Iraqi Flag Design [Archive]

Al-Hashimi

July 14th, 2012, 11:06 PM

No I never said that to you?? lol

And forcing them is great too..

No it's not the same. KRG is acting much more independent

No again you're not getting what I'm saying.. It's not even near the degree of the Kurdish movement..

Majority of Turkmens voted for Al Iraqiya for instance. ;)

There is no better option in this case. It would be the best solution for both parts. :)

Again you're not getting what I'm saying.. If Turkey and Iran accept KRG to be officially independent then it wouldn't necessarily mean that they have to split their Kurdish parts.
When KRG became an autonomy did the other Kurdish parts also became to an autonomy? No..

Well then I misunderstood you. But you said that Kurds have no problem with Arabs just to latter change stance. That's written on white and black in your post.

Well, I don't recognize Kurdistan so in my eyes nobody is forcing them to anything. Kurdistan never existed anyway. And as said you are not even a homogenous group. So why do you need a country of your own? You have an Indo-Iranian Iran next to Iraqi Kurdistan.

Anyway I don't believe that the Kurds have a bigger right to have their own country than let's say Assyrians or Turkmens or any other minority group in Iraq and for that reason I do not support it. Apart from it damaging Iraq as I said earlier.

How do you know that? My mother is half Spanish and I know Spanish and Iraqi politics very well since I follow both. There is really not much differece. All 3 have autonomy, their own parlament, politicians, taxes, police acknowledged language etc.

Who cares if it's to "this degree" when such movements exists and when Assyrians etc. want their own part of the country as well? All minorities would like that.

So? Voting for Al-Iraqiyya does not mean anything other than it being the best option right now. Iraqi politics are a mess anyway.

Not really for obvious reasons. And explain why it would be the best option. I have not heard a single argument other than Kurds wanting their own country (like the other minorities don't want that too)

Are you serious? I think only Kurds use that logic.

Why do you think that? Because the Turks are doing their utmost to counter such a thing just like the Iranians are. In case you don't know then the Turks are using military power frequently against the Kurds. Kurdish rights in Turkey and Iran are generally very bad compared to those you guys enjoy in Iraq. So that's not really a surprise.

baghdad_sara

July 14th, 2012, 11:28 PM

You sound like those Persian nationalists on Wikipedia trying to forge history.

LOL god they are so annoying...

Al-Hashimi

July 14th, 2012, 11:38 PM

LOL god they are so annoying...

:cheers:

Sure. One of them tried to "prove" that Iraqis were in fact not Semetic people but lost gone Indo-Iranians.:lol: Sounds like a few confused users on this forum.

Then I was forced to contact the administrators of Wikipedia and explained them the situation. Later they asked me of any references and I quoted 4-5 books from Google Books and direct quotations. And then the annoying Iranian nationalists that tried to forge information were banned and their information removed. Later another Iranian (I suspect they have a little team) tried to change it again just to be banned himself.

And we already have enough Iranian interference in real life.:ohno:

baghdad_sara

July 14th, 2012, 11:43 PM

What kind of question is that?

And maybe because there are many Arabs in the Kurdish region and because it still a part of Iraq, a country whose population is 80-85 percent Arab.

Not really. Kurds are Indo-Iranians. Indo-Iranians are originally not from the Middle East but outside of it. The Semetic Assyrians are the real claimants to that area if anything.

But anyway do you support an independent Kurdistan? If so, you are working against the interests of Iraq. Thankfully it's only a tiny part of Iraq.

And if the Kurds get their independence expect the Turkmens, Assyrians, Mandeans, Sunni Arabs and Shi'ah Arabs wanting their own part of Iraq= no Iraq anymore.

Also significant parts of Turkey, Iran and Syria are apparently Kurdish which would even make the Middle East a more messed up place than it is. I doubt that those countries would support an fully independent Kurdistan in Iraq.

It doesn't matter which countries oppose a free Kurdistan as long as the West have their back thats all that matters, US has already black listed Iran 'axis of evil', Syria is fucked with their own problems, Iraq is crippled, the only thing from putting this freedom on the map is Turkey. I highly doubt the West will jeopardise their diplomatic relations with Turkey for the sake of a few million Kurds.

baghdad_sara

July 14th, 2012, 11:48 PM

:cheers:

Sure. One of them tried to "prove" that Iraqis were in fact not Semetic people but lost gone Indo-Iranians.:lol: Sounds like a few confused users on this forum.

Then I was forced to contact the administrators of Wikipedia and explained them the situation. Later they asked me of any references and I quoted 4-5 books from Google Books and direct quotations. And then the annoying Iranian nationalists that tried to forge information were banned and their information removed. Later another Iranian (I suspect they have a little team) tried to change it again just to be banned himself.

And we already have enough Iranian interference in real life.:ohno:

Yes, down with pan-persianism! ..My fathers family are originally from Elam :lol:

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 12:00 AM

It doesn't matter which countries oppose a free Kurdistan as long as the West have their back thats all that matters, US has already black listed Iran 'axis of evil', Syria is fucked with their own problems, Iraq is crippled, the only thing from putting this freedom on the map is Turkey. I highly doubt the West will jeopardise their diplomatic relations with Turkey for the sake of a few million Kurds.

Yeah, if the Americans can gain enough influence in Kurdistan (as they have done and try to) then we can expect a divided Iraq.

But hey, it's the best solution and only good for the future of Iraq.:lol:

Why don't we just divide Iraq between Saudi Arabia, Syria, Kuwait, Jordan, Iran and Turkey?

The Sunni Arabs which by far acknowledge their Arab heritage can join KSA, Jordan, Syria and Kuwait while those Shi'ah Arabs denying their heritage can join the "glorious" and civilized Iranians. The Turkmens can return to Turkey.

Or maybe some of our resident Sumerians can reestablish ancient Sumeria and make Sumerian the official language.

Yeah, I sure hope not but you never know.

Anyway, what I know for certain is, that all those different Iraqi ethnic groups, ideologies, parties etc. will regret dividing Iraq when they will look back in time in 50-60 years time. Then they will wonder how they permitted the destruction of the country. But hey, Iraq is a constructed state by the British anyway. So whatever happens does not really matter!!1 As said there are opportunities in nearby countries for all the current ethnic groups.

Sinjar

July 15th, 2012, 12:12 AM

Well then I misunderstood you. But you said that Kurds have no problem with Arabs just to latter change stance. That's written on white and black in your post.

No I was talking about the hate..

Well, I don't recognize Kurdistan so in my eyes nobody is forcing them to anything. Kurdistan never existed anyway. And as said you are not even a homogenous group. So why do you need a country of your own? You have an Indo-Iranian Iran next to Iraqi Kurdistan.

Kurdistan exists if you like it or not.

No, Kurds in Iraq will rightfully stay in their homes if you like it or not.

Just like any other ethnicity.. I'm for what the Kurdish people chooses .. I would be okay with whatever they choose.

Anyway I don't believe that the Kurds have a bigger right to have their own country than let's say Assyrians or Turkmens or any other minority group in Iraq and for that reason I do not support it. Apart from it damaging Iraq as I said earlier.

Your point is it will damage Iraq because all groups will want to separate then.. That's not a realistic scenario.

I will try to put in a simple way.. Kurds generally doesn't identify themselves or are feeling being Iraqi while the rest of Iraqis do..

You are forgetting that the Kurdish population is nearly 20% of the Iraqi population while the Assyrian and Turkman combined together are what 2-4%? They also don't form a majority in vast areas like the Kurds do.

How do you know that? My mother is half Spanish and I know Spanish and Iraqi politics very well since I follow both. There is really not much differece. All 3 have autonomy, their own parlament, politicians, taxes, police acknowledged language etc.

But in KRG it's more. Just look at the military and the resources

Who cares if it's to "this degree" when such movements exists and when Assyrians etc. want their own part of the country as well? All minorities would like that.

So? Voting for Al-Iraqiyya does not mean anything other than it being the best option right now. Iraqi politics are a mess anyway.

but they are not so popular in these ethnicity groups so it does matter..

Well Al-Iraqiya is pro-Iraqi that indicates they are fine being a part of Iraq. Or does it not?

Not really for obvious reasons. And explain why it would be the best option. I have not heard a single argument other than Kurds wanting their own country (like the other minorities don't want that too)

The budget and oil dispute will be over..

You will probably mention the disputed areas but that will be solved with the referendum which both parts have to accept the result of.

Are you serious? I think only Kurds use that logic.

Yes I'm a Kurd but I don't know if other Kurds use the same logic as I do. :D

Why do you think that? Because the Turks are doing their utmost to counter such a thing just like the Iranians are. In case you don't know then the Turks are using military power frequently against the Kurds. Kurdish rights in Turkey and Iran are generally very bad compared to those you guys enjoy in Iraq. So that's not really a surprise.

Just so you know KRG is aware of these military actions..

Yes the conditions for Kurds in Iraq are much better and hopefully it will be same-wise in the other parts of Kurdistan too.

Do you agree on that if Turkey and Iran accept KRG to be officially independent then it wouldn't necessarily mean they have to give thier parts away?

baghdad_sara

July 15th, 2012, 12:12 AM

That will not happen ..well..this is the Middle East..home of the selfish, greedy and ungrateful! .. PS. Im not a self loathing individual, i just dislike Middle Easterners. :P

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 12:21 AM

That will not happen ..well..this is the Middle East..home of the selfish, greedy and ungrateful! .. PS. Im not a self loathing individual, i just dislike Middle Easterners. :P

No matter how many times fellow Arabs and fellow Semetic people will disapppoint me (Jews excluded) I will still care about them and love them because I am part of them whether I like it or not. I love our ancient culture (cradle of civilization), I love the diversity and beauty of our region, I love the generosity of our people, I love the food, the beauty of people, the talent, the nature, the different landscapes etc. (could go on and on but nobody wants to hear that anyway)

At the same time I can't stand those people who renounce their history and origin just to act like cheap copies of the West. There is nothing more I found degrading than that and a lack of respect for our history, culture etc.

Today, especially among the disapora, saying that one is conservatice is seen as something absurd. I mean just today people have accused me of being an "extreme Arab nationalist" just because I value our culture and history, religion and don't want a divided Iraq etc. I am surprised that nobody has called me a wahhabi yet given my Saudi (Hejazi) ancestry.

What I don't like is the inferiority complex many Arabs/Semetic people seem to have for some strange reasons. Being half European I don't see any reasons for Arabs, Semetic people to be envious of them other than their governments. Sure, I am proud of that part of my heritage but at the end of the day Europeans are just like any otherr people - positive and negatives.

Believe me, less than 70 years ago Europe was a bigger mess than the Middle East (WW2 comes to mind - the bloodiest time of human history), later a divided Europe, several dictators etc.

The current problems of the Middle East are largely due to outsiders and them interferring in our region through imperalistic policies, supporting puppets to basically drawing lines on a map. Of course we are also guilty of our own problems but those problems we are guilty of are due to the product of the society - a society that was poisened from the outside.

The Middle East has always been the most sought after region in the world for various reasons (being the cradle of civilization and many influential cultures and civilizations, natural ressources, stratetig importance and I could go on) so there has always been interference from outsiders which has harmed the region greatly.

And one of the reactions to that has been more extremism, tribalism and narrow-mindness from all sides.

Anyway sometimes I get tired by just talking about it and hopeless. When I hear stories about the Arab world from my grandfather (who again is telling me stories about his forefathers) I can't stop wonder how much better a place the Middle East was before the imperialists showed their ugly face. Muslims, Christians and Jews lived peacefully together. Nobody cared where they came from etc. Today it's a completely different case. Anyway enough of writing.

