 and makes clear its a post 47 book. Can you quote me something backing up what you are saying in the context of this discussion pak/iran historically or the people's.

No I never claimed otherwise, it's blatenly obviouse there are issues between Sunni / Shia. I'm arguing that Pakistan and Iran are not historical enemies, which you now accept and are saying it's the indo/Iranians prior to formation of Pakistan.

Pakistanis or Indians of the region aren't arab So kind of moot talking about Arabs.

Which problems today? What have they to with them being traditional foes if we're talking about recent events? Cross border attacks? Aren't there cross border attacks from literally all sides and from all countries in the region and from with these countries themselves?

I'm not admiting any such thing. Read the material or don't. Like I said, I dont agree with you that the surface political relations are necessarily indicative of the real situation, as we see the cracks in that superficiality all too often, so we will have to agree to disagree. You now seem to realise that the issues historically are inherent in the region rather than the surface policies of the geopolitical situations. Which is what I have been saying from the beginning.

You look like you are going to go into full mode obtuse craterloads, so that's all I want to say. I can't explain it any clearer.

 

[Craterloads]

So you can't provide any quotes from your sources.... All I'm asking for, nothing I can see talks about indo/Iran as historical enemies.

These are not simply surface relations, the events mentioned are pretty darn serious and not actions of governments who treat each other as traditional foes. You don't provide support for a nuclear program of a traditonal foe.

Everyone's aware of Sunni/Shia problems, I'm just arguing that isn't reflected in Iran - Pakistan relations and demonstrated by actions which speak louder than words of the last 60+ years.


Not sure why your getting aggressive and resorting to ad hominem. Not usually your style.

 

[Castiel]

So you can't provide any quotes from your sources....

Read them yourself, I've explained them, stated an opinion based on them and my own knowledge and stated why I think that way. Quoting them will only encourage you to argue it all the out of context. It's not as if you are unable to read them is it?

Now, like I said for the umpteenth time, we don't agree so let it go at that, no one is being aggressive or ad hominem, I simply am not in the mood for some convoluted argument over something that is pretty self evident to me and quite obviously not you as you don't recognise either the underlying geopolitical reasons for Iran-Pakistan cooperation over the years, the historical issues within the region itself regards the people, their beliefs, heritage and history, or the strain on the relationship, particularly in the last 45 years. You don't even recognise that a good proportion of Pakistanis are of Arab heritage.

Like I said, believe whatever you want....it makes no difference to me, but tensions have been strained since the 1970s, and whilst they were close allies due to the threat of the USSR, They were really only very close for around 20 years and then only because of mutual benefit in the face of a larger threat to their respective sovereignty and they were frequently a veneer over often strained policies, particularly with regard to Pakistan's relations with other Arab Nations, namely Saudi....prior to the formation of Pakistan there was frequent tension over the border, and that is now resurfacing and becoming more serious...these are the facts, as set out by Yet another Professor of Foreign Relations, Prof Hunter:

http://www.lobelog.com/the-roots-of-recurring-iranian-pakistani-tensions/

And the history of the region you wanted is the subject of the following article, which covers everything from the Arab invasions, to the British occupation and the formation of Iran and Pakistan etc....and all the inherent sectarianism, enmities, rebellions and so on...

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/baluchistan-ia

 

[Xordium]

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.

Well I am from that region and say there is that animosity something you've said you've never heard said. But now you have! But I know you'll never believe me so to save you all that intellectual googling I'll just simply offer this.

http://www.quora.com/What-do-Iranians-think-about-Pakistanis (first hit when you type the actual question rather than wiki'ing it to death)

Now from that you can see most people are pre-prejudiced to indifferent. Comfortingly enough with actual experience judging people on who they are rather than what we thought they may be.

I think the first post is very pertinent there. You have to remember the most important texts in Iran are poetry not religious. That is the spirit of the people - the country would maybe more akin to France or Italy than anything in the region. There is the same superiority because the neighbouring countries are so deficient in anything that a Persian would value: art, music, poetry, humanity, etc. Read MickeyFinns cycle ride and you'll see evidence of that when he passed through.

That is why there was such a strong reaction when the USA rejected Iranian help after 9/11. Not only did they turn away their best chance of help in the whole region they also cast aside a people who saw themselves as near relatives.

I would also respectfully point out trade relations between neighbouring countries is not indicative of the actual feeling. Try wearing an England football kit around Glasgow and we'll time how long you last. Is there a harboured under the current ill feeling between the French and the British - some unspoken historical distrust that only surfaces with jokes and a slight scorn. And yet there is a recent history of fighting on the same side in wars and all that trade. When have you seen a Polish joke about surrendering or a Dutch joke - yet they were overrun far quicker than France was and equally complicit with occupation maybe even more so. That stems from wars far before that time. And yet I've never met a French person in my life who I didn't like and I don't know anyone different from that and yet the opinions remain.

One more thing you will never determine the animosity if you just google Iran and Pakistan and try and support an argument based upon that when they are both very different constructs. Iran will largely be seen as Persia to its inhabitants because Persia embodies the cultural dimension that they value whereas Pakistan was an entity of migration prior to its formation and derived from a lot of cultures that the Persians found quite distasteful eg animism and Zoroastrian derived even if Islamic in name.

So in summary the cultured will always look down on the uncultured that has always been the way throughout time. And often that has manifested itself as conflict. A lot of Persians envisage Pakistanis as dirty, illiterate zealots.

Let me ask you one simple question - which borders is Iran having regular skirmishes along with another nations military.