Unkotare
Diamond Member
- Aug 16, 2011
- 137,536
- 28,798
- 2,180
You are free to be a douchebag just for the sake of being a douchebag, and you are apparently enjoying the hell out of it.
The Stolen Land Of Iran
- Thread starter MJB12741
- Start date
You are free to be a douchebag just for the sake of being a douchebag, and you are apparently enjoying the hell out of it.
- Thread starter
- #22
Aw jeeze man. You gotta be kidding. You see, Zoroastrianism is a religion. The major religion of the indigenous Persions. However, Persia WAS A CULTURE. Until the Muslim invasion. And just look at the culture of Iran Versus that of Persia. What a pity, don't you agree?
Calling him a douchebag because of where his post is in relation to the one he quoted is being a douchebag
- Thread starter
- #24
When their only rebuttal is to attack a poster personally, rather than the comments, the argument or discussion is over. And they lose. What fun.
Osomir
VIP Member
Not in the slightest, the people of Iran are doing MUCH better today than they used to under the Sassanian Empire.
- Thread starter
- #26
Now THAT'S funny. Fact is most of Iran's population are still young. And the overwhelming majority of them are so discontented with their lives in Iran that they are fighting for democracy. Oh how I will welcome the next Iranian revolution. You too?
On Election Day, Young Iranians Haven?t Given Up On Democracy | Generation Progress
On Election Day, Young Iranians Haven?t Given Up On Democracy | Generation Progress
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 60,742
- 18,653
- 2,250
Persians established human rights for all including religious and ethnic minorities 2500 years ago.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 60,742
- 18,653
- 2,250
Ha ha ha. You don't talk to Iranians much do you? Other than a collapsed economy and currency due to harsh sanctions and corruption, bribery, theft, and cronyism among the ruling Mullahs, oppression and strict adherence to Islamic Shariah law, lack of basic freedoms and human rights..,things are going really well for Iranians.
OMG the ignorance is astounding.
- Thread starter
- #29
So true & well documented. The Cyrus Cylinder still exists today housed in The British Museum.
And just look at what was Persia since the Muslim invasion & conquest ruled the land.
And just look at what was Persia since the Muslim invasion & conquest ruled the land.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 60,742
- 18,653
- 2,250
And then came the savage Arabs and Islamic invaders with their Shariah law, intolerance of minorities and oppression and persecution, 2000 years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_Cylinder
The Cyrus Cylinder (Persian: منشور کوروش*) is an ancient clay cylinder, now broken into several fragments, on which is written a declaration in Akkadian cuneiform script[3] in the name of the Achaemenid king Cyrus the Great.[4] It dates from the 6th century BC and was discovered in the ruins of Babylon in Mesopotamia (modern Iraq) in 1879.[3] It is currently in the possession of the British Museum, which sponsored the expedition that discovered the cylinder. It was created and used as a foundation deposit following the Persian conquest of Babylon in 539 BC, when the Neo-Babylonian Empire was invaded by Cyrus and incorporated into his Persian Empire.
Cylinder has also been claimed to be an early "human rights charter". The Persians' policy towards their subject people, as described by the Cylinder, was traditionally viewed as an expression of tolerance, moderation and generosity "on a scale previously unknown."[70] The policies of Cyrus toward subjugated nations have been contrasted to those of the Assyrians and Babylonians, who had treated subject peoples harshly; he permitted the resettling of those who had been previously deported and sponsored the reconstruction of religious buildings.[71] Cyrus was often depicted positively in Western tradition by sources such as the Old Testament of the Bible and the Greek writers Herodotus and Xenophon.[72][73] The Cyropaedia of Xenophon was particularly influential during the Renaissance when Cyrus was romanticised as an exemplary model of a virtuous and successful ruler.[74]
Last edited:
Osomir
VIP Member
They're still much better off now than they were under the Sassanian Empire. No caste system, better rights for women, more secure, less war, more unified, more centralized, stronger rule of law, better educational opportunities for its citizenry, better addressing of issues like poverty, better governmental representation, etc. Honestly, it's hard to think of a single part of the world that isn't better off now than it used to be 1500 years ago. Humans have a tendency to romanticize history, but much of it wasn't that great.
I absolutely will, which is also why it would be stupid to attack Iran.