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 12:38 AM

No I was talking about the hate..

Kurdistan exists if you like it or not.

No, Kurds in Iraq will rightfully stay in their homes if you like it or not.

Just like any other ethnicity.. I'm for what the Kurdish people chooses .. I would be okay with whatever they choose.

Your point is it will damage Iraq because all groups will want to separate then.. That's not a realistic scenario.

I will try to put in a simple way.. Kurds generally doesn't identify themselves or are feeling being Iraqi while the rest of Iraqis do..

You are forgetting that the Kurdish population is nearly 20% of the Iraqi population while the Assyrian and Turkman combined together are what 2-4%? They also don't form a majority in vast areas like the Kurds do.

But in KRG it's more. Just look at the military and the resources

but they are not so popular in these ethnicity groups so it does matter..

Well Al-Iraqiya is pro-Iraqi that indicates they are fine being a part of Iraq. Or does it not?

The budget and oil dispute will be over..

You will probably mention the disputed areas but that will be solved with the referendum which both parts have to accept the result of.

Yes I'm a Kurd but I don't know if other Kurds use the same logic as I do. :D

Just so you know KRG is aware of these military actions..

Yes the conditions for Kurds in Iraq are much better and hopefully it will be same-wise in the other parts of Kurdistan too.

Do you agree on that if Turkey and Iran accept KRG to be officially independent then it wouldn't necessarily mean they have to give thier parts away?

Hate or not, most dislike us for obvious reasons. And I can't blame them. You seemed to agree with that view.

Really? Where does it exists? You mean the autonomous region called Kurdistan. Just like Al-Anbar exists. Does not make it to a country.

Who says that they should not stay in their homes? For all I care they can stay were they are as long as they don't divide Iraq and harm it.

Yeah, so only Kurds have a say whether Iraq should be united or not? What about the Arabs living in Kurdistan? The Turkmens? The Assyrians? The Yazidis? Armenians? etc.

LOL, since when is that not a realistic scenario? You don't belive that Sunni Arabs and Shi'ah Arabs would divide Iraq further? Which would again encourage more minorities to demand a peace of Iraq because they have lived there for long.

Ok, then they should leave Iraq and move to Iran - an Indo-Iranian country like themselves. Nobody forces them to live in Iraq.

20 percent? Kurds are 15 percent at most. And that's disputed.

Military? What has ressources to do with anything? Until now it's Iraqi territory.

Yeah, it does not matter just because it does not suit your argument. Have you ever talked with a Christian Assyrian about it? One of my good friends is a Christian Assyrian and he tells me that should the Kurds get "their" country then the Assyrians would have a right to do so as well.

So? There are many reasons for voting for a certain party. What is the alternative?

Oh yeah, sure they will. Just like the North Sudanese and South Sudanese disputes are over..... Or any newly independent country for that matter.

Ok, you never know.:cheers:

Yeah, and what are they doing? Nothing it seems. At least they don't have a say in the Kurdish regions in Turkey, Iran and Syria which form 85 percent of the total area of the so-called Kurdistan.

Then why do you want to divide Iraq?

Why would that not be necessary? Do you imagine all the millions of Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Syria (which are 6 times combined the amount of Iraqi Kurds) to suddenly all move to the tiny Iraqi Kurdistan?

Do you really believe that the Kurdish nationalists would denounce their claim of greater Kuridstan in Turkey, Iran and Syria? The main Kurdish area? That will never happen especially not if they get recognized in one country first.

baghdad_sara

July 15th, 2012, 12:39 AM

No matter how many times fellow Arabs and fellow Semetic people will disapppoint me (Jews excluded) I will still care about them and love them because I am part of them whether I like it or not. I love our ancient culture (cradle of civilization), I love the diversity and beauty of our region, I love the generosity of our people, I love the food, the beauty of people, the talent, the nature, the different landscapes etc. (could go on and on but nobody wants to hear that anyway)

At the same time I can't stand those people who renounce their history and origin just to act like cheap copies of the West. There is nothing more I found degrading than that and a lack of respect for our history, culture etc.

Today, especially among the disapora, saying that one is conservatice is seen as something absurd. I mean just today people have accused me of being an "extreme Arab nationalist" just because I value our culture and history, religion and don't want a divided Iraq etc. I am surprised that nobody has called me a wahhabi yet given my Saudi (Hejazi) ancestry.

What I don't like is the inferiority complex many Arabs/Semetic people seem to have for some strange reasons. Being half European I don't see any reasons for Arabs, Semetic people to be envious of them other than their governments. Sure, I am proud of that part of my heritage but at the end of the day Europeans are just like any otherr people - positive and negatives.

Believe me, less than 70 years ago Europe was a bigger mess than the Middle East (WW2 comes to mind - the bloodiest time of human history), later a divided Europe, several dictators etc.

The current problems of the Middle East are largely due to outsiders and them interferring in our region through imperalistic policies, supporting puppets to basically drawing lines on a map. Of course we are also guilty of our own problems but those we are guilty of are a product of the society - a society that was poisened from the outside.

The Middle East has always been the most sought after region in the world for various reasons (being the cradle of civilization and many influential cultures and civilizations, natural ressources, stratetig improtance and I could go on) so there has always been interference from outsiders which has harmed the region greatly.

And one of the reactions for that has been more extremism, tribalism and narrow-mindness from all sides.

Anyway sometimes I get tired by just talking about it and hopeless. When I hear stories about the Arab world from my grandfather (who again is telling me stories about his forefathers) I can't stop wonder how much better a place the Middle East was before the imperialists showed their ugly face. Muslims, Christians and Jews lived peacefully together. Nobody cared where they came from etc. Today it's a completely different case. Anyway enough of writing.

Lol, habibi i was joking. I love me! and my people :D On a serious note, i am 'adequately' educated on Middle Eastern history on my own accord, i have read many pieces written on our history just because i have a genuine interest and belief that it is the most fascinating place on Earth.

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 12:47 AM

Lol, habibi i was joking. I love me! and my people :D On a serious note, i am 'adequately' educated on Middle Eastern history on my own accord, i have read many pieces written on our history just because i have a genuine interest and belief that it is the most fascinating place on Earth.

No problem ukthi.:)

Sometimes I have a feeling that I take this subjects too seriously but that can happes when you are passionate and really care about your people and region. I can't help it.:)

The day I don't care will be the day where I will not recognize myself.

About my Jewish comment. I was obviously joking. I have nothing against the regular Jew, unless he is a Zionist.;) Jews contributed a lot to our Arab culture and they are our Semetic brothers whether we like it or not (those real Jews at least). In Iraq they have contributed greatly as well. They are clever people also. And as we all know the first Jewish people lived in Iraq and our Prophet Ibrahim (as) was born in current day Iraq. But that goes for all Semetic people.

Indeed it is. I honestly don't know a region that is as talked about as the Middle East by the outsiders for good and bad. That should tell you enough. Also if you look back in history it's the same case.:cheers:

baghdad_sara

July 15th, 2012, 12:57 AM

No problem ukthi.:)

Sometimes I have a feeling that I take this subjects too seriously but that can happes when you are passionate and really care about your people and region. I can't help it.:)

The day I don't care will be the day where I will not recognize myself.

About my Jewish comment. I was obviously joking. I have nothing against the regular Jew, unless he is a Zionist.;) Jews contributed a lot to our Arab culture and they are our Semetic brothers whether we like it or not (those real Jews at least). In Iraq they have contributed greatly as well. They are clever people also. And as we all know the first Jewish people lived in Iraq and our Prophet Ibrahim (as) was born in current day Iraq. But that goes for all Semetic people.

Indeed it is. I honestly don't know a region that is as talked about as the Middle East by the outsiders for good and bad. That should tell you enough. Also if you look back in history it's the same case.:cheers:

The proud part in me always mentions this to westerners lol and that Alexander the Great died in Iraq, oh and that beer was first produced in Iraq, that one always gets a reaction :lol:

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 01:03 AM

The proud part in me always mentions this to westerners lol and that Alexander the Great died in Iraq, oh and that beer was first produced in Iraq, that one always gets a reaction :lol:

:lol:

Man, current day Iraq is after all the cradle of civilization. It has given the world a tremendous heritage. That alone makes us a special country/region in the world.

Not to mention our Islamic history which is only rivaled by Hejaz for obvious reasons.

There is so much to be proud of that such a word as inferiority should not be used when Iraq is mentioned. And I am dead serious here.

Reading about the Iraqi history is like reading a fairytyle, that unfortunately sometimes is interrupted by crime fiction.

Insha'Allah it will improve just like the rest of the Arab world, especially those Arab countries in our region.

sheytanElKebir

July 15th, 2012, 01:37 AM

a linguistic "group" is not a race, ethnicity, culture, nation or even a language!

Greece is bankrupt despite its ancient heritage... today's Iraqis don't have particularly much to be proud of being at the bottom of the Human Development Index below most sub-saharan african states.

and I feel I must repeat this one again:

a linguistic "group" is not a race, ethnicity, culture, nation or even a language!

Sinjar

July 15th, 2012, 01:41 AM

Hate or not, most dislike us for obvious reasons. And I can't blame them. You seemed to agree with that view.

Really? Where does it exists? You mean the autonomous region called Kurdistan. Just like Al-Anbar exists. Does not make it to a country.

Ouh you mean a country. I thought you meant something else.. Well yea it doesn't exist. There have been some Kurdish states but without the international support for it.. You also know how the British and the French divided the ME but I guess it was perfect with the Kurdish areas while the rest was shit...

Who says that they should not stay in their homes? For all I care they can stay were they are as long as they don't divide Iraq and harm it.

You say it will harm Iraq and I it will say it will not..

Yeah, so only Kurds have a say whether Iraq should be united or not? What about the Arabs living in Kurdistan? The Turkmens? The Assyrians? The Yazidis? Armenians? etc.

No all the people who lives in KRG and the disputed areas will be able to vote.

A referendum for independence is always only in the area that wants to be independent.

LOL, since when is that not a realistic scenario? You don't belive that Sunni Arabs and Shi'ah Arabs would divide Iraq further? Which would again encourage more minorities to demand a peace of Iraq because they have lived there for long.

The unfortunate problem between Sunnis and Shiaa cannot be blamed at the Kurds..

If they do wan't to split why not? We don't live in an idyllic world and if that's the solution then they should do it... Realistically, I don't think it would happen because both Sunni and Shiaa Arabs feel they are Iraqi unlike the Kurds.

Ok, then they should leave Iraq and move to Iran - an Indo-Iranian country like themselves. Nobody forces them to live in Iraq.

No they should be independent. The lived in these lands for several decades. Kurds are not immigrants in Iraq. ;)

20 percent? Kurds are 15 percent at most. And that's disputed.

It's more close to the 20%. I'm talking about the whole of Iraq not just KRG.

But even if it was 15% the point doesn't change.

Military? What has ressources to do with anything? Until now it's Iraqi territory.

Can you tell me what role Iraq has in KRG expect for giving the budget which they also fight over?

In case of that KRG will split then Iraq can keep the money for itself while Kurdistan can handle itself with its oil and gas..

Yeah, it does not matter just because it does not suit your argument. Have you ever talked with a Christian Assyrian about it? One of my good friends is a Christian Assyrian and he tells me that should the Kurds get "their" country then the Assyrians would have a right to do so as well.

So your friend who doesn't even live in Iraq represent all Assyrians?

You gotta admit Assyrians are generally more pro-Iraqis than Kurds are..

So? There are many reasons for voting for a certain party. What is the alternative?

