Iran claims Bahrain!

Nancy Wood6 said:... seriously, and when you factor in that there isn't so-called democracy there—and Americans aren't even trying to set it up—plus the fact that the rulers come from a minority religious group, isn't it pretty obvious... I mean, why are Marco Andretti and his crowd worrying about these "alleged" Iranian claims🤣

Looks like our fine forum users are acting as protectors of the weak—specifically the Sunnis in Bahrain—yet if you look back, they were the exact same people defending the oppressed Shiite majority in Iraq. Hmm, what does that tell us? Tells me the media tells them exactly who and when to defend, so they can play the part of being all polite, smart... and tough 😂

I actually had a chance to debate the same group about Saudi Arabia, where the Shiites are a minority living right around the Gulf, and man, you should have seen those same users (the ones protecting the autocratic Sunni ruling house in Bahrain) absolutely losing their minds to defend those poor Shiites, just to prove how evil Saudi Sunni Wahhabism is 😁

Poor guys don't realize that even Qatar is Wahhabist, and besides, its ruling house is to America what a pair of underwear is to a butt 🙂

They don't get that it doesn't matter who anyone is there—they're all just trash, like these local feudal-despotic ruling houses that try to grab a democratic reputation through some quasi-democratic institutions—you know, make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and stuff—but they have zero connection to the reality lived by the people. Didn't these forum users curse the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain once because they're out here using gold-plated toilets? And yet, look at us now—suddenly caring about Bahrain is a top priority.

By the way, why not just establish actual democracy in your precious Bahrain, instead of having the ruling house remain purely symbolic? Like the royal houses in Europe, for example? Why not advocate for actual majority rule? Maybe even set up a parliament similar to Lebanon's, where both Sunnis and Shiites get 50% of the seats so nobody gets outvoted? Why not push for that in Bahrain? But noooo, what matters is that you got a chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment in an unofficial chat that "allegedly" said what it allegedly said. If what he said is true, then let's give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they actually side with ☕.

Before posting these kinds of threads and comments, a lot of people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it'll be easier 🤣

Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

Angela Lee said:Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

So, here’s the deal with how things work in Bahrain—basically, their whole legal setup is built on Sharia law, but they’ve also sprinkled in these legislative bits left behind by the British from back in the colonial days. It's a bit of a mix, really. Check out this excerpt that breaks down exactly how the system functions over there in Bahrain:

"So, when you look at how things actually work over in Bahrain—you know, the whole legal setup there—it’s kind of a wild mix—it's basically built on several different threads of Sharia law blended with certain components of British civil law. It's a pretty unique combo, really.So, looking back at how things were set up—it was mostly shaped by advisors back in the 1920s when the British were running the show under that "protectorate" deal—well before full independence finally kicked in back in 1971. According to the Bahrain Constitution, the judiciary is supposed to be its own thing—an independent and separate branch of the administration—which is pretty standard, really. headed by the Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs...who gets picked by the Prime Minister. At the end of the day, the Emir holds all the cards when it comes to the legal system and has the final say with the right of pardon.

Look, let's be real here—Bahrain is just as much of an Islamist state as Iran is. The only difference is that over in Iran, you actually have democracy, real elections, actual political factions, and legitimate parties that lead to real power. You know, the kind of stuff that actually matters? In Bahrain, you’ve got this hereditary absolute monarchy situation going on where the King calls all the shots, and then he goes ahead and appoints his own close relative as Prime Minister! Talk about keeping it in the family, right? Political parties are basically banned there, and they didn't even allow basic political associations until way back in 2005. Man, I could go on forever about the "magnificent" democracy in Bahrain—not that I really feel like doing the heavy lifting today, though—but honestly, this should be crystal clear to anyone with half a brain!

Angela Lee said:Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

Honestly, I think the Iranians are totally spot on when it comes to filtering their candidates—I mean, this kind of thing happens everywhere in the world, whether it’s done directly through things like lustration or just more indirectly via background checks and then some media smear campaigns. They definitely learned their lesson from back in the 50s when the CIA stepped in and toppled their democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, specifically because the system was way too liberalized and left itself wide open to being manipulated. In Iran, this whole filtering process actually follows the constitution—which, by the way, was backed and voted for in a democratic referendum—something you just never see happening in Bahrain. See, in Bahrain, you're dealing with an absolute monarchy, so it's a completely different ballgame.

Honestly, if you look at the Iranian parliament, it’s actually a pretty solid example of democracy in action—with all its moving parts and everything. A huge chunk of the representatives are women, and they’ve even carved out specific seats for minority groups—like two spots for Armenians, one for the Assyrian-Chaldean community, one for Zoroastrians, and one for the Jewish community. Plus, they have these local assemblies for provinces and cities, too. And get this—most of those local reps are women, and a good number of them are actually serving as mayors!!!

