21–30 of 111 posts
That "Islamic Golden Age" is a complete misnomer. It hides the religious diversity of the geography. Many don't know that it took many centuries for the majority of the population of the Iranian plateau to convert to Islam. For a good part of what is referred to as "Islamic Golden Age" Islam was not the dominant religion. Similar story applies to India. Up until 17th century, India was ruled by "muslim" rulers. Shoul…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. Not to mention Farsi has some of the most beautiful proverbs.
Just a minor pet peeve but why not keep calling the language "Persian" in English? Just how it doesn't feel entirely right to suddenly start calling Spanish "Español" in English, or Swedish as "Svenska" and so on
1. Would you like to visit Persia?
2. Would you like to visit Iran?
Maybe a bit off topic but it's always strange when someone says "Islamic Golden Age" when talking about Iran. Nothing against a specific religion. It's like saying Newton's work came during Christian Golden Age in Europe. The religion had nothing to do with it. In fact, there is a book [1] (in Persian) title "Two Centuries of Silence" that talks about the significant blow to Iran's culture, literature and science aft…
> Persepolis Fortification Tablets, dated back to 492–457 BC in the reign of Darius the Great, are characteristic examples of the Achaemenid records, most of which have not been translated (Root, 1997). Of the ~30,000 clay tablets (10,000 intact pieces, 10,000 more or less complete ones, and probably more than 10,000 fragments), 2100 texts were transcribed, interpreted, and published (Jones and Stolper, 2008) This is…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no installation. Please stop repeating IRI's propaganda line. Iranian society was divided between nationalists, fundamentalists, and communists. The "Ayatollah's" in fact started the mess by assassinating the previous prime minister (who is never discussed) who was also "democratically elected". This was not the first Islamist terror in Iran. Again this is before the counter-coup of '53. (Yes, the first cou…
> This monarch was sworn in as king in the Majlis way before ’53. Kindly explain how he was “installed” in ’53 by the CIA. Basically, the Shah assumed direct rule in an autocoup (after a first failed autcoup) in an effort he was threatened with being deposted by the CIA into participating in, with US- and UK- and their Iranian pawns both orchestrating pro-Mossadegh anti-Shah demonstrations and violence, then pro-Comm…
Former enemies:
https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/n-america/us/q&a/ref/2.html
"Cousins":
https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/176895/SN06808.pdf
(it's a question of power asymmetries. Really did the poor Shah have any choice? Related thoughts: Is the Japanese PM "Installed" by US? Is the UK PM a "puppet" of US?)
And to be quite frank, as an Iranian born, the assertion that some American (Kermit Roosevelt) gets off the plane with a briefcase full of dollars and overnight "installs" the constitutional king of Iran is bascially a hidden insult to Iranians. What sort of a entirely pushover nation are they, these Iranians? It's a bad propaganda joke.
Secondly, the fact remains that the roughly 14 years (60s-early70s) that Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, yes as an autocract oversteppingn the bounds of the constitution, ran the place, Iran experienced its singularly most spectacular years in the 20th century. And the social progress, specially women's rights, are all due to the efforts of that man and his "regime".
US has nothing to apologize to Iran about viz a vis the Shah other than backstabbing a loyal ally in a time of crisis, and actively helping to usher in an entirely alien system, the "Islamic Republic of Iran"*, to power.
US chose Islamic Fundamentalism as a stretegic tool to further its geopolitical goals, and unleashed the hords on the world. US does need to come clean about that.
* (3 lies in one name, a world record!): It is not a republic. It is not Islam. And it certainly is not Iranian.
Maybe a bit off topic but it's always strange when someone says "Islamic Golden Age" when talking about Iran. Nothing against a specific religion. It's like saying Newton's work came during Christian Golden Age in Europe. The religion had nothing to do with it. In fact, there is a book [1] (in Persian) title "Two Centuries of Silence" that talks about the significant blow to Iran's culture, literature and science aft…
I think Persians of that era would not make a distinction between religious and governmental rule.
Maybe a bit off topic but it's always strange when someone says "Islamic Golden Age" when talking about Iran. Nothing against a specific religion. It's like saying Newton's work came during Christian Golden Age in Europe. The religion had nothing to do with it. In fact, there is a book [1] (in Persian) title "Two Centuries of Silence" that talks about the significant blow to Iran's culture, literature and science aft…
So if you're feeling like it's taking value away from Persian history, instead, try to see it from the perspective that Persians are a large part of the reason why the Golden Age is even a thing :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no installation. Please stop repeating IRI's propaganda line. Iranian society was divided between nationalists, fundamentalists, and communists. The "Ayatollah's" in fact started the mess by assassinating the previous prime minister (who is never discussed) who was also "democratically elected". This was not the first Islamist terror in Iran. Again this is before the counter-coup of '53. (Yes, the first cou…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état Let's call it instigation.
Weird that anyone is still in denial after that
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. Not to mention Farsi has some of the most beautiful proverbs.
Just a minor pet peeve but why not keep calling the language "Persian" in English? Just how it doesn't feel entirely right to suddenly start calling Spanish "Español" in English, or Swedish as "Svenska" and so on
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état Let's call it instigation.
The CIA literally admitted to master-minding and funding the coup Weird that anyone is still in denial after that