You're either a shill or a terrorist

[AE Bravo]

The Caliphate is a genuine existential threat

Of course. They are against the very idea of an Arab nation-state.

Tunisians, some Palestinian parties, and Yemen’s Houthis are Arabs that support Iran. They also have no ties to any Sunni insurgencies. I don’t know why you don’t recognize some of these groups’ Arab identities.

Despite this the two states have open diplomatic channels and, to my knowledge, have no current belligerent operations against each other.

No, they are actively undermining each other. What open diplomatic channels are you referring to? Iranians are banned from pilgrimage and no Saudi is allowed to travel to Iran.

It's also worht remembering that Saudi Arabia and Iran are presenting themselves as the leaders of the two major branches of Islam and this is the major reason for their antagonistic rhetoric - both states find the other useful as a domestic punching bag.

Yeah, I said that.

A final thought for you - modern Israel is roughly 25% of the size of "The Kingdom of David" and if Israel continues to veer to the left, and continues to soak up immigrants and have an expanding population then it's conceivable they will attempt to seize the Trans-Jordan, the Sinai and Lebanon in a few decades. Currently there's only a very small group of people in Israel who would support that, but I believe there is a larger yearning in the country for what they see as a "restoration" of their ancient land. Iran does not have this sort of impetus.

This is not realistic, and will not be good for Israel. Both Iran and Turkey will never allow this, Egypt will be loaded with cash by that time, and if Assad sticks around it’s going to be a wrap. I don’t think Israel would risk this, especially after the diplomatic progress with Saudis after their Red Sea purchases. As much as Israel wanted Iran, they're getting the Saudis and they'll probably take what they can get.

In my analysis your posts suggest Arabs have a blind spot where they tend to focus on the other, Jew, Shia, Persian, Israeli, rather than the Cuckoo in the Nest - the Caliphate. I would have thought all Arab energy would be devoted to crushing IS before looking for new enemies.

Again, if by Arabs you mean Saudi Arabia, they really don’t have much to benefit from confronting Daesh, sadly. Their western patrons dislike Assad for daring to take an independent direction while threatening the security of Israel, and so Al Saud as essentially vassals of the west act imprudently like them.

[Pannonian]

Again, if by Arabs you mean Saudi Arabia, they really don’t have much to benefit from confronting Daesh, sadly. Their western patrons dislike Assad for daring to take an independent direction while threatening the security of Israel, and so Al Saud as essentially vassals of the west act imprudently like them.

Sometimes you have to cut out the canker even if you don't materially gain from it. Britain bankrupted itself in the fight against Nazi Germany, volunteering ever greater efforts in the fight, despite Germany actively trying to arrange a truce and division of spoils. I don't think anyone in Britain has an ounce of regret about this sacrifice. The price was worth paying many times over, to remove the evil that we did.

[Husar]

Sometimes you have to cut out the canker even if you don't materially gain from it. Britain bankrupted itself in the fight against Nazi Germany, volunteering ever greater efforts in the fight, despite Germany actively trying to arrange a truce and division of spoils. I don't think anyone in Britain has an ounce of regret about this sacrifice. The price was worth paying many times over, to remove the evil that we did.

Yes, the entire WW2 history of the nation of altruism was flawless, from appeasement and the great defense of Poland to firebombing civilians at night it was one true humanitarian effort while Britain never had a single nazi sympathizer or nationalist.

[Pannonian]

Yes, the entire WW2 history of the nation of altruism was flawless, from appeasement and the great defense of Poland to firebombing civilians at night it was one true humanitarian effort while Britain never had a single nazi sympathizer or nationalist.

You've got that right there. Britain wasn't without its share of Nazi sympathisers. Germany raised a Waffen SS unit consisting of British POWs who were willing to fight for the Nazis, called the British Free Corps. At peak strength, it numbered 27, equivalent to an extremely understrength platoon. And that was counting Dominion members. I suppose they could have fielded a couple of football teams to entertain fellow Nazis. Too few to form two rugby teams though.

It's probably not fair to just count active combatants though. We should also count all those who were contributing to Germany's war effort by spying on Britain for Germany. I'll leave it to you to add the count.

As a comparison, how many Irish citizens defied their government's explicit policy to serve in Britain's armed forces and merchant navy? 40k - 60k wasn't it?

[Fragony]

Nazi-sympathisers everywhere, especially in the nobility and royal families

[Gilrandir]

Where is Hax when I need him he knows a lot more about it's about.

Try wikipedia instead. It may sometimes help.

the Persians have not adopted Arab culture or Arab language aside from a few elements like headscarves.

... and the script.

Yes, the entire WW2 history of the nation of altruism was flawless, from appeasement and the great defense of Poland to firebombing civilians at night it was one true humanitarian effort while Britain never had a single nazi sympathizer or nationalist.