Angela Lee said:Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

Look, Bahrain basically maintains a pretty decent standard of living—it’s just a clever way for the usurping King, who represents a tiny local minority backed from abroad to hold onto his throne, to create this whole illusion of democracy. It’s simple math, really—just give people enough material comforts and they’ll generally leave you alone to run the show. But honestly, I have to ask—why isn't the royal house Shiite? The Shiite population is the majority there. Why aren't they the ones holding the keys to the government in Bahrain? I guess they must be masochists if they're actually okay with being ruled by a minority.

Angela Lee said:Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

I’m not gonna go there because it’s just plain wrong. Official Tehran has made it clear multiple times—like, repeatedly—that they support and respect Bahrain's independence and sovereignty, and they aren't budging on that point. Honestly, this whole thing about some random individual "allegedly" saying something... it’s totally on par with those random statements you hear from some backbenchers in places like Ohio or Florida making weird comments about territorial claims against another state. I mean, do we start talking about those guys owning the territory? Of course not! We don't do that. Now, if his—this specific guy from Iran—words were actually translated correctly, then sure, he basically said the people of Bahrain should be asked what they would choose if there weren't any doubts about siding with Iran. Look, saying stuff like that isn't right, but let's be real—hotheads exist everywhere. Besides, there really isn't any doubt at all about where the Bahrainis would actually stand on this one. 👍

Angela Lee said:Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

I've got this one covered—honestly, it’s pretty obvious. The Shiite majority in Bahrain would way rather align themselves with an Islamist, democratic Iran than keep sucking up to an absolutist, feudal monarch who barely represents the actual citizens of that country—not to mention he's basically just a puppet for foreign interests. Look, I'll say it straight: you anti-Iran folks on this forum just don't get it. When you claim you're "defending Bahrain" from supposed "claims from Iran," what you're actually doing is defending a Sharia-based absolute monarchy where the rule of thumb is basically that the King *is* the country!

Look, comparing a full-blown national referendum in Bahrain—where they're actually deciding their future for the whole population—to those weird partial referendums you're talking about, like the ones for specific regions or minority groups, just doesn't fly. It’s totally different! You're basically trying to compare farming to a freaking symphony concert here. It's apples and oranges, really.

Angela Lee said:Unlike Iran and similar Islamist states, Bahrain is actually miles ahead when it comes to democracy, popular will, and political freedoms. Even the UN acknowledges this, though of course, these opportunists won't use the UN as a reliable reference in this case, because it paints a positive picture of a country that those pro-Iranian types don't particularly like and a land that official Tehran tries to claim. But, naturally, these same opportunists will jump to use the UN as a credible reference when it comes to, say, an attack on Iraq.

They don't seem to grasp that it doesn't matter who or what is there, given that they are essentially nothing more than local feudal-despotic ruling houses. They try to use quasi-democratic institutions—make-believe parliaments, pseudo-governments, and things like that—to chase a democratic reputation, but they have absolutely nothing to show for it regarding the reality felt by the people. And weren't our forum friends once cursing out the sheiks and emirs of Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain because they use gold seashells as toilets? Yet, look at us now; suddenly, caring for Bahrain is a top priority.

In contrast to Iran, which suppresses the opposition in every possible way, where the high religious clergy decides who can run in presidential elections and determines how many candidates from opposition parties are allowed to run for the quasi-parliament of Iran. That is the kind of "democracy" Nancy Wood6 is rambling about, and with such an unbelievable level of arrogance, too—though I suspect she doesn't even believe her own nonsense.

By the way, why hasn't a real democracy been established in that beloved Bahrain of yours? Why shouldn't the ruling house become merely symbolic, much like the royal houses in Europe?

According to official UN data, Bahrain ranks among the top three in the Middle East regarding both political and human freedoms, which is a far cry from that Iranian "gem" of a democracy you keep shoving down our throats.

But, oh noooo, it's vital that you get the chance to demonize Iran based on some official's comment made during an unofficial chat, which was "allegedly" said.

Well, it’s good, we are making progress. Pretty soon you’ll probably move past all that lazy rhetoric from Tehran and actually write about how official Tehran truly belongs to Bahrain
.

If what they said is actually true, then I suppose we should just give the Bahrainis a referendum and see who they decide to side with ☕.

Do you happen to have any actual intel suggesting that Bahrainis want to align themselves with the official Islamist Tehran? If you do, please feel free to share that with the rest of us. Your reasoning is quite remarkable—truly extraordinary. Since we are playing along with your specific logic, I guess we could also hold a referendum for people in California and ask if they want to join Italy. Or maybe we could set up a referendum for Americans living abroad and ask if they want to join some other country. It’s a curious way of thinking, really; I sometimes wonder how an adult can arrive at such a conclusion
.

Before bringing up these topics and posting, many people ought to ask themselves: am I actually brainwashed 😁? Just admit it to yourselves, it will make things easier 🤣.

Actually, before you post anything else, you might want to consider whether you aren't the one who has been brainwashed by the political propaganda coming out of official Islamist Tehran. You should probably just admit it to yourself—though I suspect it won't be easy, because at that point, you'd likely need medication
.

Honestly, there’s just no way you're getting brainwashed by official Tehran propaganda—it’s actually impossible. I mean, they don't even have the media reach to get past their own borders, let alone the massive bankrolls needed to run global PR campaigns like Al Jazeera does. Personally, I try to look at things in the Middle East with a clear head—just calling it like I see it, plain and simple. If a majority is being suppressed by a minority somewhere, like what’s happening in Bahrain, I’m going to say it. Period. My takes are always consistent, backed by logic, and rooted in actual facts. Your views? Well, they seem more like a cocktail of brainwashing, bias, fanboyism, and a bit of Islamophobia—which, let's be real, you conveniently ignore whenever we talk about Bahrain or Saudi Arabia, but suddenly you're all over it when it comes to Iran because you've been told they're the ultimate villain and the "Satanic" stronghold. But hey, don't let that get to you. You're young—there's still hope for you yet!

Let's run it back—so, basically, Bahrain has a 70% Shiite population that doesn't actually hold any real power. Instead, you’ve got this absolute monarchy run by a Sunni royal house that was originally set up by the British. If you want to see just how much the Shiite community actually "enjoys" living there, you can check out this link from the US government. It pretty much confirms—as if anyone would doubt it—that the Kingdom of Bahrain isn't exactly running an anti-Islamist regime:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2007/90208.htm

Nancy Wood6 said:So, here’s the deal with how things work in Bahrain—basically, their whole legal setup is built on Sharia law, but they’ve also sprinkled in these legislative bits left behind by the British from back in the colonial days. It's a bit of a mix, really. Check out this excerpt that breaks down exactly how the system functions over there in Bahrain:

"So, when you look at how things actually work over in Bahrain—you know, the whole legal setup there—it’s kind of a wild mix—it's basically built on several different threads of Sharia law blended with certain components of British civil law. It's a pretty unique combo, really.So, looking back at how things were set up—it was mostly shaped by advisors back in the 1920s when the British were running the show under that "protectorate" deal—well before full independence finally kicked in back in 1971. According to the Bahrain Constitution, the judiciary is supposed to be its own thing—an independent and separate branch of the administration—which is pretty standard, really. headed by the Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs...who gets picked by the Prime Minister. At the end of the day, the Emir holds all the cards when it comes to the legal system and has the final say with the right of pardon.

Look, let's be real here—Bahrain is just as much of an Islamist state as Iran is. The only difference is that over in Iran, you actually have democracy, real elections, actual political factions, and legitimate parties that lead to real power. You know, the kind of stuff that actually matters? In Bahrain, you’ve got this hereditary absolute monarchy situation going on where the King calls all the shots, and then he goes ahead and appoints his own close relative as Prime Minister! Talk about keeping it in the family, right? Political parties are basically banned there, and they didn't even allow basic political associations until way back in 2005. Man, I could go on forever about the "magnificent" democracy in Bahrain—not that I really feel like doing the heavy lifting today, though—but honestly, this should be crystal clear to anyone with half a brain!

Honestly, I think the Iranians are totally spot on when it comes to filtering their candidates—I mean, this kind of thing happens everywhere in the world, whether it’s done directly through things like lustration or just more indirectly via background checks and then some media smear campaigns. They definitely learned their lesson from back in the 50s when the CIA stepped in and toppled their democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mosaddegh, specifically because the system was way too liberalized and left itself wide open to being manipulated. In Iran, this whole filtering process actually follows the constitution—which, by the way, was backed and voted for in a democratic referendum—something you just never see happening in Bahrain. See, in Bahrain, you're dealing with an absolute monarchy, so it's a completely different ballgame.

Honestly, if you look at the Iranian parliament, it’s actually a pretty solid example of democracy in action—with all its moving parts and everything. A huge chunk of the representatives are women, and they’ve even carved out specific seats for minority groups—like two spots for Armenians, one for the Assyrian-Chaldean community, one for Zoroastrians, and one for the Jewish community. Plus, they have these local assemblies for provinces and cities, too. And get this—most of those local reps are women, and a good number of them are actually serving as mayors!!!

Look, Bahrain basically maintains a pretty decent standard of living—it’s just a clever way for the usurping King, who represents a tiny local minority backed from abroad to hold onto his throne, to create this whole illusion of democracy. It’s simple math, really—just give people enough material comforts and they’ll generally leave you alone to run the show. But honestly, I have to ask—why isn't the royal house Shiite? The Shiite population is the majority there. Why aren't they the ones holding the keys to the government in Bahrain? I guess they must be masochists if they're actually okay with being ruled by a minority.

I’m not gonna go there because it’s just plain wrong. Official Tehran has made it clear multiple times—like, repeatedly—that they support and respect Bahrain's independence and sovereignty, and they aren't budging on that point. Honestly, this whole thing about some random individual "allegedly" saying something... it’s totally on par with those random statements you hear from some backbenchers in places like Ohio or Florida making weird comments about territorial claims against another state. I mean, do we start talking about those guys owning the territory? Of course not! We don't do that. Now, if his—this specific guy from Iran—words were actually translated correctly, then sure, he basically said the people of Bahrain should be asked what they would choose if there weren't any doubts about siding with Iran. Look, saying stuff like that isn't right, but let's be real—hotheads exist everywhere. Besides, there really isn't any doubt at all about where the Bahrainis would actually stand on this one. 👍

I've got this one covered—honestly, it’s pretty obvious. The Shiite majority in Bahrain would way rather align themselves with an Islamist, democratic Iran than keep sucking up to an absolutist, feudal monarch who barely represents the actual citizens of that country—not to mention he's basically just a puppet for foreign interests. Look, I'll say it straight: you anti-Iran folks on this forum just don't get it. When you claim you're "defending Bahrain" from supposed "claims from Iran," what you're actually doing is defending a Sharia-based absolute monarchy where the rule of thumb is basically that the King *is* the country!

Look, comparing a full-blown national referendum in Bahrain—where they're actually deciding their future for the whole population—to those weird partial referendums you're talking about, like the ones for specific regions or minority groups, just doesn't fly. It’s totally different! You're basically trying to compare farming to a freaking symphony concert here. It's apples and oranges, really.

Honestly, there’s just no way you're getting brainwashed by official Tehran propaganda—it’s actually impossible. I mean, they don't even have the media reach to get past their own borders, let alone the massive bankrolls needed to run global PR campaigns like Al Jazeera does. Personally, I try to look at things in the Middle East with a clear head—just calling it like I see it, plain and simple. If a majority is being suppressed by a minority somewhere, like what’s happening in Bahrain, I’m going to say it. Period. My takes are always consistent, backed by logic, and rooted in actual facts. Your views? Well, they seem more like a cocktail of brainwashing, bias, fanboyism, and a bit of Islamophobia—which, let's be real, you conveniently ignore whenever we talk about Bahrain or Saudi Arabia, but suddenly you're all over it when it comes to Iran because you've been told they're the ultimate villain and the "Satanic" stronghold. But hey, don't let that get to you. You're young—there's still hope for you yet!

Let's run it back—so, basically, Bahrain has a 70% Shiite population that doesn't actually hold any real power. Instead, you’ve got this absolute monarchy run by a Sunni royal house that was originally set up by the British. If you want to see just how much the Shiite community actually "enjoys" living there, you can check out this link from the US government. It pretty much confirms—as if anyone would doubt it—that the Kingdom of Bahrain isn't exactly running an anti-Islamist regime:

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2007/90208.htm

I suppose if you look at how the Shiite populations behave in places where they actually hold power—like in Iran or certain parts of Iraq—those old colonial masters certainly seemed to know what they were doing. I've visited Bahrain before, and it felt like such a prosperous, pleasant place that I'd probably love to go back. As for Iran, I don't think I'll ever set foot there.

I honestly can't help but express how much it bothers me that slybison8 refuses to even set foot in Iran. I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way about it.
No worries though, Bahrain is always here to embrace its friends from America.

The smart move for the people of Bahrain is to align with Iran—politically speaking, not religious stuff—since Iran is the real heavyweight in the neighborhood. The West is basically circling the drain here. I mean, China already has weaponry that leaves the US in the dust, and just imagine who China is selling that gear to. 🤷

Morgan Cook6 said:The smart move for the people of Bahrain is to align with Iran—politically speaking, not religious stuff—since Iran is the real heavyweight in the neighborhood. The West is basically circling the drain here. I mean, China already has weaponry that leaves the US in the dust, and just imagine who China is selling that gear to. 🤷

Comparing Bahrain to Iran Norway is wild! They don't have much to offer by siding with them. It's just like how Kuwait is way more advanced than Iraq.

Maria Booth said:Comparing Bahrain to Iran Norway is wild! They don't have much to offer by siding with them. It's just like how Kuwait is way more advanced than Iraq.

Look, those kinds of conversations belong in a different era—you know, back when the majority in Bahrain actually had a say in things. But up until now, it’s just been this royal family running the show, and they don't even represent a third of the population, let alone ruling everything with an absolute grip.