They could vote for separatist parties? The Turkman parties could also run in the election alone without being in the Al Iraqiya list if they're so anti-Iraqi..

Oh yeah, sure they will. Just like the North Sudanese and South Sudanese disputes are over..... Or any newly independent country for that matter.

Well the conflict is they didn't solve the issue with the disputed areas to start with. That must be done in Iraq to avoid further complications in the future..

Do you wan't Sudan to be a country where the conflict, oppression and civil war would go on? At least the Southern are more happy now.

Ok, you never know.:cheers:
:cheers:

Yeah, and what are they doing? Nothing it seems. At least they don't have a say in the Kurdish regions in Turkey, Iran and Syria which form 85 percent of the total area of the so-called Kurdistan.

KRG is using pragmatism

Then why do you want to divide Iraq?

Why not just do what the people in KRG wants to? The most important thing for me happened though and it is that they got their freedom.

Why would that not be necessary? Do you imagine all the millions of Kurds in Turkey, Iran and Syria (which are 6 times combined the amount of Iraqi Kurds) to suddenly all move to the tiny Iraqi Kurdistan?

No they should stay where they are and hopefully their situation will improve by time. There are more Azeris in Iran than in Azerbaijan itself for instance..

Do you really believe that the Kurdish nationalists would denounce their claim of greater Kuridstan in Turkey, Iran and Syria? The main Kurdish area? That will never happen especially not if they get recognized in one country first.

Of course not but Turkey and Iran has oppressed the Kurds for decades do you think it will make them stop?

Chounz

July 15th, 2012, 02:03 AM

I recently drew this on photoshop. I know its not professional, but what do you guys think of the concept behind it?
Obviously the symbol in the middle represents our heritage and the sun the kurds. The white represents peace. And obviously the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers on the side.
I think its very unique.

i realy dont see why their should be any kurdish symbols in our flag. they hve their own flag and its no like they will put up ours. also bearing in mind most of them want to be independant from iraq anyway.

:lol:

This guy is retarded..

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 02:08 AM

Ouh you mean a country. I thought you meant something else.. Well yea it doesn't exist. There have been some Kurdish states but without the international support for it.. You also know how the British and the French divided the ME but I guess it was perfect with the Kurdish areas while the rest was shit...

You say it will harm Iraq and I it will say it will not..

No all the people who lives in KRG and the disputed areas will be able to vote.

A referendum for independence is always only in the area that wants to be independent.

The unfortunate problem between Sunnis and Shiaa cannot be blamed at the Kurds..

If they do wan't to split why not? We don't live in an idyllic world and if that's the solution then they should do it... Realistically, I don't think it would happen because both Sunni and Shiaa Arabs feel they are Iraqi unlike the Kurds.

No they should be independent. The lived in these lands for several decades. Kurds are not immigrants in Iraq. ;)

It's more close to the 20%. I'm talking about the whole of Iraq not just KRG.

But even if it was 15% the point doesn't change.

Can you tell me what role Iraq has in KRG expect for giving the budget which they also fight over?

In case of that KRG will split then Iraq can keep the money for itself while Kurdistan can handle itself with its oil and gas..

So your friend who doesn't even live in Iraq represent all Assyrians?

You gotta admit Assyrians are generally more pro-Iraqis than Kurds are..

They could vote for separatist parties? The Turkman parties could also run in the election alone without being in the Al Iraqiya list if they're so anti-Iraqi..

Well the conflict is they didn't solve the issue with the disputed areas to start with. That must be done in Iraq to avoid further complications in the future..

Do you wan't Sudan to be a country where the conflict, oppression and civil war would go on? At least the Southern are more happy now.

:cheers:

KRG is using pragmatism

Why not just do what the people in KRG wants to? The most important thing for me happened though and it is that they got their freedom.

No they should stay where they are and hopefully their situation will improve by time. There are more Azeris in Iran than in Azerbaijan itself for instance..

Of course not but Turkey and Iran has oppressed the Kurds for decades do you think it will make them stop?

Well I have always been talking about a country in the sense of the word. Not autonomious regions. Yeah, but Kurdistan never existed as one seperate country. And personally I doubt that will ever happen. And that's not really a surprise considering the Kurds being a non-homogenous group. As far as I know Iraqi Kurds differ from Turkish and Iranians.

Yeah, the imperialists did a great job (NOT). Not sure if a Kurdistan would have helped anyone or anything in that matter. People would still complain.

Yes, and I gave my reasons. It would be nice if you did the same on your stance since that would make this discussion a little bit more interesting and factual.

Ok, that's a good thing if true.

Strange. So the rest of Iraq and nearby countries have nothing to say in that matter? And who enforces that? UN? Like they ever were a reliable or legimite organization. Those guys have the blood of millions of people on their hands.

Who blamed the Kurds? I am just saying that should Iraq be divided it would only encourage other parts to become divided as well and that would ultimately destroy the Iraq we know of today. You as a Kurd probably don't care about it but we most Iraqi Arabs actually do.

Well, sure we as individuals don't control such matters but that does not prevent me from voicing my opinion. I personally, and I have given my reasons for that, don't want to see a divided Iraq no matter which ethnic group wants to break free UNLESS most groups do so and the remaining are left with no other option than proclaiming "their" part of the country as well.

Well that's where we differ. Given my reasons for that as well.

Most data says between 15-17 percent at most.

It's part of Iraq and has been so for 90 years and earlier it was part of Ottoman Iraq for 400 years and the al-khilafa al-abbasiyyah for 500 years. Autonomy should be enough given that the rest and vast majority of Kurdistan will not be united country in the foreseeable future. Iraqi Kurdistan is only a tiny part of the Kurdistan you Kurdish nationalists imagine. And why is the current level of autonomy and federalism not good enough?

He lived in Iraq and visits the country often, as I also do. I thnk his opinion is not only limited to himself. But yeah, they probably are - not that it says much.

Yeah, but there is not enough of them but if there were they would surely do the same as you Kurds. Do you agree or not?

Which I have my serious doubts about.

I am not Sudanese so I can't say. I am just telling you that despite being two seperate countries now there are still problems among both parties. That's also common in other newly independent states.

Which they won't achieve anything with.

Yeah, so why want more?

Sure, I agree but I just doubt that happening. Turkey and Iran are completely different stories. Much more stable countries. Imagine Iran giving the Kurds their share of Iran. Then the Baloch would demand the same, the Azeris and other ethnic groups as well. The Arabs in Khuzestan. It would destroy Iran as it would with Iraq (potentially). Turkey the same scenario.

That's my whole point. What make you believe that their position will strengthen should Iraqi Kurdistan become independent? I only see the opposite happening - a bigger internal and external pressure of recognizing Turkish, Iranian and Syrian Kurdistan as well. And if that does not happen then the Kurds will whine about that for decades again until they get their will.

Ishtarporten

July 15th, 2012, 02:16 AM

Can you guys stick back to the topic and make flags?

Sinjar

July 15th, 2012, 02:44 AM

Why? To control their own resources as they are trying to now and have their own budget where they are not so dependent on Iraq. They get a lower and lower share at the moment and they also don't share the oil. Just see the current conflict and you will understand why the Kurds want to be independent. They're building up to it.

Of course The Kurds would still complain if the British gave them a country and it would be much worse than Anfal and the oppression they have been through and still are.

I actually do care as I'm partly Arabic and see myself as an Iraqi also.

Anyway I'm sorry for saying that Kurds can get a country like the Arabs and Turks. How could I forget that Kurds are not homogeneous which is the first requirement to be a country. It will destroy and HARM Iraq totally. All people will divide afterwards.
Everything will go bad in Iraq afterwards so we have to prevent it.

Back to topic so your excuse for not putting elements of the diversity of Iraq is that Kurds don't want to be a part of Iraq but you say they have to so why not show them that you want them to be part of Iraq?

sheytanElKebir

July 15th, 2012, 11:31 AM

hahaha. nice one sinjar!

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 02:18 PM

You are not answering my whole post as I did with yours.

Don't even know what you are answering to in the first section.

Anyway I am not surprised that the Kurds want their small little country I am just not forced to support such a movement.

You are twisting my words again. Read my sentence again. I said that even if an independent tiny Iraqi Kurdistan was made in 1920 then the Kurds would still complain and whine about wanting the much, much larger Turkish, Iranian and Syrian part.

Ok, but your loyalty lies among Kurds (I assume your father is Kurdish) which is the most important thing. No sane Iraqi Arab would support dividing the country.

Another "emotional" sentence. You are twisting my words. It's a fact that a seperate Kurdistan would harm Iraq and probably encourage a further divide of the country. Obviously that does not suit your agenda of trying to portray that everything will be ideally when you the Kurds get your litty tiny land. I just don't agree at all.

Yes they don't want to. You said that yourself even and it's also your personal opinion. Yes, I support a united Iraq and yes I don't see the need to change the flag.

Sinjar

July 15th, 2012, 03:06 PM

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 03:16 PM

My loyalty doesn't have to belong to this or another group.. I prefer to be just and fair. I'm neither an Arabic or Kurdish nationalist

Both my father and mother are half Kurdish and Arabic..

I was not emotional but sarcastic.. I told thousand times the reason but you just disqualify them by saying all people will divide afterwards. I told you thousand times it was not the case with the autonomy the Kurds got. Why is it still the only autonomy in Iraq? But I know you will say that's Kurdish logic...

I prefer the whining over the killing and oppression that was and is going on against the Kurds from the last century till this day.. Again how can you know how the Kurds will react if they got their own state?

But if your'e against the dividing then you most show them that they are part of the country too?

Yeah, sure we people don't have any loyalty as long as we are mixed.

Ok, but I stil assume that your paternal family is of Kurdish origin. At least that was what you replied and you also refer to yourself as Kurdish.

You gave 2 reasons - that's not much. One was the will of the Kurdish people and the second was that it would end the current conflict between Kurdistan and the government.

And then some bogus (with all due respect) about it being the best for Iraq and Turkey and Iran not having a problem with it, and that Iraq should have no fear of a further divide later on, bla, bla.

Who is killing Kurds in Iraq today? I thought we were speaking about Iraq. Who cares about Turkey and Iran? Last time I checked nobody is Turkish or Iranian here or even of such an origin (correct me if I am wrong). Also there are no Iranian, Syrian or Turkish Kurds here.

And what's wrong with the current autonomy? Or even further autonomy?

What do you mean "how do I know how the Kurds will react"? Is it not bloody obvious that the Kurds in Turkey, Syria and Iran would demand their own Kurdistan as well if the tiny Iraqi one was to be officially recognized? Is that really so strange?

Why should I do that when I am satisfied with the current flag?

The point is that the reality is a different one - namely that most Kurds by far want their own country so why should we include Kurdish symbols if they don't want to be a part of the country?

If it came to an proposal of a new flag and the Kurds wanted to be a part of the country (and other minorities) then go for Kurdish and Assyrian symbols along the Arab ones. I have no problem with that.

But personally I don't see the need for a new flag. It has been changed enough of times lately.

SumerianKing

July 15th, 2012, 06:29 PM

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 06:35 PM

actualy if krg becomes independant, it wouldnt harm iraq but would dramatically effect the krg. atm the krg is highly dependant on the 17% ofthe budget it recieves from the central government. even in 20 years their oil exports wont reach the 17% they recieve. and actualy many iraqis prefare for the krg to seperate because of the recent conflict going on, their actions and attitude towrds the central government shows they dont deserve any money from the central government. all their attitide shows is that they dont want anything to do with iraq, so give it to them! i rather them seperate so they will stop giving the government a headache.

Yeah sure, no harm done at all. Let us just divide the country completely.

Why don't we just divide Iraq between Saudi Arabia, Syria, Kuwait, Jordan, Iran and Turkey?

The Sunni Arabs which by far acknowledge their Arab heritage can join KSA, Jordan, Syria and Kuwait while those Shi'ah Arabs denying their heritage can join the "glorious" and civilized Iranians. The Turkmens can return to Turkey.

Or maybe some of our resident Sumerians can reestablish ancient Sumeria and make Sumerian the official language.

What's the point of Iraqi identity then if everyone want their own piece of the country?

alshawi1234

July 15th, 2012, 07:08 PM

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 07:25 PM

Most kurds don't consider themselves iraqi, it's better to give them their own country. Besides its better for Iraq If Kurds achieve independence.

Right now the Kurdish region is closer to a country anyway. They have heir own government, security forces, government organizations, they control their borders with other countries and they have their own parliament and laws.

The only thing that they share with Iraq is "official" borderlines, currency and the share of oil that goes to them.

Ok, but why would that be better for Iraq? And don't you fear a further divide? Why not make Kurdistan a federal republic so it can remain as a part of Iraq? A similar system as that seen in the UK (Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales) and Spain?

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 09:01 PM

Before I start yes, this is Kurd123. I just wanted to respond to Al-Hashimi from the point of view of a Kurd that is actually from Kurdistan. I will not post more than the one or more responds to Hashimi.

First of all I find your "Kurds are not native" argument to be complete and utter rubbish, as if we follow that logic Arabs are not native aswell, and no, speaking a language of Afro-Semite origins doesn't make you native. First of all, the majority of Kurds neither consider themselves to be "Indo-Iranian" nor "Semite" but rather Kurdish.

Ironically Kurds have the highest percentage of Mesopotamian genes in Iraq (Yes even higher than the Assyrians that have a surprisingly high percentage of Northern European DNA). According to this site (that gathers data from research already carried out) shows the J2 percentage within Southern (Iraqi) Kurds to be higher than the average in Iraq.

J2 Kurds - 28.5
J2 Iraq - 16

Infact research shows that Iraqi Arabs high a much higher percentage of J1. J2 however is native to Mesopotamia.

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

You claim that "Kurds" came over from outside of the middle east, however the Indo-European ancestry of Kurds migrated from modern day Baluchistan which is still middle eastern, not so different from the native inhabitants of Southern Iraq that were invaded by the Arabs and so, what makes you more native than us? I just find all of your arguments to be ridiculous and bias.

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 09:07 PM

Chounz

July 15th, 2012, 09:12 PM

Yeah sure, no harm done at all. Let us just divide the country completely.

Why don't we just divide Iraq between Saudi Arabia, Syria, Kuwait, Jordan, Iran and Turkey?

The Sunni Arabs which by far acknowledge their Arab heritage can join KSA, Jordan, Syria and Kuwait while those Shi'ah Arabs denying their heritage can join the "glorious" and civilized Iranians. The Turkmens can return to Turkey.

Or maybe some of our resident Sumerians can reestablish ancient Sumeria and make Sumerian the official language.

What's the point of Iraqi identity then if everyone want their own piece of the country?

Kuwait? LOL. Sunni Arabs don't even share a border with Kuwait. There is huge Shi3a land in between.

We will join Syria once our brothers there are liberated INSHALLAH. :D

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 09:17 PM

Semetic people are natives to the Middle East and Iraq unlike Indo-Iranians like Kurds. That's a widely accepted theory by all genetic scholars.

LOL, who told you that the haplogroup J2 is a Mesopotamian haplogroup? If you know the haplogroups of the ancient Babylonians, Mesopotamians etc. please post them here for all to see. You seem to be the only one that know about such matters. And the Babylonians and Mesopotamians were Semetic people. Kurds have probably mixed with them and other Semetic people (Assyrians) like every other group in the region. Hardly a surprise. That does not make them native to the region. Two completely different things.

I said outside of any Arab country. Last time I checked Balochistan lies in Southern Pakistan and Southeastern Iran, hardly the Middle East.

I'm not going to spoon feed you, go and do your own research. Again, your argument is complete and utter gibberish. There wasn't a group called 'Kurd' that migrated from modern day Baluchistan, but rather, Kurds developed over time with the influence of all their ancestry. There is a high influence from the Hurrians which form a large part of Kurdish ancestry, and if we assume that modern day Assyrians show similarities to the ancient Assyrians, than so would Kurds. Islamic influence aside Kurdish and Assyrian cultures are very similar (i.e. Similar traditional clothing, similar traditional dance etc) which would again strengthen the fact that Kurds are more native to Mesopotamia.

Not that any of that matter anyway becuase all of the migration happened thousands of years ago and is not enough for you to justify what every you have going on in that mind of yours. Humans have been migrating ever since they began living on this earth so this 'native' talk is nothing but jibber jabber.

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 09:26 PM

I'm not going to spoon feed you, go and do your own research. Again, your argument is complete and utter gibberish. There wasn't a group called 'Kurd' that migrated from modern day Baluchistan, but rather, Kurds developed over time with the influence of all their ancestry. There is a high influence from the Hurrians which form a large part of Kurdish ancestry, and if we assume that modern day Assyrians show similarities to the ancient Assyrians than do would Kurds as Islamic influence aside Kurdish and Assyrian cultures are very similar (i.e. Similar traditional clothing, similar traditional dance etc) which would again strengthen the fact that Kurds are more native to Mesopotamia.

Not that any of that matter anyway becuase all of the migration happened thousands of years ago and is not enough for you to justify what every you have going on in that mind of yours. Humans have been migrating ever since they began living on this earth so this 'native' talk is nothing but jibber jabber.

LOL, a frustrated banned Kurdish nationalist user returns again and try to protray Kurds as non Indo-Iranians. Are you ashamed of your peoples history since you openly lie?

LOL, your own link says that the haplogroups J2 is a Semetic haplogroup. At the same time non-Semetic and non-Middle Eastern haplogroups such as R1a, R1b and I make up nearly 50 percent of the Kurdish population in Iraq while it only make up 15 percent of the total population of the other Iraqis. Marsh Arabs only have 5 percent of those genes....

What don't you understand? Nobody ever claimed that Kurds have not mixed with native ancient Semetic peoples such as Assyrians, Mesopotamians and Babylonians. Don't you read what I say?

Kurds have probably mixed with them and other Semetic people (Assyrians) like every other group in the region. Hardly a surprise. That does not make them native to the region. Two completely different things.

Oh, what a surprise. Kurds and Assyrian have some similar traditions after having lived close to each other for hundred of years and intermarried. Who would have thought that?

Oh yes, Balochistan is really native to any current day Arab/Semetic country. I see that. Where was it again? Southern Pakistan and Southeastern Iran?

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 09:33 PM

LOL, a frustrated banned Kurdish nationalist user returns again and try to protray Kurds as non Indo-Iranians. Are you ashamed of your peoples history since you openly lie?

LOL, your own link says that the haplogroups J2 is a Semetic haplogroup. At the same time non-Semetic and non-Middle Eastern haplogroups such as R1a, R1b and I make up nearly 50 percent of the Kurdish population in Iraq while it only make up 15 percent of the total population of the other Iraqis. Marsh Arabs only have 5 percent of those genes....

What don't you understand? Nobody ever claimed that Kurds have not mixed with native ancient Semetic peoples such as Assyrians, Mesopotamians and Babylonians. Don't you read what I say.

Kurds have probably mixed with them and other Semetic people (Assyrians) like every other group in the region. Hardly a surprise. That does not make them native to the region. Two completely different things.

Oh, what a surprise. Kurds and Assyrian have similar traditions after having lived close to each other for hundred of years. Who would have thought?

Oh yes, Balochistan is really native to any current day Arab/Semetic country. I see that.

I don't believe that I suggested Kurds are not an Indo-European speaking people. Why would I be ashamed of that? the Indo-Europeans came in and kicked Semite behind, is that my fault? I've been born in Mesopotamia and so have my ancestors for the last 2000 years, it's not my fault the Iranic came in and dominated the region. In fact I can trace my origins. 1/2 Semite (Jewish and Assyrian) and 1/2 European (Modern day Russia).

You fail to understand that the Arabs are not native to Iraq and that your logic regarding Kurds would apply to them as well.

Stop saying "Kurds have mixed with Semites" because they we'rent called Kurds. The invading Indo-Europeans were just that, and the term Kurd has been formed after the mixing happened. Infact Kurd originated in Mesopotamia (Modern day Southern Turkey).

Your logic is so flawed, you seem to believe that you can call yourself native simply because Arabs are Semite too? Can I go around to any Indo-European country and say, hey I'm native here too! we both speak an Indo-European language!

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 09:46 PM

I don't believe that I suggested Kurds are not an Indo-European speaking people. Why would I be ashamed of that? the Indo-Europeans came in and kicked Semite behind, is that my fault? I've been born in Mesopotamia and so have my ancestors for the last 2000 years, it's not my fault the Iranic came in and dominated the region. In fact I can trace my origins. 1/2 Semite (Jewish and Assyrian) and 1/2 European (Modern day Russia).

You fail to understand that the Arabs are not native to Iraq and that your logic regarding Kurds would apply to them as well.

Stop saying "Kurds have mixed with Semites" because they we'rent called Kurds. The invading Indo-Europeans were just that, and the term Kurd has been formed after the mixing happened. Infact Kurd originated in Mesopotamia (Modern day Southern Turkey).

Your logic is so flawed, you seem to believe that you can call yourself native simply because Arabs are Semite too? Can I go around to any Indo-European country and say, hey I'm native here too! we both speak an Indo-European language!

Then how come do you use Semetic haplogroups as a evidence of Kurds being non- Indo-Iranains (that's what you said in the beginning!) when 50 percent (vast majority!) of the predominant haplogroups among Iraqi Kurds and Kurds have a non-Semetic and Middle Eastern origin? That's according to your own link you posted. Enormous contradiction anyone?:lol:

What the hell are you talking about kid? The Semetic people have dominated Iraq and the Middle East since the first Semetic people came to existence (Akkadians).

LOL, yes Arabs - being a Semetic people and cousins of the Assyrians are not native to Iraq - the original Semetic homeland where the first Semetic language, people and civilization was formed. Yeah, right.

Have you read about the newest studies on the origin of Arab people and the origin of the Arabic language? It all points to an Northern Middle Eastern origin that correspondents with modern day Iraq and words in the Arabic language that naturally do not exist in the Southern Arabian Peninsular.

Kid, the Arabs and other Semetic people lived in current day Iraq when the Kurds were non-existent in this region. The word "Arab" was first used by the Assyrians in Iraq to describe nomads/farmes who lived outside of the main cities or had moved out of them. That was 2800 years ago.

Just come to terms with the fact that the Kurds are an Indo-Iranian people that are not native to the region but have lived in current day Northern Iraq for a very long time and have mixed with the native Semetic population (Assyrian, Mesopotamian etc.). The reason why Kurds even have J haplogroup in them is because that fact and due to Kurds being a non-homogenous group and them absorbing non-Kurds who later were assimilated. Their descendents (among the original Indo-Iranian Kurds which dominate the genetic pool) are now what constitutes a Kurd.

What I told you in the last part of my message is the genetic evidence which has no interest other than showing the reality. But even that is a widely accepted Kurdish standpoint.

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 09:57 PM

Then how come do you use Semetic haplogroups as a evidence of Kurds being non- Indo-Iranains (that's what you said in the beginning!) when 50 percent (vast majority!) of the predominant haplogroups among Iraqi Kurds and Kurds have a non-Semetic and Middle Eastern origin? That's according to your own link you posted. Enormous contradiction anyone?:lol:

What the hell are you talking about kid? The Semetic people have dominated Iraq and the Middle East since the first Semetic people came to existence (Akkadians).

LOL, yes Arabs - being a Semetic people and cousins of the Assyrians are not native to Iraq - the original Semetic homeland where the first Semetic language, people and civilization was formed. Yeah, right.

Have you read about the newest studies on the origin of Arab people and the origin of the Arabic language? It all points to an Northern Middle Eastern origin that correspondents with modern day Iraq.

Kid, the Arabs and other Semetic people lived in current day Iraq when the Kurds were non-existent in this region. The word "Arab" was first used by the Assyrians in Iraq to describe nomads who lived outside of the main cities. That was 2800 years ago.

Just come to terms with the fac that the Kurds are an Indo-Iranian people that are not native to the region but have lived in current day Northern Iraq for a very long time and have mixed with the native Semetic population (Assyrian, Mesopotamian etc.). The reason why Kurds even have J haplogroup in them is because the Kurds are not a homogenous group and observed non-Kurds who later were assimilated and their descendents (among the original Indo-Iranian Kurds) are now what constitutes Kurds.

What I told you in the last part of my message is the official Kurdish standpoint taken from Kurdish nationalistic pages.

No that's what you said. What I said is that the J2 trait within Kurds is higher than that of Arabs (fact). You are such a fool, you keep saying "Kurds" where as the fact is the Indo-Europeans refereed to themselves as Aryans or by others as Medes. The Medes conquered Assyria and obviously mixing occurred, however they were not called Kurds! the mixed people became Kurds years after the fall of the Medes. Not only did the Medes conquered and mix with the Assyrians but they also mixed with the Hurrians in the area.

Kid? ok.. seems like I hit a nerve. Where is your evidence? just because the Arabs spoke a language of semite origin doesn't make you cousins with the Assyrians nor does it make you native to Iraq, or am I native to Germany? :lol:

You need to come to terms with the fact that Kurds an an Indo-European speaking people that are native to the region. It's like telling the natives in Mexico that they are Spanish because they were conquered by Spain and speak Spanish?

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 10:03 PM

First of all kid, Kurds are an Indo-Iranian people - not an Indo-European people like all European are bar the Basques, Finnish, Hungarians and Estonians. Now you have learnt something new again today.

Second of all you seem unable to reply to my post where I caught you making a huge contradiction.

So let me repost my latest reply in order for you to reply to each of my sentences in that post of mine and not some nonsense about Kurds suddenly being descendants of Medes while they were descendents of Semetic people that were native to the region a few minutes ago. Make up your mind.

Then how come do you use Semetic haplogroups as a evidence of Kurds being non- Indo-Iranains (that's what you said in the beginning!) when 50 percent (vast majority!) of the predominant haplogroups among Iraqi Kurds and Kurds have a non-Semetic and Middle Eastern origin? That's according to your own link you posted. Enormous contradiction anyone?

What the hell are you talking about kid? The Semetic people have dominated Iraq and the Middle East since the first Semetic people came to existence (Akkadians).

LOL, yes Arabs - being a Semetic people and cousins of the Assyrians are not native to Iraq - the original Semetic homeland where the first Semetic language, people and civilization was formed. Yeah, right.

Have you read about the newest studies on the origin of Arab people and the origin of the Arabic language? It all points to an Northern Middle Eastern origin that correspondents with modern day Iraq and words in the Arabic language that naturally do not exist in the Southern Arabian Peninsular.

Kid, the Arabs and other Semetic people lived in current day Iraq when the Kurds were non-existent in this region. The word "Arab" was first used by the Assyrians in Iraq to describe nomads/farmes who lived outside of the main cities or had moved out of them. That was 2800 years ago.

Just come to terms with the fact that the Kurds are an Indo-Iranian people that are not native to the region but have lived in current day Northern Iraq for a very long time and have mixed with the native Semetic population (Assyrian, Mesopotamian etc.). The reason why Kurds even have J haplogroup in them is because that fact and due to Kurds being a non-homogenous group and them absorbing non-Kurds who later were assimilated. Their descendents (among them the original Indo-Iranian Kurds which dominate the genetic pool of the modern Kurds) are now what constitutes a Kurd.

What I told you in the last part of my message is the genetic evidence which has no interest other than showing the reality. But even that is a widely accepted Kurdish standpoint.

Now go ahead. If not don't bother me if you want a serious discussion.I want you to especially counter what I wrote in the marked part of my quotation of my previous post.

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 10:14 PM

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 10:39 PM

I believe this was my opening paragraph.

"You claim that "Kurds" came over from outside of the middle east, however the Indo-European ancestry of Kurds migrated from modern day Baluchistan which is still middle eastern, not so different from the native inhabitants of Southern Iraq that were invaded by the Arabs and so, what makes you more native than us? I just find all of your arguments to be ridiculous and bias."

I don't see where I claimed that Kurds are of Semite origin nor did I claim that they are fully of Indo-European ancestry. Do you even know what "Indo-Iranian" Means? it's another word for Indo-Aryan which is a branch of the Indo-European tree. Yes, we can't use the word Aryan anymore (A name common among Kurdish boys) because the Germans raped it. I don't know why the Germans claimed to be Aryan but every single Nazi symbol can be found all over Iran and other Iranic speaking regions.

What I told you is that the term Kurd is a mixture of Indo-European and native Semite people where as you insist on saying that Kurds are indo-Iranians simply because we speak a language of classified as such.

Since the Median invasion and after their fall the Kurdish rulling families were of Indo-European decent (and there is evidence of that i.e. Ottoman era documents), infact Kurmanji simply means son of the Medes (Kur= son Maji = Magi a Median tribe) but as I keep trying to explain to you, the Term Kurd was not used by the Indo-Europeans! the Kurds became known as Kurds after the mixing occurred.

Don't put too much weight on language you fool (and I like the way you ignored my Mexian example) since research carried out in 99 shows that your "semite cousins" the Jews are actually closer to Kurds, Turks and others in the region rather than Semite Arabs.

You believe. You wrote black on white that Kurds were neither Semetic nor Indo-Iranian just to later claim that they are the latter. Sorry buddy, you are confused.

Are you joking kid? You are seriously trying to explain to me the difference between Indo-Iranian and Indo-European while I just gave you such an explanation and even mentioned every non-Indo-European people in Europe after you falsely claimed that Kurds were Indo-Europeans - while they are Indo-Iranians? Not sure if serious (I would have posted that gif but that would probably make you even more angry)

Yeah, I know the history of the Aryan word but I don't get what relevance it has in this discussion. Nor whether Kurdish children are named "Aryan" today.

"What I told you is that the term Kurd is a mixture of Indo-European and native Semite people where as you insist on saying that Kurds are indo-Iranians simply because we speak a language of classified as such."

Completely false and nonsense. Are you drunk? I just reposted a long post where I tried to explain to you that the ROOT of the Kurdish people is Indo-Iranian (the genetic evidence you posted support that and you seem to agree) while at the same time having mixed with the local ancient Semetic peoples such as Mesopotamians (who probably belonged to the J1 and J2 halogroups) and Assyrians who mostly belong to those two Semetic haplogroups:

Let me post it for the 3 time. I even asked you specially to reply to that and you did not.

"Just come to terms with the fact that the Kurds are an Indo-Iranian people that are not native to the region but have lived in current day Northern Iraq for a very long time and have mixed with the native Semetic population (Assyrian, Mesopotamian etc.). The reason why Kurds even have J haplogroup in them is because that fact and due to Kurds being a non-homogenous group and them absorbing non-Kurds who later were assimilated. Their descendents (among them the original Indo-Iranian Kurds which dominate the genetic pool of the modern Kurds) are now what constitutes a Kurd.

What I told you in the last part of my message is the genetic evidence which has no interest other than showing the reality. But even that is a widely accepted Kurdish standpoint."

Did I just not tell you in that same post of mind from where I have quoted the above marked sentences, that the word Kurd came to existance after the mixture of foreign Indo-Iranians who mixed with the local (mostly Semetic) population? Did I not tell you that the word Arab was first used by Assyrians 2800 years ago to describe nomads/farmers living outside of the main Assyrian cities in current day Iraq? So yes, the Arab presence in Iraq surpassed that of the Kurds. You have indirectly admitted that. But that was known for a long time anyway.

Nor have I claimed that Kurds have not lived in Northern Iraq for a very long time.

Fool? If anyone is the fool it's you based on this discussion. Anyway I expect you to be banned again very shortly since being a banned member and then posting is not allowed.

Your Mexican language example is just so stupid that it's not worth replying. If you don't know then the Mexicans started to speak Spanish roughly 400 years ago when the Spaniards colonized them (I am 1/4 Spanish so I know Spanish history very well). That's completely different from the spread of the Semetic langauge since the first known Semetic language, people and culture originated (Akkadian) orginated in Iraq.

By your absurd logic then Spaniards - despite being the first people to speak Spanish - a Indo-European language and at the same time being Indo-European are not the original people speaking Spanish nor Indo-European for that matter.

Why are you even including Jews when they have a much higher J1, J2 admixture than the Kurds? And the Jewish history is well-known of being a mixture (especially the Ashkenazi Jews which origin by large is probably not originally Semetic but rather Germanic, Slavic and Khazar).

Anyway I don't expect you to know such things and it would only complicate the matters further for you so I will leave it with that.

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 11:16 PM

I don't just believe, it's a fact. Go read my first post since it seems you didn't bother reading it in the first place.

I'm confused? Indo-Iranian is a branch of Indo-European, so how can one not be the same as the other? Germans are not simply an Indo-European speaking people but rather a Germanic branch of the Indo-European tree just as Iranic is a branch of the Indo-European tree, so what is there to be confused about?

I said Kurds don't consider themselves to be, that is different than saying they are not, seriously read what I type properly before making a fool out of yourself.

Bloody hell, how many times do I need to repeat this? the roots of "Kurds" is NOT indo-European.. the roots of the MEDES IS. The roots of the Hurrians (another ancestor of Kurds, with heavy influence on language and culture) is native to Southern Kurdistan. What is so hard to understand? When the medes arrived they didn't say we are Kurds, they refereed to themselves as Aryans.

The Term Kurd was used after the fall of the medes and after the mixing occurred, and so it does not make it have Indo-Iranian roots! infact the term Kurd is derived from the word Corduene which was an ancient region located in northern Mesopotamia and modern day Kurdish inhabited south east Turkey. Therefore the word Kurd has MESOPOTAMIAN ROOTS regardless of the early ancestry of these people.

You base too much on language, which is just foolish seeing how Arabs and Assyrians are not genetically similar (DNA evidence is available) and seeing how Arabs and Jews are not genetically similar despite the fact all three speak a Semite language.

sheytanElKebir

July 15th, 2012, 11:20 PM

thanks ideas... and I'd like to add to that the ethiopians!!

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 11:24 PM

thanks ideas... and I'd like to add to that the ethiopians!!

All this talk is nonsense anyway. Human migration can't be analysed based on what we know and it would be foolish to assume that migration has not occurred during the last couple hundred thousand years.. and where to we draw the line of who is native and who is not?

SumerianKing

July 15th, 2012, 11:25 PM

ideas123 Please reply to him on this thread http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1490300&page=6

Thank you. Please dont ruin this thread.

SumerianKing

July 15th, 2012, 11:28 PM

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 11:32 PM

Ideas123 your on point bro, you cannot base everything on just language.

Also, when you said that Assyrians and Arabs are not genetically similar, You did mean Assyrians and non Iraqi Arabs? Because you do know that they are similar to the Iraqi Arabs right? Just like how the Kurds and the Iraqi Arabs are similar.

Modern day Assyrians have a surprisingly high European trait (close if not higher than Kurds but not as high as Anatolian Kurds), off course there are similarities but they are not as Al-Hashimi seems to think (this is the point I'm trying to make)

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 11:32 PM

You guys seem unable to understand what I write. Or simple genetics. So I will leave it with that.

To the banned Kurdish nationalist: Read my post again and your own contradictory nonsense.

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 11:36 PM

You are a complete joke when it come to genetics ideas123: Sorry to tell you the reality.

All current day Semetic populations have two haplogroups that are predominant. J1 and J2. That's the reality whether I, you or anyone else likes that.

The Assyrians, being Semetic have those two genes as the predominant ones as has the Jews. Your own goddamn link you posted confirm that.

UNLIKE the Kurds whose genes are non- Middle Eastern in majority as I already proved and explained to you.

Let me post this again - since it seems you are unable to understand it.

Just come to terms with the fact that the Kurds are an Indo-Iranian people that are not native to the region but have lived in current day Northern Iraq for a very long time and have mixed with the native Semetic population (Assyrian, Mesopotamian etc.). The reason why Kurds even have J haplogroup in them is because that fact and due to Kurds being a non-homogenous group and them absorbing non-Kurds who later were assimilated. Their descendents (among them the original Indo-Iranian Kurds which dominate the genetic pool of the modern Kurds) are now what constitutes a Kurd.

What I told you in the last part of my message is the genetic evidence which has no interest other than showing the reality. But even that is a widely accepted Kurdish standpoint."

"Did I just not tell you in that same post of mind from where I have quoted the above marked sentences, that the word Kurd came to existance after the mixture of foreign Indo-Iranians who mixed with the local (mostly Semetic) population? Did I not tell you that the word Arab was first used by Assyrians 2800 years ago to describe nomads/farmers living outside of the main Assyrian cities in current day Iraq? So yes, the Arab presence in Iraq surpassed that of the Kurds. You have indirectly admitted that. But that was known for a long time anyway.

Nor have I claimed that Kurds have not lived in Northern Iraq for a very long time.

Fool? If anyone is the fool it's you based on this discussion. Anyway I expect you to be banned again very shortly since being a banned member and then posting is not allowed.

Your Mexican language example is just so stupid that it's not worth replying. If you don't know then the Mexicans started to speak Spanish roughly 400 years ago when the Spaniards colonized them (I am 1/4 Spanish so I know Spanish history very well). That's completely different from the spread of the Semetic langauge since the first known Semetic language, people and culture originated (Akkadian) orginated in Iraq.

By your absurd logic then Spaniards - despite being the first people to speak Spanish - a Indo-European language and at the same time being Indo-European are not the original people speaking Spanish nor Indo-European for that matter.

Why are you even including Jews when they have a much higher J1, J2 admixture than the Kurds? And the Jewish history is well-known of being a mixture (especially the Ashkenazi Jews which origin by large is probably not originally Semetic but rather Germanic, Slavic and Khazar).

Anyway I don't expect you to know such things and it would only complicate the matters further for you so I will leave it with that."

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 11:36 PM

The words of Proff Izady. If you can't understand after this you will never understand it.

Yes, Kurds as the descendants of the Medes inasmuch as they contributed genetically and linguistically to the formation of what the Kurds are today. No, Kurds are not descendants of the Medes as their civilized ancestors were already in place when the Medes appeared, flourished, and ultimately disappeared. Kurds need not have come at some given date from some other place into their present homeland; indeed they did not. They and their culture are the progeny of an evolution of native inhabitants and cultures of the Zagros-Taurus mountain systems, coming to us from remote antiquity. The addition of a Median ingredient was only one of countless many.

Let us conclude that neither Kurds or any other nation require ad discrete beginning. Only the most fanciful movie buffs can think of the intricate processes of the evolution of nations as one that needs a beginning, and an end.

SumerianKing

July 15th, 2012, 11:37 PM

ALL FURTHER POSTS ON THIS THREAD PLEASE: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1490300

Al-Hashimi

July 15th, 2012, 11:41 PM

So far you have been unable to proof that the Kurds are original natives to the region. Copying a text from doubtful Kurdish nationalistic sources (I have myself seen them and know your tricks) does not make it the reality from a genetic standpoint which is the only objective and trustful way of determining what is correct or what is wrong.

You are still unable to explain to us all why over 50 percent of the Kurdish genetic pool (unlike the Iraqi Arab and other Semetic people in Iraq and nearby) don't have such genes? It is well-known that those haplogroups that form over 50 percent of the Kurdish gene pool today are not native Middle Eastern haplogroups.

Your own goddamn link proves that. Your fairytales will not change that.

So you fail miserably.

ideas123

July 15th, 2012, 11:45 PM

Al-Hashimi

July 16th, 2012, 12:18 AM

Well, seeing how he has a P.H.D and non of us do, and seeing how he has been lecturing in Harvard we can safely assume that his words are much more accurate than ours. He is not biased, infact what he wrote angered the majority of Kurds that like to believe they are descendant of the Medes and nothing else.

You just don't want to understand that the word Kurd was created in Mesopotamia regardless of the Indo-European Median ancestry (partly) of the people.

In 2001, a team of Israeli, German, and Indian scientists discovered that the majority of Jews around the world are closely related to the Kurdish people -- more closely than they are to the Semitic-speaking Arabs or any other population that was tested.

Strange.. didn't you say your 'Semite' cousins are genetically close to Arabs?

Genetic research on Kurds and infact on Iraqi Arabs is rare (the website based the information on 100 Kurds and 500 Iraqi Arabs) which is not enough to go by but it gives us an idea. Some villages in Kurdistan would have a much higher I2a gene (Northern European) where as others will have a much higher J1 and J2 trait. What I'm trying to explain to you is the history but you keep ignoring it.

Please don't waste my time, if you don't even bother to read my posts. There is no point arguing about a matter if that's the case. You are claiming that I have said something while in fact I have been talking about the opposite.

Seriously. You are using 11 year old data. That's totally outdated. Human genetics evolve. Less than two years ago most experts on the field of human genetics thought that the Sumerians were outsiders. Today most evidence point to an native origin. I suggest you take a look at the Israeli forum. Today a member posted a much newer genetic analysis that pointed to a common Semetic ancestry among Jews, Arabs and other Semetic people.

And I ALREADY told you SEVERAL times that the Kurds have significant Semetic admixture due to them mixing with the local Semetic populations in Northern Iraq (Mesopotamians, Babylonians and Assyrians). In recent times also Arabs. So stop repeating yourself. We are talking about the root and most predominant genes of the Kurdish people which point to an Indo-Iranian orgin - which most scholars agree about and even the Kurds themselves. You did so as well earlier in this thread.

Unlike you I am a member of a Arabic forum where Arabs from all over the world are posting their DNA. There is a Iraqi project as well (not solely Arabs of course since Iraqi is only a nationality rather than a ethnic group).

Yes, Kurds have a lot of non-Middle Eastern haplogroups which I have been saying all the time. Not sure why you mention the haplogroup I.

Apart from that you are wrong. The haplogroup is indeed native to Europeans but it's not Northern European. It's highest frequencies are found in Balkan and the Italian island of Sardegna. It's indeed also frequent in Germanic nations (mostly Northern Germany and Scandinavia - Finland excluded who are an Uralic people by far (haplogroup N)

Anyway it seems we are misunderstanding each other because you don't bother to read what I am actually writing. For that reason this discussion is going into circles which is a waste of time since I assume we both want to gain something from this discussion.

And before you bother to reply - read my post closely so you don't make similar replies again.

ideas123

July 16th, 2012, 12:26 AM

Al-Hashimi

July 16th, 2012, 12:34 AM

On the contrary you are the one not reading my posts. Infact I have agreed with the fact that Kurds do have partly Indo-European ancestry (Medes). What I disagree on is where you kept saying "Kurds came over to Mesopotamia" and I kept trying to explain to you that the Indo-Europeans that arrived in the region were NOT Kurds but rather Medes, I also kept trying to explain to you that the term Kurd was first used in Mesopotamia so the Roots of "Kurds" is Mesopotamian regardless of what the earlier Indo-European ancestry was. Is that understandable?

Yes I meant Southeastern Europe, my bad. I used I as an example because my Kurdish side is predominantly of I trait, and the village they were from was the same.

See where we only differ is that you claim that the root of the Kurdish people was native which I don't agree with, as does most scholars and genetic evidence.

Because how do you otherwise explain the fact that over 50 percent of all Kurds belong to non- Middle Eastern haplogroups (R1a, R1b, I) and speak a Indo-Iranian language? In comparison nearby Smetic people speak a Semetic language and mostly belong to the haplogroups J1 and J2 which are Semetic haplogroups by far as the link you posted shows and you yourself have agreed with.

I agree completely that the Kurds have mixed with the native Semetic populations (Mesopotamians, Babylonians, Assyrians) and other peoples. Probably also other Indo-Iranians.

We also agree that the label Kurd came to existance after that mixture had happened, which I already wrote several posts ago (see that's what i am saying about not reading carefully enough what the other person is writing)

We also agree that Kurds have lived in the region of Kurdistan for a very long time.

Lastly, the haplogroup I is not exclusively Southern European or Northern European. It's found in Balkan, Sardegna, Northern Germany and Scandinavia (Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Iceland). So it's pretty widespread. It's also found in lower numbers outside of those countries.

All haplogroups have spread since haplogroups predate ethnic groups. That's why you have two different ethnic groups who can share the same haplogroups in majority (for example amng Semetic ethnic groups, Indo-Iranians, Indo-Europeans, Indic populations, East Asians etc.

ideas123

July 16th, 2012, 12:44 AM

It is believed to be originated from there. But that is not relevant to this.

As I said, the website based the information on just 100 people which is not enough to go by, the J1 and J2 percentage within Kurds is likely much higher, but as I said the information we have is very scarce and what we have is a good foundation but in no way or form enough to go by.

As I said before, speaking an Afro-Semite language does not make you native and I already provided evidence that suggest Kurds are genetically close to the Jews (Semites) than the Arabs, besides, when you have lived in a region long enough you are native, or where do you draw the line of who is native and who is not?

In conclusion these discussions mean very little to me, the mountainous regions are the Kurdish homeland because it is there that the Ethnic name "Kurd" was born.

Sinjar

July 16th, 2012, 02:31 PM

Sumer and Alshawi, exactly. That's what I've been trying to tell him..

Ideas he will deny everything by saying it's an extreme nationalist source though you proved it isn't. Thanks for the useful info.

Al-Hashimi

July 16th, 2012, 02:33 PM

:lol:

Ali_as

July 18th, 2012, 07:23 PM

Ishtarporten

July 19th, 2012, 04:56 AM

i had to go back to page 5 to actually see some designs...the rest was just a political discussion!

as for the flag i'd go for the 1959 flag - though i understand that some people may be uncomfortable about that considering the killings that went on at the time.

Why should we have a Kurdish symbol while the Kurds are ashamed to have something that belong to iraq in their flag!

Ali_as

July 19th, 2012, 01:49 PM

Why should we have a Kurdish symbol while the Kurds are ashamed to have something that belong to iraq in their flag!

by adopting such a flag, the central govt will show that it represents everyone - even those who may not have a strong affinity with the country but are nevertheless still a part of the country.

i mean look at the union jack of the UK - it represents scotland even though the latter wants to become independent (well some people within it do).

Ishtarporten

July 19th, 2012, 03:01 PM

by adopting such a flag, the central govt will show that it represents everyone - even those who may not have a strong affinity with the country but are nevertheless still a part of the country.

i mean look at the union jack of the UK - it represents scotland even though the latter wants to become independent (well some people within it do).

i agree with you but the Kurds will not understand they only shout "biji Kurdistan and hell with the iraqis"!!

Ali_as

July 19th, 2012, 04:00 PM

i agree with you but the Kurds will not understand they only shout "biji Kurdistan and hell with the iraqis"!!

bro, come on...what's with the generalization?!

even if some kurds say that. fine. it's their opinion and while i don't agree with the second part i would not resort with a similar attack. it's not helpful to anybody.

Ishtarporten

July 19th, 2012, 05:01 PM

bro, come on...what's with the generalization?!

even if some kurds say that. fine. it's their opinion and while i don't agree with the second part i would not resort with a similar attack. it's not helpful to anybody.

Im not hating but they should be thanksful for what they got in Iraq and respect the Iraqi people!

Ali - Iraq

July 19th, 2012, 07:19 PM

i agree with you but the Kurds will not understand they only shout "biji Kurdistan and hell with the iraqis"!!
True story.

Sinjar

July 20th, 2012, 01:26 PM

Exactly dear Ali_as..

check this about the referendum that is going to take place in 2014 in Scotland. Link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-18364699)

Aladdin1990

August 2nd, 2012, 11:46 PM

well don't quite know whether this is still a flag proposal page or an argue page but I like this design which I designed (hahaha).. it represents Mesopotamian Iraq only unfortunately and not Kurdistan. But Kurdistan has its flag, so why not Mesopotamia as well?

What it represents:
Two blue stripes: Euphrates and Tigris

The sun with the four stripes: it is an ancient mesopotamian symbol for the sun god Shemesh found on many old tablets. Shemesh himself is on the Law Stone of Hammurabi. He was the god of Justice in old Mesopotamia thus representing the Justice (which will hopefully come to the country and its people...).

The four blue stripes are actually the two rivers again which come together in the middle and go apart again which is representing Baghdad as the capital because Baghdad lies at the point where Tigris and Euphrates are the closest.

The wheat in the middle of the sun is actually also on the old Coat of Arms of Iraq from the 60s. It represents the fertility of the land which is its prime richness.

The colours red, white, green and black in the sun are the Pan-Arab Flags representing the different Caliphates: Ummayad, Abbasid etc. They are in the same alignment as they were in the Flag of the Arab Revolt showing that Mesopotamia is an Arabic country and proud of that.

I hope you like it:

http://i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj533/Aladdin1990photo/Bildschirmfoto2012-08-02um233255.png

Al-Hashimi

August 2nd, 2012, 11:56 PM

Wallah akhi this is not bad!

If you tell me what program you used to design the flag I will try and make one myself.

Maybe a little addition from me at least.

If you could somehow add this flag into your flag or parts of the flag then it would be perfect because the current is somehow similar to the Assyrian flag and the Arab/Islamic symbols are difficult to detect.

http://i48.tinypic.com/vear2s.png

Aladdin1990

August 3rd, 2012, 12:00 AM

I kept it free of any religious symbols on purpose because it isn't supposed to represent a religious group but an entire country and people. Christians or Mandeans etc. shouldn't feel left out. Religious freedom for individuals and a country for all!

The Arab symbols are the Pan Arab colours. I tried to focus more on the identity of the country itself which is Bilad al Raifidain, Nahrain, Mesopotamia, Iraq whatever you may call it.

Al-Hashimi

August 3rd, 2012, 12:04 AM

I understand:)

Could you tell me which program you used?

I am curious because I now want to try and make my own flag or a few ones and see which is better. It's a funny thought designing a new flag.

Aladdin1990

August 3rd, 2012, 12:05 AM

Haha a very sophisticated one...called..."Paint" haha;) the lame microsoft program which is standard.

Al-Hashimi

August 3rd, 2012, 12:07 AM

Don't excuse yourself. The closest thing I have been to designing any flag on my computer has been to resize a picture:lol:

If anybody know a good program that is easy to use then please share maybe we will then have more contributions to this thread.

Chounz

August 3rd, 2012, 12:19 AM

Aladdin I like your flag very much. My flag and your flag are probably the best ones suggested on this thread up to date.. :D

Aladdin1990

August 3rd, 2012, 01:19 AM

Aladdin I like your flag very much. My flag and your flag are probably the best ones suggested on this thread up to date.. :D

^^:)

naturally I like mine more! haha;) I like yours but I don't like the turquoise .. I tried to avoid the blue/israel theme by making the blue stripes thick and vertical instead of thin and horizontal (which even make sense because the rivers flow from north to south and they are biiiiig rivers so they should be represented accurately:P)

Al-Hashimi

August 3rd, 2012, 01:35 AM

Post the flag Chounz made, never seen it before.

Chounz

August 3rd, 2012, 01:38 AM

Here:

http://s18.postimage.org/c0u9pwofd/iraqflg2.png

Light blue rivers instead of the dark blue/navy israel-like colour.

The green representing our palm trees/agriculture instead of Kurds. :D

Al-Hashimi

August 3rd, 2012, 01:42 AM

Here:

It screams ISRAEL. Sorry akhi, Aladdin wins this round.:)

Although I must say that I like the colour combinations.

SumerianKing

August 3rd, 2012, 02:20 AM

Aladdin1990

August 3rd, 2012, 03:00 AM

galbi, i love it. btw just asking, are you part of the chaldean chruch? hence your avatar.

the only problem with this flag is that some narrow minded assyrians are going to think that it only represents them. as there are those who stupidly think that they are the only original people of mesopotamia. only because some people of rafidain never converted to islam.

^^ thank you. I'm glad you like it. No I'm not from the Chaldean church. I know it looks similar to the Assyrian Flag but I designed this ages ago when I was 16 I think (2006) back then I had no clue what the Assyrian flag looked like. It's kind of a coincidence especially the sun! I used that because I had to make a school report about the Law Stone of Hammurabi and I liked it's historic value and the symbol it stands for: justice.

With the flag I tried to represent the culture a lot. Basically ancient culture with the sun symbol and medieval and contemporary Arabic culture with the pan Arab colours. I didn't want to focus on a religious group.

And my avatar is basically only the middle part of the flag!;) the "coat of arms".

SumerianKing

August 3rd, 2012, 03:22 AM

^^ thank you. I'm glad you like it. No I'm not from the Chaldean church. I know it looks similar to the Assyrian Flag but I designed this ages ago when I was 16 I think (2006) back then I had no clue what the Assyrian flag looked like. It's kind of a coincidence especially the sun! I used that because I had to make a school report about the Law Stone of Hammurabi and I liked it's historic value and the symbol it stands for: justice.

With the flag I tried to represent the culture a lot. Basically ancient culture with the sun symbol and medieval and contemporary Arabic culture with the pan Arab colours. I didn't want to focus on a religious group.

And my avatar is basically only the middle part of the flag!;) the "coat of arms".

The concept and the message behind it is very nice, good thinking bro :)

I think the two sections of blue is MANDATORY. Because without the Tigris and Euphrates, iraq would be nothing. It is these rivers hat gave life to our land.

Al-Hashimi

August 3rd, 2012, 03:48 AM

I must admit that I really like the Assyrian flag. There is something really unique about it.

Do we know of the earliest flag used in modern-day Iraq?

Also I have always wondered why no Iraqi provinces have there own regional flags apart from Iraqi Kurdistan?

That's the case all over Europe.

romano1

August 3rd, 2012, 11:14 AM

i design this for new iraqi flag
it's simple and nice and take from iraq the future and the past
and the two rivers
http://i48.tinypic.com/2nbeu7m.png

Mesch

August 3rd, 2012, 11:33 AM

http://1.1.1.4/bmi/i1266.photobucket.com/albums/jj533/Aladdin1990photo/Bildschirmfoto2012-08-02um233255.png

This looks beautiful. :cheers:

Sinjar

August 3rd, 2012, 12:59 PM

I like it too akhi.

I think it's better to change the blue color in both sides to black and green like the old flag. The two rivers are already represented in the middle..

Btw Sumer, why are you calling him habibiti? :D I think he is a man...

Spin Cycle

August 3rd, 2012, 01:13 PM

Here:

Rihna min Israel ila Argentina.

If you darken the blue and replace the white with green....that may work.

SumerianKing

August 3rd, 2012, 04:25 PM

NOO we have to stick with the blue.
I made this:
It represents the 2 rivers that gave life to Iraq, and in the middle represents Sumerian cuneiform, which symbolises the first civilization that came to birth between the 2 rivers.

But I do like the fact to keep it nice and simple like what romano1 said.

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/4860/iraqflagk.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/84/iraqflagk.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

IraqiPlan_et

August 3rd, 2012, 04:49 PM

^^ Not bad since it depicts the sumerian civilization with geographical concideration (as between the rivers)

My proposal :D

http://www.artcornergallery.com/en/images/medium/1208.jpg

fazl1991

August 3rd, 2012, 04:51 PM

its like some one is going to come and pick a flag from this forum :lol:

Aladdin1990

August 3rd, 2012, 04:58 PM

SumerianKing

August 3rd, 2012, 05:00 PM

its like some one is going to come and pick a flag from this forum :lol:

I wish.. You never know...
The flag that romano1 proposed is the best, in terms thats its simple but yet portrays a strong message. I think Iraqis will love it, why? Because which Iraqi does not LOVE dijla wel furat? It is the beating heart of Iraq.

SumerianKing

August 3rd, 2012, 05:02 PM

Love it. But it doesn't at all represent the medieval and contemporary Arab history of Iraq which is just as great as the ancient history of the land.

Thats the problem, everyone wants it to represent something.
However the sumerian writing represents the first civilization in Iraq and the world which later on gave rise to all the other eras throughout Iraqs history.

Anyway, best solution is to remove the Sumerian writing and just leave it as blue and white. Nothing better and nothing more meaningful then that.

SumerianKing

August 3rd, 2012, 05:04 PM

Id just love to see this in Iraq.

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9683/2nbeu7m.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/2nbeu7m.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Mesch

August 4th, 2012, 02:53 AM

Looks like Nigeria's flag.

Euphrates

August 4th, 2012, 02:57 AM

Id just love to see this in Iraq.

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9683/2nbeu7m.png (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/2nbeu7m.png/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Sorry, but this is very ugly.

Euphrates

August 4th, 2012, 03:01 AM

Ali - Iraq

August 4th, 2012, 03:04 AM

Iraqi criticism ftw xd

Al-Hashimi

August 4th, 2012, 03:10 AM

Euphrates

August 4th, 2012, 04:35 AM

Euphrates:

That's not a flag proposal. I just proposed that parts of it could be added to Aladdin's flag to show our glorious Arab/Islamic past (Lakhmids, Hatra, Abbasids, Golden Age of Islam etc.) because they were hard to detect on his flag despite him including it in the colours.

In my opinion we should include Sumer, ancient Semetic Iraq (Akkadia, Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Assyria), the Islamic/Arabic Iraq and the geography (Euphrates, Tigris, deserts, mountains etc.) :D

One should not be preferred over the other. If it's not possible to include them all (ancient Iraq, Islamic/Arabic Iraq and the geography (the two rivers) then we should just keep the current one.

The difficulty lies in combining all those crucial elements and to satisfy most people while not making the flag too complicated.

I have yet to see a perfect flag in that department.:)

I have to agree..there's much latent that can be used to fulfill the criteria yet satisfy most Iraqis..like everyone else says though, at the current time the flag should be the least of our problems, although I wouldn't mind seeing a change.

