Iran's Parliament and Shrine Attacked

[The BlackBear]

Still developing, but gunmen and suicide bombers have attacked the Parliament and a Shrine to modern Iran's founder. BBC news summary as of now:

1. Gunmen and suicide bombers attack Ayatollah Khomeini's shrine and parliament in Iranian capital
2. Reports of hostages taken by attackers in parliament
3. Several people have been killed or wounded but numbers not yet confirmed
4. So-called Islamic State claims it carried out attacks, without providing any evidence

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-middle-east-40184696

[The BlackBear]

So it's apparently over.

At least 12 dead and many more injured. Four suspects killed at the Parliament, and one suicide bonber dead at the shrine and three arrested there.

There an image of a defused explosive vest from inside the parliament.

[mormont]

If the reports of IS having footage from the attack are true, that suggests a higher level of involvement than the usual 'well, these guys had heard of us so we claim responsibility'.

[Fragile Bird]

They obviously planned this for some weeks or months, but the timing was....interesting?

[The BlackBear]

4 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

They obviously planned this for some weeks or months, but the timing was....interesting?

You mean after the election?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

So it seems that IS is redefining Ramadan. Awesome. High Holy Days indeed.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/opinions/long-deadly-ramadan-opinion-bergen/index.html

[Fragile Bird]

5 hours ago, The BlackBear said:

You mean after the election?

No, after Trump's Middle East visit.

[Dejection]

The Wahabi-Zionist alliance will do all it can to harm Iran. I pray that Iran remains safe in the face of the threats.

[Wolfgirly]

This is awful and these terrorists have to be stopped.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, Dejection said:

The Wahabi-Zionist alliance will do all it can to harm Iran. I pray that Iran remains safe in the face of the threats.

What???  Do you have any actual evidence that "Wahabi's" support Israel or that Israel supports "Wahabis"?

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

12 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What???  Do you have any actual evidence that "Wahabi's" support Israel or that Israel supports "Wahabis"?

One of the most successful "You've Got to be Shitting Me!" alliances since the famed U.S. Calvary/Apache Indian alliance of 1853.

[The BlackBear]

4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

No, after Trump's Middle East visit.

I'm really not sure Trump had anything to do with it. Iran has been on IS' radar for a while, they're predominately Shia, have been funding the Syrian government and sending in militias. And as a target being able to claim a hit against Iran is as good as you can get, Al Qaeda wouldn't go up against them, and the home grown Sunni insurgency is relegated to the backwaters. Trump seems irrelevant.

[Dejection]

7 hours ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

What???  Do you have any actual evidence that "Wahabi's" support Israel or that Israel supports "Wahabis"?

Back-channel diplomacy between Israel and GCC states is an open secret, their positions on issues like Syria are similar and then there are states like Egypt and Jordan which are openly friendly with Israel since they are Western puppet regimes. The real relationship between Wahabism and the Zionists goes way back to the first World War when local Arabs supported the British against the Ottoman Empire. I don't know why anyone would still be unaware of how Saudi Arabia is a prime time Western stooge.

[House Balstroko]

6 minutes ago, Dejection said:

Back-channel diplomacy between Israel and GCC states is an open secret, their positions on issues like Syria are similar and then there are states like Egypt and Jordan which are openly friendly with Israel since they are Western puppet regimes. The real relationship between Wahabism and the Zionists goes way back to the first World War when local Arabs supported the British against the Ottoman Empire. I don't know why anyone would still be unaware of how Saudi Arabia is a prime time Western stooge.

Back channel diplomacy as you like yo call it exists across many different parties. It's part of human nature. Egypt and a Jordan aren't exactly friendly with Israel, they just have a peace treaty with them. 

There is also very little real difference between Iran and Saudi Arabia, both countries are very extreme, they just support different factions. 

[Dejection]

1 minute ago, House Balstroko said:

Back channel diplomacy as you like yo call it exists across many different parties. It's part of human nature. Egypt and a Jordan aren't exactly friendly with Israel, they just have a peace treaty with them. 

There is also very little real difference between Iran and Saudi Arabia, both countries are very extreme, they just support different factions. 

It means something when it's been going on for near a century. Saudi Arabia is entirely Zionist property; do bother looking up how that country was created. Saudis are essentially (very) upjumped village tribal lords made rich through their discovery of oil courtesy of the West and the petrodollar. Saudi Arabia is for all intents and purposes part of the unified political bloc known as the West. It is funny how constricted the worldview of people who rely on trash Western media is; the way they show it, it's the US who relies on Saudi and not the other way around. Iran is nowhere near Saudi Arabia because Iran does not follow a horrid and flawed interpretation of Islam which directly encourages violence as Wahabism does. Iran supports legitimate resistance movements such as Hezbollah (Lebanon) and Hamas (Gaza) which fight legally against occupational militaries. Saudi Arabia funds demons such as ISIS and Boko Haram. I come from Pakistan where the rise of extremism was an 80s and 90s thing; it's not mere coincidence that it was during this time period that Saudi Arabia found the opportunity to fund their Wahabi ideology into my country via direct links with preachers in backward areas. Terrorist producing factories. 

[House Balstroko]

9 minutes ago, Dejection said:

It means something when it's been going on for near a century. Saudi Arabia is entirely Zionist property; do bother looking up how that country was created. Saudis are essentially (very) upjumped village tribal lords made rich through their discovery of oil courtesy of the West and the petrodollar. Saudi Arabia is for all intents and purposes part of the unified political bloc known as the West. It is funny how constricted the worldview of people who rely on trash Western media is; the way they show it, it's the US who relies on Saudi and not the other way around. Iran is nowhere near Saudi Arabia because Iran does not follow a horrid and flawed interpretation of Islam which directly encourages violence as Wahabism does. Iran supports legitimate resistance movements such as Hezbollah (Lebanon) and Hamas (Gaza) which fight legally against occupational militaries. Saudi Arabia funds demons such as ISIS and Boko Haram. I come from Pakistan where the rise of extremism was an 80s and 90s thing; it's not mere coincidence that it was during this time period that Saudi Arabia found the opportunity to fund their Wahabi ideology into my country via direct links with preachers in backward areas. Terrorist producing factories. 

You are right that Saudi Arabia funds a lot of movements, but to suggest that Iran doesn't do the same is wrong. I wouldn't call Hezbollah and Hamas legitimate groups as you claim. 

The other thing is that Saudi Arabia is the centre of the Islamic world which holds its two most sacred sites so it has an advantage over Iran already even within the Islamic world. In case of a major conflict between the two, most major Muslim countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey... will back SA. 

[Dejection]

1 minute ago, House Balstroko said:

You are right that Saudi Arabia funds a lot of movements, but to suggest that Iran doesn't do the same is wrong. I wouldn't call Hezbollah and Hamas legitimate groups as you claim. 

The other thing is that Saudi Arabia is the centre of the Islamic world which holds its two most sacred sites so it has an advantage over Iran already even within the Islamic world. In case of a major conflict between the two, most major Muslim countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey... will back SA. 

They are not legitimate groups for people who believe in wars of aggression and oppression by foreign armies. Morally and legally they are justified in their actions. And hey, another *coincidence* is that Saudi Arabia condemns Hezbollah and Hamas (for the latter which isn't Sunni, however, it's possible they censor their contempt seeing as they need to act like the Sunni leaders of the Sunni world). 

You are incorrect on the second point as well. Pakistan, home to the world's second largest Shia population (and likely largest Shia and even Iranic population in the next 10-15 years) has always managed, despite in every other way it's messed up, to maintain a balance between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The recent refusal to join their putrid campaign against Yemen is an example and the history of offering to host talks between the two is also one. Given the regional shift of Pakistan toward Russia and Iran it can be expected to actually employ pro Iranian policies soon. It make sense too, Iran shares a border with Pakistan and cultural ties as well; the Persians of old are among our ancestors and we have been foolish to not just outright align with Iran from the get-go. Sadly the uneducated average Pakistani thinks the Saudis are great simply because they are Arabs.

[House Balstroko]

15 minutes ago, Dejection said:

They are not legitimate groups for people who believe in wars of aggression and oppression by foreign armies. Morally and legally they are justified in their actions. And hey, another *coincidence* is that Saudi Arabia condemns Hezbollah and Hamas (for the latter which isn't Sunni, however, it's possible they censor their contempt seeing as they need to act like the Sunni leaders of the Sunni world). 

