Reply to War with Iran Part II

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "War with Iran Part II"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]he Arab Word is Watching a Different War:

Three reasons why it has been difficult to understand the Arab position:

1 - The first is the Arab relationship with Iran. From the vantage point of Brussels or London, Iran presents itself as a resistance movement with a grievance against American hegemony and Israeli occupation, and this presentation maps comfortably onto familiar Western anticolonial frameworks. 
What it does not map onto is the lived experience of Arab populations in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and across the Gulf. In those countries, Iran's presence meant Hezbollah holding the Lebanese state hostage to Tehran's decisions, thirty-five armed factions in Iraq drawing salaries from Iranian funds channeled through the Iraqi national treasury, and Houthi commanders answering to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while firing on Arab civilians from Yemeni soil. Freedom is not the word any serious Arab observer would use for what Iran brought.

Indeed, the Arab world's quarrel with Iran runs far deeper than American bases or Israeli airstrikes. What drives it is the systematic subversion of Arab sovereignty by a foreign power that uses the language of Islamic solidarity as cover for an imperial project conducted through proxies.

2 - The second dimension is the proxy question itself, where Western analysis fails most comprehensively. Iran goes far beyond supporting armed groups. Parallel state structures get built inside Arab countries, financial systems get captured, and political figures get installed who owe their existence and survival entirely to Tehran.  The Iranians who have administered this project understand it as the export of a revolution, but what Arab populations have experienced is closer to a colonial occupation conducted through intermediaries, and as of now, they’re not mourning the Islamic Republic.  But Westerners treat these proxy networks as instruments of legitimate resistance rather than as mechanisms of subjugation, they endorse an imperial project while believing themselves to be opposing one, and as a matter of fact, make themselves the legitimizing force behind Iran’s war against the Arab world.

3- The third dimension is the most counterintuitive for a Western audience, and it is the one most consequential for how the current war is understood and misunderstood. [b]For Arab nationalists, including secular nationalists and even those with deep reservations about Israeli policy, Iran represents a greater and more immediate threat than Israel does.[/b]

This is a position that Western media are structurally ill-equipped to render intelligible, because Western discourse on the Middle East has been organized for decades around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as the primary axis of regional injustice.

The result is that when Western governments and Western publics take strong positions against Israel’s actions against Iran’s operations, they believe themselves to be standing with the Arab world. In reality, they are advancing a position that the Arab world does not share and has not asked for, while ignoring the threat that Arab governments and Arab populations actually live with.

The rhetorical use of Israel as a perpetual alibi for Iranian aggression has been one of the Islamic Republic’s most durable tools, and Western opinion has served as the unwitting amplifier of that tool across the entire duration of the Islamic Republic’s existence.

[twitter]https://x.com/zriboua/status/2043397089539846205?s=20[/twitter][/quote]

Excellent analysis. (which in no way justifies Israeli conduct but explains how the US left has been thoroughly duped and even willingly led into it through the exploitation of antisemitic tropes.)[/quote]

This is not analysis. It is propaganda. Anyone who has a basic understanding of the ME would strongly disagree with this sh#t. The problem is Israel. [/quote]

If you can't define the words shia and sunni without looking, your ignorant opinion isn't interesting. [/quote]

Dp. I’m a Sunni and I have theological issues with twelver Shiism.

I agree with the PP that the post was propaganda and that Israel is the problem.[/quote]

DP here and as someone very well aware of the Sunni vs Shia debate in that region, the post was propaganda and completely absolved Israel of causing havoc in the Middle East. Israel is just frustrated it can no longer play the Sunni vs Shia card and that the people in the Middle
East are moving past the theological differences and emphasizing the need for cooperation.  [/quote]

That post didn’t absolve Israel of anything. It just pointed out a basic fact that everyone whose mind is not totally clouded by anti-semitism and/or TikTok foreign affairs influencers understands … that Iran is broadly hated in the ME. [/quote]

Give it a rest, you amateur. Outside of the CORRUPT LEADERS who are all servile dogs of Isr whether paid to play nice w/ isr and turn against their brethren who are being slaughtered by isr  (Jordan/Pakistan/Egypt) or even more pathetic, PAY to be servile losers (Gulf states), the majority of SUNNI Muslims are absolutely rooting for Iran.

And it's so ludicrous you condescendingly mention "TikTok influencers" as if "thinktanker" ZJs like Richard Haass and every other warmongering, decrepit, bloodthirsty loser like him who never saw bloodshed in the ME that didn't get them hard, have credibility on this subject. We've had to sit through years of racist, supremacist, Z monsters from these disgusting, Israel-First thinktanks like AEI/Foundation for Def. of Dem/Heritage/ Fed.Soc/blah/blah/blah, be a part of every god-damned  roundtable discussion to talk about the MIDDLE EAST/MUSLIMS/ARABS.  No one needs to hear the opinions of someone who is literally why the ME is f***ed. It's like inviting on a rapist or friend of a rapist to discuss the victim.[/quote]

Yeah you sound super credible [/quote]

Pretty sure I understand it better than you. What is your background?

I'll never forget back in the day (or any day when the ME is discussed in MSM), watching National Review Z-trash Rich Lowry during the Iraq war on Chris Matthews' show, talking about the "Arab street" and what the "Arab street" thinks. Chris then asked that loser if he'd ever actually been to the Middle East. Guess what the answer was. That's what passes for "credibility" in America. Some Zionist or western chauvinist telling brainwashed viewers what Muslims/Arabs think. Preposterous garbage.

You're the one w/ less than no credibility on this topic. No one in their right mind wants to hear from a Zionist or "thinktank"  with "credibility" about what the *Middle East*  thinks. It was always complete insanity having an entire discussion on the Middle East w/ NO actual ME Muslims/Arabs even at the table. Who in the hell thinks it's normal to even do that? But that's what it has always been and it's why Gen X and older have a warped view of the ME w/ Israel being treated as though it pissed rainbows.[/quote]

We all know Chris Matthews has only been to Israel on a sponsored trip. Looks like, the indoctrination worked.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics