The Coming War with Iran and The Future of the Clash of Civilizations

[Blue]

Article sounded to me like more religious war propagating garbage. The author wants it from the sound of it. As long as we have anyone that thinks there is greater reward after death than in this life, the value of human life will continue lose value until the biggest nut of all lights the big match. And if anyone survives, maybe they will have learned the lesson that has fallen on deaf ears for thousands of years.


But probably not.

[Ironduke]

Shi'a and non-Arab. If you pay closer attention to Middle Eastern politics you will notice the tendency of Arab politicians to make frequent references to the "Arab and Muslim world". Note the "Arab" in there, which always comes first before the "Muslim". Hypocrites? I think so. First priority for them is the "Arab world" whether they are outwardly nationalists or self-professed pan-Islamists. The Arabs always make the distinction between the two "Muslim worlds", the Arab and the non-Arab. I seem to recall a Bin Laden audio (perhaps more than one) where even he makes the distinction. So yeah, its something imbedded into their psyche whether they realize it or not or admit to it or not.

I pay very close attention to ME Politics as part of my course of study. The Arabic word for non-Arab Muslim is muwali. Conversions of non-Arabs to Islam was very controversial in the early days, from my understanding of early Islamic history is that Islam was intended by Mohammad and the early caliphs to be a religion for the Arabs and there was a lack of intent in proselytizing any non-Arabs. That's a matter of debate, but it's my take on the matter.

[Deltacamelately]

Well we don't also belive in an antichrist-like figure or any figure/leader for the end of times, and if the Pakistanis teach that to their children that's just wrong. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding but you really should have emphazised more the Pakistani aspect of this indoctrination and not the Sunni one, I am a sunni and I have never heard of such a figure/leader.

Its alright. Just try to access this site - www.abytheliberal.com
You will find a Pakistan vs India thread that is full of this BS, as to how P.B.U or something will rise and take Pakistan to the worldstage of supremacy and glory. And mind you, the majority posters I found there were Pakistani Sunnis, thus the obvious remark. However, I don't want to generalise or implicate anybody or any group in particular.

[1980s]

Conversions of non-Arabs to Islam was very controversial in the early days, from my understanding of early Islamic history is that Islam was intended by Mohammad and the early caliphs to be a religion for the Arabs and there was a lack of intent in proselytizing any non-Arabs. That's a matter of debate, but it's my take on the matter.

Im not sure that is correct. One of the Prophet Mohammed's most well known companions was a Persian convert, Salman Al-Farsi. Also the Arabs did not just migrate and settle outside of Arabia but successfully absorbed the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt and the Maghreb into not only the Muslim but the Arab fold too. The idea of forced-conversion may have been a taboo during the time of the Prophet Mohammed, but as seen in later Islamic history it became acceptable and even the norm in some parts of the World.

[Deltacamelately]

Im not sure that is correct. One of the Prophet Mohammed's most well known companions was a Persian convert, Salam Al-Farsi. Also the Arabs did not just migrate and settle outside of Arabia but successfully absorbed the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt and the Maghreb into not only the Muslim but the Arab fold too. The idea of forced-conversion may have been a taboo during the time of the Prophet Mohammed, but as seen in later Islamic history it became acceptable and even the norm in some parts of the World.

I think I'll have to agree here with you. However, during the early days of Islam and probably during the Prophet's life, Islam was just not a religion for the Arabs, rather a way of life as well, as is being differentiated between the Sharia and the Sunnah. It wasn't to be enforced on the other races and the Prophet and his followers were probably also concerned about preserving the sanctity and individuality of the Arab bloodline. However, this was clearly derailed by the later Khaliphas or Caliphs and there are inneumerable incidents, wherein the sword was generously used to ensure that the humbled population converts and "All walk to the way of Allah".

[Yusuf]

The Shias believes that not the Sunnis, the Koran is pretty clear on this matter, Mohammed is the seal of all prophets, there will be none afther him. This is official Sunni doctrine.

Its the same with Shias. Mohammed was the last prophet and we are not expecting any new prophet. But yes we are waiting for Imam who is from his blood line.

[Yusuf]

I was under the impression that Islamic end-time prophecy holds that Jesus will return to battle the dajjal.

We (shias) are waiting for the Imam to come out from seclusion.

[Yusuf]

Iranian secularists, nationalists and socialists / marxists have no interest in claiming 'leadership of the Islamic world'. So if Iran didn't have the Islamic Republic, its role in Islamic causes in the Middle East would amount to very little, if not cease to exist. The only Iranian faction with these kinds of aspirations are ultra-fanatics within the present regime - and it cant even be said that they make-up a majority in the Islamic Republic, which is more faction-ridden and ideologically disunited than you know. The regime realized during the 1980s that 'exporting the revolution' and being the 'leader of the Islamic world' was an impossible task. But most importantly, ordinary Iranian people hold no such ambitions about being some kind of 'leaders' of the Muslim world. The average Iranian wants nothing to do with countries and societies like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan. Iran may be a Muslim majority country with a theocratic regime, but Iranian people are not Islamic fundamentalists. We have our own identity and culture that is separate from Islam and is just as important to most Iranians as being Muslim is.

Well by leaders of the Islamic world should not be defined in a role as someone who "leads" as such. It can also mean a leading Islamic country that can be a role model for others to follow. Leaders not in a military or literal sense of the word but leaders in health care, industries, infrastructure etc..

[Yusuf]

I pay very close attention to ME Politics as part of my course of study. The Arabic word for non-Arab Muslim is muwali. Conversions of non-Arabs to Islam was very controversial in the early days, from my understanding of early Islamic history is that Islam was intended by Mohammad and the early caliphs to be a religion for the Arabs and there was a lack of intent in proselytizing any non-Arabs. That's a matter of debate, but it's my take on the matter.

I dont think so. It was not meant to be confined in any way. In our (Dawoodi Bohra Shia) books we have the words of our Prophet Mohammed making a prophecy about the death of the vice regent of the Imam (who is from the Prophets blood line) 1000 years hence. And it did happen according to our history some 400 years ago.

I have never come across anywhere about the intention of the Prophet to confine the religion to the Arabs.

[Ironduke]

Im not sure that is correct. One of the Prophet Mohammed's most well known companions was a Persian convert, Salman Al-Farsi. Also the Arabs did not just migrate and settle outside of Arabia but successfully absorbed the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, the Levant, Egypt and the Maghreb into not only the Muslim but the Arab fold too. The idea of forced-conversion may have been a taboo during the time of the Prophet Mohammed, but as seen in later Islamic history it became acceptable and even the norm in some parts of the World.

The first to make the call to prayer was an Ethiopian servant/slave as well.

I'm pointing out that Mohammed as a commander never seemed to have looked further than uniting Arabia. His energies were entirely dedicated to bringing every last Arab tribe under his rule -- and seem to have been limited to just that. Convert to Islam and acknowledge Mohammed's leadership, by force of arms if necessary. I realize there are people's today who are termed "Christian Arab", but these are people who were Aramaic, Syriac, Coptic, or so on who were later assimilated into Arab culture.

When the Army of Islam first conquered territories outside of Arabia (e.g. Palestine, Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Persia), the historical record seems to show that the Arabs were very concerned over large scale conversions by non-Arabs to Islam, muwalis as they were called. Conversion seems to have not been encouraged. In the territories they conquered, the Arabs established separate, adjacent cities next to large population centers and did not settle alongside the newly conquered peoples. Cairo is one of those cities to have been established in the early period. Non-Arab converts to Islam were also just above the bottom of the social strata.

My interpretation of the historical record -- I'm well-read on the subject but certainly not an expert -- is that the Muslim religion in the beginning was intended for the Arab tribes and Mohammed's aim was only to bring these tribes under his sole rule -- everything that happened afterward was incidental.

[Ahriman]

True, in a fair sence with Christainity speading from Israel to all over Europe, North America, and South America.

[GraniteForge]

tankie, the stuff you've posted isn't actual quattrains from Nostradamus, they're interpretations of them. I put no stock in Nostradamus or prophecy myself. I can sit down and write a book myself with vague predictions and most of them could be interpreted by somebody in the future to have come true. :)

Here you go:
Straight from a fresh vision, some definitive, undisputed signs of the Coming Endtime. I make these revelations available to the WAB community that they might gird themselves. All I ask in return is a small, free-will offering of silver or gold bullion, that I may continue to bring you this breaking news from the future:

"A great man will fall"

"A major city will be gripped by fear"

"The trust of the people will be abused"

"A new contagion will appear"

"Entertainers will die by their threes"

and a special New Year's bonus revelation:

"A great uncertainty will manifest itself among the people"

[GraniteForge]

Yes I know that this always happens, esspecially if you fight an asymetrical war, but that doesn't make it right!

I will be very interested as to how you personally , can find the answers to avoid it then.

And yes, it isnt right !

Strictly speaking, civilians deaths can be chalked up to indifference or laziness, more than limitations of technology. If you go after the bad guys with, say, hatchets, you don't have to worry about taking out a school next door.

We (shias) are waiting for the Imam to come out from seclusion.

As I recall, most Shia are waiting for the twelfth Iman to come out of occultation, but some follow, instead an earlier Iman, perhaps the seventh? Are you a Twelver?

...
Conversion seems to have not been encouraged. In the territories they conquered, the Arabs established separate, adjacent cities next to large population centers and did not settle alongside the newly conquered peoples. Cairo is one of those cities to have been established in the early period. Non-Arab converts to Islam were also just above the bottom of the social strata.

My interpretation of the historical record -- I'm well-read on the subject but certainly not an expert -- is that the Muslim religion in the beginning was intended for the Arab tribes and Mohammed's aim was only to bring these tribes under his sole rule -- everything that happened afterward was incidental.

Of course, Islam has always had a strong element of allowance for adherents of other religions, who nevertheless worship the same god. In lands conquered by the Muslims, those other Ahl al kitab were expected to live by their own laws, beside -- but not integrated with or among -- Muslims. Remember that at this period of time, segregation by community was the norm. Individuality of dress or expression was disallowed. In most Western and Middle Eastern countries (and possibly also in the East, I just don't know), for example, people wore clothing that readily identified them as to social class, caste, profession, religion, etc.

[Ironduke]

Of course, Islam has always had a strong element of allowance for adherents of other religions, who nevertheless worship the same god. In lands conquered by the Muslims, those other Ahl al kitab were expected to live by their own laws, beside -- but not integrated with or among -- Muslims. Remember that at this period of time, segregation by community was the norm. Individuality of dress or expression was disallowed. In most Western and Middle Eastern countries (and possibly also in the East, I just don't know), for example, people wore clothing that readily identified them as to social class, caste, profession, religion, etc.

After the initial Arab conquests, there were restrictions on what the non-Muslims in newly conquered regions could dress. I'm not sure however if these were grounded in Koranic law or not, or how long they persisted. I know that in the East (e.g. China) there were certain restrictions on hairstyles and am only vaguely aware of restrictions on dress.