You are incorrect on the second point as well. Pakistan, home to the world's second largest Shia population (and likely largest Shia and even Iranic population in the next 10-15 years) has always managed, despite in every other way it's messed up, to maintain a balance between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The recent refusal to join their putrid campaign against Yemen is an example and the history of offering to host talks between the two is also one. Given the regional shift of Pakistan toward Russia and Iran it can be expected to actually employ pro Iranian policies soon. It make sense too, Iran shares a border with Pakistan and cultural ties as well; the Persians of old are among our ancestors and we have been foolish to not just outright align with Iran from the get-go. Sadly the uneducated average Pakistani thinks the Saudis are great simply because they are Arabs.

What wars of aggression are you talking about? Israel has been attacked no less than 4 times by the Arab league. That's not to say that Israel is entirely innocent either as it has done its fair share of questionable things. 

Im not sure what exactly your second point is supposed to address. The two holiest sites of Islam are in Saudi Arabia, therefore it already has an advantage. That's not to mention the fact that 80% of Muslims are Sunni. Pakistan also shares a long border with India, yet the two are still at odds despite sharing cultural traits. 

[Dejection]

5 minutes ago, House Balstroko said:

What wars of aggression are you talking about? Israel has been attacked no less than 4 times by the Arab league. That's not to say that Israel is entirely innocent either as it has done its fair share of questionable things. 

Im not sure what exactly your second point is supposed to address. The two holiest sites of Islam are in Saudi Arabia, therefore it already has an advantage. That's not to mention the fact that 80% of Muslims are Sunni. Pakistan also shares a long border with India, yet the two are still at odds despite sharing cultural traits. 

Israel's attacks on Lebanon in both the 80s and 2006 have been based on false pretext and in any case not connected to the '4 times Arab countries attacked Israel'. Lebanon never attacked Israel and the Arab countries which did made their peace with it barring Syria. This is no justification.

My second point addressed the fallacy that Pakistan is a completely pro Saudi state in the case of Iran-Saudi enmity. I simply provided evidence that it has maintained neutrality.

Pakistan also shares a long border with India, yet the two are still at odds despite sharing cultural traits.

This is an utterly defunct comparison. Pakistan and Iran have positive examples of cooperation throughout their history, shared religious values and also a mutual interest to not mess with each other. No disputed territories or disputed natural resources either. One cannot make such crude generalized comparisons. In any case, again, Iran-Pakistan relations have at most remained positive.

P.S Indo Pak cultural traits are highly exaggerated, especially by the Indian side. About half of Pakistan can be said to have close cultural links with India (mainly Punjab) while the other half are closer to Persians, Afghans and Turks.

[House Balstroko]

5 minutes ago, Dejection said:

Israel's attacks on Lebanon in both the 80s and 2006 have been based on false pretext and in any case not connected to the '4 times Arab countries attacked Israel'. Lebanon never attacked Israel and the Arab countries which did made their peace with it barring Syria. This is no justification.

My second point addressed the fallacy that Pakistan is a completely pro Saudi state in the case of Iran-Saudi enmity. I simply provided evidence that it has maintained neutrality.

 

 

This is an utterly defunct comparison. Pakistan and Iran have positive examples of cooperation throughout their history, shared religious values and also a mutual interest to not mess with each other. No disputed territories or disputed natural resources either. One cannot make such crude generalized comparisons. In any case, again, Iran-Pakistan relations have at most remained positive.

P.S Indo Pak cultural traits are highly exaggerated, especially by the Indian side. About half of Pakistan can be said to have close cultural links with India (mainly Punjab) while the other half are closer to Persians, Afghans and Turks.

Israel was targeting Hezbollah across Lebanon and Syria. That's a very complex issue in and out of itself.

Pakistan may not be entirely on the Saudi side, but most Pakistanis are Sunni and SA is ultimately the home of the holy sites which gives it the advantage. 

I think this discussion has gone way off topic. Admittedly, I'm guilty of derailing it. To paraphrase, my objection was to you bringing Wahabism and Zionism into the mix, two terms that are highly used out of context in most discussions. 

At the end of the day, no one is innocent in this conflict and both Iran and Saudi are equally to blame. 

Either way, I offer my condolences to those who lost there lives and would do so for anyone irrespective of nationality.