You've got that right there. Britain wasn't without its share of Nazi sympathisers. Germany raised a Waffen SS unit consisting of British POWs who were willing to fight for the Nazis, called the British Free Corps. At peak strength, it numbered 27, equivalent to an extremely understrength platoon. And that was counting Dominion members. I suppose they could have fielded a couple of football teams to entertain fellow Nazis. Too few to form two rugby teams though.

It is too naive to believe the reason of it is a special integrity or moral high ground of the British. The high number of other "native" detachments within German armies is explained by the fact that they were recruited IN THE OCCUPIED COUNTRIES. Had Britain been occupied, I'm sure we would have discussed a British counterpart of Charlemagne or Galychyna.

[Pannonian]

It is too naive to believe the reason of it is a special integrity or moral high ground of the British. The high number of other "native" detachments within German armies is explained by the fact that they were recruited IN THE OCCUPIED COUNTRIES. Had Britain been occupied, I'm sure we would have discussed a British counterpart of Charlemagne or Galychyna.

Going back to the original point, which is that Showtime said that Saudi had no incentive to confront IS, Britain had no special incentive to confront Nazi Germany to the extent that we did either. Yet we did. That we did, gives us the moral position to despise those Muslim countries who profess to be opposed to IS, yet do nothing about it. So we weren't occupied by Germany. Neither are Saudi, UAE, and the rest of that lot occupied by IS. When we acted in the region, we were criticised for acting as a colonial power (perhaps not in those words, but by the usual anti-colonials in alliance with their religious fundie friends). So now we shouldn't intervene, but should leave it to the regional powers to deal with the problem themselves. And how they deal with it or don't deal with it is a mark of what they are. We proved we weren't Nazis or anything like them by virtue of the fact that we fought against them. Let's see what Saudi and their friends do about IS.

[Gilrandir]

Going back to the original point, which is that Showtime said that Saudi had no incentive to confront IS, Britain had no special incentive to confront Nazi Germany to the extent that we did either. Yet we did. That we did, gives us the moral position to despise those Muslim countries who profess to be opposed to IS, yet do nothing about it.

Britain did fight Germany. After it had fed to Hitler Czechoslovakia and Austria. So we will see if Muslim countries will wake up as Britian did. And judging by their declaration of anti-ISIS coalition they are rubbing their eyes already.

So we weren't occupied by Germany. Neither are Saudi, UAE, and the rest of that lot occupied by IS.

So they don't have ISIS collaborationists.

We proved we weren't Nazis or anything like them by virtue of the fact that we fought against them.

Fighting nazis doesn't absolve anyone from other sins. The USSR fought nazis, but it doesn't whitewash all that Stalin did inside the country.


Generally speaking, it is not fair to equate Germany and ISIS. The latter is not a country thus it lacks potency Hitler enjoyed to wage a war (several wars at a time indeed).

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Of course. They are against the very idea of an Arab nation-state.

At least we agree on something.

Tunisians, some Palestinian parties, and Yemen’s Houthis are Arabs that support Iran. They also have no ties to any Sunni insurgencies. I don’t know why you don’t recognize some of these groups’ Arab identities.

It depends on your definition of "Arab", Yemen is an Arab state but Palestinians and Tunisians are arguably "Arabised" rather than Arabs.

No, they are actively undermining each other. What open diplomatic channels are you referring to? Iranians are banned from pilgrimage and no Saudi is allowed to travel to Iran.

They antagonise, but to pretend they don't talk to each other is naive.

This is not realistic, and will not be good for Israel. Both Iran and Turkey will never allow this, Egypt will be loaded with cash by that time, and if Assad sticks around it’s going to be a wrap. I don’t think Israel would risk this, especially after the diplomatic progress with Saudis after their Red Sea purchases. As much as Israel wanted Iran, they're getting the Saudis and they'll probably take what they can get.

Creating Israel was not realistic - but the Zionists (the original ones) did it.

Again, if by Arabs you mean Saudi Arabia, they really don’t have much to benefit from confronting Daesh, sadly. Their western patrons dislike Assad for daring to take an independent direction while threatening the security of Israel, and so Al Saud as essentially vassals of the west act imprudently like them.

Westerners dislike Assad for killing his own people - it offends out delicate sensibilities and if the Saudis think IS isn't worth confronting then they're idiots.

[Pannonian]

Westerners dislike Assad for killing his own people - it offends out delicate sensibilities and if the Saudis think IS isn't worth confronting then they're idiots.

Or it says something about their worldview. Oh well, it's their country, they can do whatever they like with their foreign policy. However, the UK is our country, and I think we should stamp down on the import of Salafist preachers. Just because Saudi and their allies have their foreign policy doesn't mean we have to accept it in our backyard.