All this talk about Bahrain being "Norway to Iran" is honestly just nonsense—kind of like saying Kuwait is a hundred times more advanced than Iraq. Calling Bahrain "Norway" to Iran doesn't make sense because Iran is a legitimate, fully realized state with all the actual components of a nation, plus they manage to run their own independent policy despite those brutal sanctions. Meanwhile, if you look at it objectively, Bahrain is pretty much just a successful little satellite for the major power centers in that part of the world.

Before the first Gulf War, Iraq was arguably one of the most logical, prosperous, and truly complete states out there—whereas Kuwait has always been, and remains, a bit of a British creation (just like Bahrain, the UAE, Oman, and so on).

And hey, of course small, wealthy places are going to lean on their backers. I mean, look at Hong Kong or Macau—do they lack anything while being embraced by their homeland, China? Not at all! And it won't be any different for Taiwan. Honestly, it wouldn't be any different for Bahrain either. 👍

Nancy Wood6 said:Look, those kinds of conversations belong in a different era—you know, back when the majority in Bahrain actually had a say in things. But up until now, it’s just been this royal family running the show, and they don't even represent a third of the population, let alone ruling everything with an absolute grip.

All this talk about Bahrain being "Norway to Iran" is honestly just nonsense—kind of like saying Kuwait is a hundred times more advanced than Iraq. Calling Bahrain "Norway" to Iran doesn't make sense because Iran is a legitimate, fully realized state with all the actual components of a nation, plus they manage to run their own independent policy despite those brutal sanctions. Meanwhile, if you look at it objectively, Bahrain is pretty much just a successful little satellite for the major power centers in that part of the world.

Before the first Gulf War, Iraq was arguably one of the most logical, prosperous, and truly complete states out there—whereas Kuwait has always been, and remains, a bit of a British creation (just like Bahrain, the UAE, Oman, and so on).

And hey, of course small, wealthy places are going to lean on their backers. I mean, look at Hong Kong or Macau—do they lack anything while being embraced by their homeland, China? Not at all! And it won't be any different for Taiwan. Honestly, it wouldn't be any different for Bahrain either. 👍

Neither would Herzegovina!

Dennis Baker34 said:Neither would Herzegovina!

Nice...👍

slybison8 said:I suppose if you look at how the Shiite populations behave in places where they actually hold power—like in Iran or certain parts of Iraq—those old colonial masters certainly seemed to know what they were doing. I've visited Bahrain before, and it felt like such a prosperous, pleasant place that I'd probably love to go back. As for Iran, I don't think I'll ever set foot there.

What's the reason behind this decision of yours?

Honestly, it’s a little disappointing to hear a take like that coming from someone like you, but hey, whatever.

Regarding this topic, Nancy Wood6 already covered it all. If anyone actually bothered to read the article, they’d see it’s nothing but "allegedly" this and "an unnamed official said" that. Just more nonsense. Even the Bahraini Minister of Labor stepped up to say the statement is completely false, claiming he has no idea who would even say something like that. Honestly, I don't know how anyone can buy into such garbage. What's the point? Why spend your time on some forum just to trash a country? Look, I don't exactly have high opinions of North Korea either, but I'm not going to waste my free time hunting down articles about them online just to sit around and talk about them on a forum. That's just twisted.😲

rustywalker42 said:What's the reason behind this decision of yours?

Honestly, it’s a little disappointing to hear a take like that coming from someone like you, but hey, whatever.

Regarding this topic, Nancy Wood6 already covered it all. If anyone actually bothered to read the article, they’d see it’s nothing but "allegedly" this and "an unnamed official said" that. Just more nonsense. Even the Bahraini Minister of Labor stepped up to say the statement is completely false, claiming he has no idea who would even say something like that. Honestly, I don't know how anyone can buy into such garbage. What's the point? Why spend your time on some forum just to trash a country? Look, I don't exactly have high opinions of North Korea either, but I'm not going to waste my free time hunting down articles about them online just to sit around and talk about them on a forum. That's just twisted.😲

It is essentially the same reason why traveling to Saudi Arabia doesn't even cross my mind. I simply cannot bring myself to visit countries that actively promote intolerance at a state level, disregard fundamental human rights, and refuse to recognize individual free will as anything of importance. Both nations have laws that I personally find impossible to abide by, so I choose not to travel there. I actually made this quite clear to my employers during my initial job interview; they were understanding of my position, and that was that. I guess slybison8 won't be visiting Iran or Saudi Arabia—at least not as long as the current regimes remain in power.

slybison8 said:It is essentially the same reason why traveling to Saudi Arabia doesn't even cross my mind. I simply cannot bring myself to visit countries that actively promote intolerance at a state level, disregard fundamental human rights, and refuse to recognize individual free will as anything of importance. Both nations have laws that I personally find impossible to abide by, so I choose not to travel there. I actually made this quite clear to my employers during my initial job interview; they were understanding of my position, and that was that. I guess slybison8 won't be visiting Iran or Saudi Arabia—at least not as long as the current regimes remain in power.