Last edited:
Osomir
VIP Member
But at the same time promoted a heavy caste system.
Roudy
Diamond Member
- Mar 16, 2012
- 60,742
- 18,653
- 2,250
Lets not forget what Pope Benedict quoted about Persian King's response to Islamic invaders threatening to invade Iran, and his "assessment" of what Islam brings with itself.
Regensburg lecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
The Regensburg lecture was delivered on 12 September 2006 by Pope Benedict XVI at the University of Regensburg in Germany, where he had once served as a professor of theology. It was entitled "Faith, Reason and the University — Memories and Reflections" (German: Glaube, Vernunft und Universität — Erinnerungen und Reflexionen). The lecture is considered to be among the most important papal statements on world affairs since John Paul II's 1995 address to the United Nations, and sparked international reactions and controversy.
In his lecture, the Pope, speaking in German, quoted an unfavorable remark about Islam made at the end of the 14th century by Manuel II Palaiologos, the Byzantine emperor. As the English translation of the Pope's lecture was disseminated across the world, many Islamic politicians and religious leaders protested against what they saw as an insulting mischaracterization of Islam.[1][2]
The controversial comment originally appeared in the 7th of the 26 Dialogues Held With A Certain Persian, the Worthy Mouterizes, in Anakara of Galatia,[4] written in 1391 as an expression of the views of the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaiologos, one of the last Christian rulers before the Fall of Constantinople to the Muslim Ottoman Empire, on such issues as forced conversion, holy war, and the relationship between faith and reason.
Mass street protests were mounted in many Islamic countries, the Majlis-e-Shoora (Pakistani parliament) unanimously called on the Pope to retract "this objectionable statement".[3]
Last edited:
Osomir
VIP Member
Most of the Sassanian Empire's population didn't live in Iran.
- Thread starter
- #35
Oh yeah, right. The Persians had such a "heavy caste system" that king Artexeres married the Jewess Queen Esther, thus making her the most revered woman in all of Persian history.
Osomir
VIP Member
Are you denying that there was a caste system in place?
- Thread starter
- #37
The only possible caste system in ancient Persia existed around 1000 BCE according to the Persian poet Ferdowsi in his Shahnameh. And let us not forget the indigenous Persian connection to the Rig Veda.
This was short lived. And after the split between the Aryian Hindus & Zoroastrians, there has never been a caste system in Persia.
This was short lived. And after the split between the Aryian Hindus & Zoroastrians, there has never been a caste system in Persia.
Osomir
VIP Member
The caste system was still in place when the Muslim armies invaded, and it even remained unofficially after the Sassanian empire was no more. It took a while for it to diminish, which was usually coupled with religious conversion to Islam.
Suggesting there wasn't one is historically inaccurate.
- Thread starter
- #39
With all due respect, you really need to bone up on Persian history. There was no "caste system" among the Acamenids, Aracids (Parthians) or Sassanians. It is true however that during the founding of the Sassanid dynasty by Ardashir I & Shapir I, (approximately 225-270 C.E. there was intolerance toward other religions in Persia. This ended with the rule of Yazdagird I, in or around 340 C.E. & except for this period the Persians (before the Muslim invasion of Persia) were always the most tolerant rulers of empire in the history of the world.
Osomir
VIP Member
They absolutely had social hierarchies (four main social classifications). Not sure why you keep mixing them with religion though. It didn't really have as much to do with it outside of the priest class.
Except when the Zoroastrian priests were able to periodically convince the rulers to persecute Christians due to Christianity being the official religion of the Byzantines with whom they were at war.
Don't get me wrong, I rather like the Sassanian Empire, and it was a very important model for the early Arab Empire, particularly under the Umayyads who largely adopted their bureaucratic, religious, and military organization models and mixed them with Byzantine and Greek economic models, but ignoring the problems that the Sassanian faced, particularly with regards to the cultural issues that existed between the Persian stronghold and its periphery (like Iraq) doesn't allow for a very good understanding of history. I could site you book sources if you'd like.
I also find it interesting how you've conveniently ignored all of the other variables and focused instead on only this one.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
I LOVE this video, real life Sister Act :-)- Started by NewsVine_Mariyam
- Replies: 1
-
-