Honestly, it surprises me. For someone who's actually been to Libya, making such a hardline stance against another country based purely on news reports seems a bit much. You'd think an adult with that kind of travel experience wouldn't hold onto such heavy prejudices. I mean, what specific brand of intolerance is Iran pushing, or what horrific laws do they have that Libya somehow managed to avoid?

rustywalker42 said:Honestly, it surprises me. For someone who's actually been to Libya, making such a hardline stance against another country based purely on news reports seems a bit much. You'd think an adult with that kind of travel experience wouldn't hold onto such heavy prejudices. I mean, what specific brand of intolerance is Iran pushing, or what horrific laws do they have that Libya somehow managed to avoid?

I suppose common sense still prevails in Libya. Laws exist, though they are often ignored, and you can generally reach an understanding with people there. Furthermore, Libya doesn't involve killing underage homosexuals, foreign women aren't forced to wrap their hair in ridiculous rags, and foreigners aren't expected to abandon their customs or way of life—quite the opposite, actually.

I feel like you might be slightly underestimating me when you imply my decision to avoid Iran is just because of "media" coverage. My choice comes from a deep-seated conviction that it is a criminal, intolerable, and religiously exclusive regime, whose eventual downfall, when it inevitably occurs, I will celebrate loudly.

slybison8 said:I suppose common sense still prevails in Libya. Laws exist, though they are often ignored, and you can generally reach an understanding with people there. Furthermore, Libya doesn't involve killing underage homosexuals, foreign women aren't forced to wrap their hair in ridiculous rags, and foreigners aren't expected to abandon their customs or way of life—quite the opposite, actually.

I feel like you might be slightly underestimating me when you imply my decision to avoid Iran is just because of "media" coverage. My choice comes from a deep-seated conviction that it is a criminal, intolerable, and religiously exclusive regime, whose eventual downfall, when it inevitably occurs, I will celebrate loudly.

So what? He’s just saying there are laws in Iran that people actually follow. I don't see the "wall" being the issue here. You travel to a different country—you respect their culture. Period. Why hasn't anyone ever written, "Why on earth would I bow at a 45-degree angle and make weird little head gestures while I'm in Japan?"
Believe it or not, you can actually cut a deal with Iranians. Or what, you think they’re all just "hardline thugs looking to hack hands off?"

So, you’re actually underestimating me if you think I’m skipping a trip to Iran just because of some "media reports." Give me some credit. I’m staying away because I truly believe this regime is criminal, insufferable, and religiously exclusionary. When they finally collapse—and they will—I’ll be there to celebrate loudly.

You’re bringing it on, whether you realize it or not. You haven't even set foot in Iran, yet you've already decided the place is garbage. You're wrong. Really, really wrong.

rustywalker42 said:So what? He’s just saying there are laws in Iran that people actually follow. I don't see the "wall" being the issue here. You travel to a different country—you respect their culture. Period. Why hasn't anyone ever written, "Why on earth would I bow at a 45-degree angle and make weird little head gestures while I'm in Japan?"
Believe it or not, you can actually cut a deal with Iranians. Or what, you think they’re all just "hardline thugs looking to hack hands off?"

So, you’re actually underestimating me if you think I’m skipping a trip to Iran just because of some "media reports." Give me some credit. I’m staying away because I truly believe this regime is criminal, insufferable, and religiously exclusionary. When they finally collapse—and they will—I’ll be there to celebrate loudly.

You’re bringing it on, whether you realize it or not. You haven't even set foot in Iran, yet you've already decided the place is garbage. You're wrong. Really, really wrong.

But then again, I haven't gone there, and it's precisely because I find that culture unacceptable that I have no intention of visiting. For me, the veil is a genuine problem because I don't see any reason why a foreigner on a temporary visit should abandon their own values to adopt local customs. If we in America allow Muslim women to walk down the street covered—and it's not even just that we permit it, but that we actually have communities where this is the norm—then they should certainly allow our women to walk around uncovered in their own lands. Their culture and way of life don't really affect me, mostly because I hold my own culture in higher regard and I don't see any reason to engage in any kind of moral relativism. Since I suppose I am the type of person who doesn't always hold back from making negative comments when abroad, I imagine I would get into significant trouble in those two countries (meaning not just Iran, but also Saudi Arabia), so I don't think it would be particularly wise for me to travel there while these current regimes and their laws are in power.

slybison8 said:But then again, I haven't gone there, and it's precisely because I find that culture unacceptable that I have no intention of visiting. For me, the veil is a genuine problem because I don't see any reason why a foreigner on a temporary visit should abandon their own values to adopt local customs. If we in America allow Muslim women to walk down the street covered—and it's not even just that we permit it, but that we actually have communities where this is the norm—then they should certainly allow our women to walk around uncovered in their own lands. Their culture and way of life don't really affect me, mostly because I hold my own culture in higher regard and I don't see any reason to engage in any kind of moral relativism. Since I suppose I am the type of person who doesn't always hold back from making negative comments when abroad, I imagine I would get into significant trouble in those two countries (meaning not just Iran, but also Saudi Arabia), so I don't think it would be particularly wise for me to travel there while these current regimes and their laws are in power.

You're looking at this way too superficially. To them, it's seen as a total lack of respect. Just like how you'd bow when greeting someone in Japan instead of just standing there because standing there would be rude, it's the same deal with the veil.

Their culture and lifestyle don't concern me. I have my own, which I believe is better than theirs, and I see zero reason to engage in any kind of moral relativism regarding it.

Trust me, when it comes to social etiquette, Americans come off as total hillbillies to Iranians. It's that classic American egocentrism—thinking we're such a sophisticated people while everyone else is just some Eastern barbarian or shepherd.
Go spend a week vacationing on the coast of Florida before you start lecturing me about "our" culture.

Since I'm the type of person who doesn't hold back from criticizing foreign countries, I'm pretty sure I'd end up in massive trouble in those two places (meaning not just Iran, but Saudi Arabia too). For that reason alone, I don't think traveling there is smart while these current regimes and their laws are in power.

Actually, you're wrong about that. You won't face anything just for criticizing something. You think I haven't met people like that? Foreigners who criticized the government there?

Bottom line: you're full of baseless prejudices. I'll just leave it at that. It doesn't really fit your profile, but I guess unfortunately nobody is immune to that.

slybison8 said:I suppose common sense still prevails in Libya. Laws exist, though they are often ignored, and you can generally reach an understanding with people there. Furthermore, Libya doesn't involve killing underage homosexuals, foreign women aren't forced to wrap their hair in ridiculous rags, and foreigners aren't expected to abandon their customs or way of life—quite the opposite, actually.

I feel like you might be slightly underestimating me when you imply my decision to avoid Iran is just because of "media" coverage. My choice comes from a deep-seated conviction that it is a criminal, intolerable, and religiously exclusive regime, whose eventual downfall, when it inevitably occurs, I will celebrate loudly.

rustywalker42 brought this up, and honestly, I’m jumping on the bandwagon here—I've always seen you as someone with super balanced and objective takes, so seeing this absolute dump of bias... well, it's a little surprising, to say the least. It's almost like someone else has gotten their hands on your login info or something. 🤷.

Look, you keep throwing around this word "regime," but I’m telling you—everything in Iran actually plays out through democratic processes—from how they established their constitution right down to the way they elect their executive branch. The Iranian government is just a direct reflection of what its citizens want, so there's absolutely nothing criminal, unbearable, or exclusively oppressive about it.

Look, just look at the facts here—doesn't it blow your mind a little? In the Iranian parliament, they actually have seats specifically reserved ahead of time for representatives of the Jewish faith, one for Zoroastrians, one for Assyrian Chaldeans, and two for Armenians. Now, listen, Iran is an Islamic country—they don't try to hide that, and their laws are rooted in Sharia—but you’ve gotta realize that they adapt things quite a bit to fit current circumstances. Practicing Christianity, Zoroastrianism, Judaism... it's all totally allowed in Iran. They even have the right to make wine, consume alcohol, and the whole nine yards. They celebrate Christmas, Passover, and every single holiday that belongs to them without any issues whatsoever. It's pretty wild when you think about it!

Look, if you’re visiting Iran as a foreigner, the expectation is pretty straightforward—they just want you to dress a bit more conservatively. We’re talking skipping the short shorts, and for women, it's basically just using a small piece of fabric—which I’d honestly call more of a fashion accessory or a quick cover-up—to tuck away the hair and avoid anything too tight. It’s nothing crazy, really; it’s just how they roll. People will have to adjust to stuff like this in other places too, like certain parts of India and places like that. It isn't about being exclusive or forcing anyone into anything—it’s just their local dress code. I mean, think about it—you can't just show up to your job in the UK wearing whatever random outfit you felt like that morning, right? So, it's the same deal in Iran. There's a standard. It’s no biggie. They have their own way of living, and hey, that’s their right.

So, let's think about this for a second—isn't Anglicanism the official state religion in the UK? Well, yeah, obviously it is. And isn't that Lutheran style of Protestantism the official faith in places like Norway or Iceland? Of course it is. In Argentina, Roman Catholicism is the state religion, right? Naturally. Same goes for Greece with Orthodox Christianity—it’s the official deal there. Even in Thailand, Buddhism holds that official status. It just makes sense. When you look at states with a Muslim majority, they basically have Islam as the state religion by default—mostly because, at its core, Islam doesn't really go for that whole "separate church and state" vibe where you give the Emperor one thing and God another—it's just built to be a way of life that touches everything in society.

Honestly, I’m pretty bummed out because—and I’m sure you don't mean this—but you’re just throwing stones at Iran without any actual reason to back it up. There aren't really any objective grounds for that kind of talk, you know? Even the way you say you won't set foot there until the regime changes just screams bias—I mean, if you actually wanted to be objective, you’d go there yourself to see if what people are saying is even true! Personally, I’m heading to Iran in May just to experience the place firsthand, and rustywalker42 has been there before and already knows the deal. We’re both Americans, too, coming from families with deep, centuries-old Roman Catholic traditions. So, hey, let's not do that—it’s just not right. I genuinely love reading your stuff otherwise, though, because you really do have a fantastic way of writing. 😉

slybison8 said:I suppose common sense still prevails in Libya. Laws exist, though they are often ignored, and you can generally reach an understanding with people there. Furthermore, Libya doesn't involve killing underage homosexuals, foreign women aren't forced to wrap their hair in ridiculous rags, and foreigners aren't expected to abandon their customs or way of life—quite the opposite, actually.

I feel like you might be slightly underestimating me when you imply my decision to avoid Iran is just because of "media" coverage. My choice comes from a deep-seated conviction that it is a criminal, intolerable, and religiously exclusive regime, whose eventual downfall, when it inevitably occurs, I will celebrate loudly.

Hey slybison8, check out this interesting piece on Iran:

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The...81216-567.html

It’s not exactly some high-brow academic journal, but it offers a pretty cool insight from an everyday perspective—basically focusing on those exact little details you claim contradict the reality on the ground there.

Don't get me wrong, nobody is claiming Iran is some paradise, but we should probably look at it realistically and without bias. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm just trying to help everyone get a slightly more well-rounded view. 👍

Maria Booth said:Comparing Bahrain to Iran Norway is wild! They don't have much to offer by siding with them. It's just like how Kuwait is way more advanced than Iraq.

Please. When they bombed him for no reason 15 years ago... ☕Iraq was actually the most developed nation in that region—it just turns out some people don't like seeing certain countries thrive.🤷

blueotter70 said:Bahrain halts gas talks with Iran as row deepens

Bahrain-Iran row deepens

Every other day, Iran and its leadership start making claims over this tiny, wealthy kingdom—and honestly, the American media stays suspiciously quiet about these blatant threats. It’s pretty pathetic...

Since I keep an eye on international news, I can tell you this isn't new—Iranian officials basically claim Bahrain belongs to them a few times every year just to mess with their sovereignty. Even Kuwait stood up to these claims, mostly because they've dealt with enough territorial bullying from Iraq themselves. This whole thing feels like a rerun of the Kuwait-Iraq situation... it's a perfect example of what Iran would pull on everyone nearby if the USA wasn't standing by Bahrain as a fierce ally.

So, are the local "peacekeepers" going to show up now? Will they finally raise their voices against Iran’s hostile ambitions toward neighboring states, or will they just stay silent while Iran pushes its imperialist agenda? This is just one small glimpse into why there’ll never be peace in the Middle East if Iran actually gets an atomic bomb—their intentions toward their neighbors are crystal clear, and without American backing, Iran would likely be at war with smaller Arab states already. At least, that's what some of the top analysts I follow seem to agree on...

Arab states are actually the toughest opponents of Iran's nuclear ambitions, even though global media tends to focus almost entirely on Israel. Egypt and Jordan were quick to back Bahrain, voicing concerns about Iran's growing influence in Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria—not to mention the whole nuclear issue again. Why are they so worried? It’s simple: those Arab states see a massive threat to their own survival in a nuclear-armed Iran. It looks to me like we're heading toward a major showdown between Shia Iran and the Sunni Arab states...

Oh, you certainly can! You can say whatever you want, and in this case, it sounds like nothing but pathological hatred toward a free-thinking nation and its democratic, patriotic government.

If you want proof of how much the OP is fueled by this obsession with Iran—trying so hard to pass off total fiction as cold, hard facts—just look at the latest developments involving key players from both Iran and Bahrain. Not to mention all the other absolute nonsense thrown into the original post, but check out this solid article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090227...hraindiplomacy

Some people are just truly something else—I guess that’s just part of being human, huh? 😁