I don't agree with parading 'arab/islamic' culture on the flag though..Islam is not the only religion in Iraq despite it's general significance in the country, other religions were likewise essential throughout modern and ancient history of Iraq..

I don't want any kurdish in the flag, kurds have their own flag and being frank, we all know where their priorities lie.

In my opinion, I'd like to see a simple flag, I'm not sure how I should define a 'simple flag'...on the most part something the vast majority can get along with because of simple principle of design yet strong relevance to the country...(those flag designers have a load on their shoulders coming to think of it :D )

SumerianKing

August 4th, 2012, 04:38 AM

whatever the design i think it must have the rivers, its the beating heart of iraq.

Al-Hashimi

August 4th, 2012, 02:36 PM

I have to agree..there's much latent that can be used to fulfill the criteria yet satisfy most Iraqis..like everyone else says though, at the current time the flag should be the least of our problems, although I wouldn't mind seeing a change.

I don't agree with parading 'arab/islamic' culture on the flag though..Islam is not the only religion in Iraq despite it's general significance in the country, other religions were likewise essential throughout modern and ancient history of Iraq..

I don't want any kurdish in the flag, kurds have their own flag and being frank, we all know where their priorities lie.

In my opinion, I'd like to see a simple flag, I'm not sure how I should define a 'simple flag'...on the most part something the vast majority can get along with because of simple principle of design yet strong relevance to the country...(those flag designers have a load on their shoulders coming to think of it :D )

I agree completely about the flag not being the most important issue at all right now but discussing a possible new flag is a funny thought.:)

About the religion part. I know that Christianity is observed by the Assyrians but they are more or less the only ones. For the past 1400 years or so Iraq has always been a majority Muslim country. Our Islamic heritage and history is also second only to Hejaz for obvious reasons.

But I would not have anything against adding a Christian symbol myself. The question is whether adding a Assyrian symbol is not enough?

And is there any flag that displays two religions on it? I actually don't think such a flag exists so it's about time we make one, LOL.

But as I said if we can't include symbols from ancient Iraq, our Arab/Islamic heritage and geography (Tigris, Euphrates mainly) then there is no point making a new flag since too many would complain.

I know this is the coat of arms of the Kingdom of Iraq but I like how they managed to include the two rivers, the palm tress, the desert, the scimitar, the wheat as a symbol of the earlierst agriculture in Iraq etc. without making if look too complicated. Yes, the design is inspired by European coat of arms but that's not the point but rather how fairly many symbols like that can be used together with success.

http://i46.tinypic.com/28i0tbr.png

Euphrates

August 4th, 2012, 02:46 PM

I agree completely about the flag not being the most important issue at all right now but discussing a possible new flag is a funny thought.:)

About the religion part. I know that Christianity is observed by the Assyrians but they are more or less the only ones. For the past 1400 years or so Iraq has always been a majority Muslim country. Our Islamic heritage and history is also second only to Hejaz for obvious reasons.

But I would not have anything against adding a Christian symbol myself. The question is whether adding a Assyrian symbol is not enough?

And is there any flag that displays two religions on it? I actually don't think such a flag exists so it's about time we make one, LOL.

But as I said if we can't include symbols from ancient Iraq, our Arab/Islamic heritage and geography (Tigris, Euphrates mainly) then there is no point making a new flag since too many would complain.

I know this is the coat of arms of the Kingdom of Iraq but I like how they managed to include the two rivers, the palm tress, the desert, the scimitar, the wheat as a symbol of the earlierst agriculture in Iraq etc. without making if look too complicated. Yes, the design is inspired by European coat of arms but that's not the point but rather how fairly many symbols like that can be used together with success.

http://i46.tinypic.com/28i0tbr.png

I really like that coat of arms.

Do we really have to have religion on the flag? I understand there is great influence with religion, but religion has been nothing but trouble for us. I don't want any of it on the flag. I'd like to see something more neutral.

Al-Hashimi

August 4th, 2012, 03:15 PM

I forgot to add that the Babylonian Lion and Arabian horse (I think that was the intention?!) are added in the coat of arms of the Kingdom of Iraq as well, as you might have realized now.:)

Well, I would not insist on adding religious symbols but if the Iraqi people prefer doing that then I have absolutely no objections.

But if I was anti-religion then I would be afraid of that being the case since religion (Islam) has played an even greater role in Iraq since 2003 and continues to do it. Not sure if that's a short-term trend but I doubt it.

I assume that they would have removed the takbir if the opposite was the case.:)

Basrawii

August 4th, 2012, 09:41 PM

http://i46.tinypic.com/28i0tbr.png

nice curtains! lol xD

Ali - Iraq

August 4th, 2012, 10:12 PM

hahahaha

romano1

August 4th, 2012, 11:15 PM

Sorry, but this is very ugly.
why ???
ليش مو تصميم حلو وبسيط وينطي وجه جديد للعراق
واللون الازرق من اجمل الالوان

romano1

August 4th, 2012, 11:20 PM

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Flag_of_Libya_%281977%29.svg

شنو رايكم بعلم القذافي مال ليبيا حلو ومحد يرسمه غلط

Sinjar

August 5th, 2012, 12:58 AM

why ???
ليش مو تصميم حلو وبسيط وينطي وجه جديد للعراق
واللون الازرق من اجمل الالوان

ye sa7e7 bas yeshbah 3alam Nigeria lol.

Alulim

August 9th, 2012, 09:17 AM

I always laugh when I see fellow Iraqis speak about the Arabs and how they always want to show a good picture of the Arabs. Weren't those Arabs you are so proud of and consider as brothers the ones that let USA through to attack Iraq? Weren't these Arabs the ones that sent us their garbage shitty terrorists that destroyed and killed many innocent Iraqis, weren't these Arabs the ones that started the biggest problem in Iraq the belief questioning whether you are Shi3i or Sunni? Damn these Arabs are so loyal and great. I am tired of hearing this bullshit about the Arabs, I cannot love a person who has hurt an innocent Iraqi I just can't.

So now after reading this you think I am Kurd, oh no you are wrong I am so much Iraqi a person can ever be even though you may not believe it the Kurds are also Iraqis. But i don't consider myself being Arab I see nothing bright in the Arabs to be honest, many of you might get angry but just give a thought a see who destroyed our beloved country the most, USA or or neighborhood brothers the Arabs?

And after reading this you will think I am one of those Shi3a that loves Iran, no to hell with Iran too together with Saudi Arabia, Iraqs biggest enemies.

I am Sumerian, I am Iraqi and I think we should drop this whatever it is called "Arabhood" and be ourselves and think about ourselves and what is best for us and stop listening to the outsiders(Iran and Saudi Arabia). We are Iraqis, the rest of Arabs don't want us good they want to see us hurt just like Iran.

I hope you understand me and my feelings I just love Iraq and the Iraqis so much that I hate the person that hurt one of us and yes the Kurds are Iraqis at least the ones in northern Iraq whether they like it or not.

Ali - Iraq

August 9th, 2012, 03:43 PM

I am Sumerian, I am Iraqi and I think we should drop this whatever it is called "Arabhood" and be ourselves and think about ourselves and what is best for us and stop listening to the outsiders(Iran and Saudi Arabia). We are Iraqis, the rest of Arabs don't want us good they want to see us hurt just like Iran.
Hehe you are funny aroui. Watch out for Hashimi! This is going to be funny :DDD

Mesch

August 9th, 2012, 08:14 PM

Poor Sumerians, all 3ahat the world are claiming to be their descendants.

Basrawii

August 9th, 2012, 08:25 PM

poor camels... they had to serve these filthy people.

Mesch

August 9th, 2012, 09:50 PM

Sinjar

August 12th, 2012, 11:09 PM

how can you let Alilum's comment go unnoticed Al Hashimi? :ohno:

Ishtarporten

August 12th, 2012, 11:31 PM

how can you let Alilum's comment go unnoticed Al Hashimi? :ohno:

mysterious:eek:

SumerianAkkadian

August 14th, 2012, 12:16 AM

Yousifovic

August 14th, 2012, 03:15 AM

this is my proposal

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/9106/stocagin22bluesk095223.jpg

BigDreamer

August 14th, 2012, 03:21 AM

Yousifovic

August 14th, 2012, 03:22 AM

^^ wats up dreamer ?

SumerianAkkadian

August 15th, 2012, 08:29 AM

SumerianAkkadian

August 15th, 2012, 09:29 AM

SumerianAkkadian

August 15th, 2012, 09:53 AM

SumerianAkkadian

August 15th, 2012, 10:54 AM

SumerianAkkadian

August 16th, 2012, 03:39 AM

Chounz

August 16th, 2012, 03:45 AM

If the idea of having cuneiform on the Iraqi flag doesn't excite you - you're obviously not a real Iraqi. It should give you tingles.

Ummm no it doesn't excite me? I've never been a fan of any form of writing on a flag. Am I not a real Iraqi then? I doubt it gives 'tingles' to the majority of Iraqis anyway..

SumerianAkkadian

August 16th, 2012, 04:05 AM

Chounz

August 16th, 2012, 04:12 AM

That appears to be a pointlessly antagonistic retort.

Umm how was that antagonistic? I was just trying to understand your logic.

And why did you delete the most important line in my reply anyway? Just so it could fit your accusation?

If you meant it then whatever you are, it's not what I am.

LOL really? How dramatic. Up to you buddy..

Your loss tbh. :D

SumerianAkkadian

August 16th, 2012, 05:40 AM

Chounz

August 16th, 2012, 06:22 AM

Like I said on another thread; I feel nothing in common with those people who are indifferent to ancient Iraqi history. That would apply to you and Spin Cycle, and your kind, whose identity is limited to Arabian culture.

You can't understand an Iraqi passion for cuneiform? that's not normal.

My identity is limited to Arabian culture? Really? Interesting lol. Learning new things about myself everyday.. :D

Spin Cycle isn't even proud of Arabian culture AFAIK so I'm not sure how you're assuming these things about us?

My point is that just yesterday we were criticising Iraqis because of their low nationalism and what not. And I believe it was YOU who started the whole topic. Do you think this whole 'Oh if you believe this and think this and say this then you're not a real Iraqi but if you don't then you are' sort of talk really helps? I KNOW that you did not mean it in a completely serious way and it was not on such an important matter... but these things still matter.

This could be the root or one of the causes of our whole nationalism problem today. Some Iraqis feel less Iraqi than other Iraqis. And why do they feel less Iraqi than other Iraqis? Partly because of being accused of being less Iraqi than other Iraqis.

I mean what good does it really do? People have different views and beliefs, why should any of it matter in determining your 'Iraqi-ness'? Some Iraqis prefer a different form of government over the other. Some Iraqis prefer a different time period in history over the other. Some Iraqis prefer a different flag design than the other. So what?

This whole 'real' Iraqi 'real' Arab 'real' Muslim talk has caused bloodshed in the past.....why do we feel the need to repeat it?

Chounz

August 16th, 2012, 06:49 AM

Like I said on another thread; I feel nothing in common with those people who are indifferent to ancient Iraqi history. That would apply to you and Spin Cycle, and your kind, whose identity is limited to Arabian culture.

Because I am not a fan of any form of writing (including Cuneiform) on any flag, especially the Iraqi one, that makes me 'indifferent' to ancient Iraqi history? Hahaha.

Like.. where do I even begin? Where is the correlation exactly? I could be the proudest Iraqi of Mesopotamian history but prefer a flag with no writing?

JSYK the main reason why I don't support any form of writing on a flag is because it simply don't look right/good. If they could incorporate the Cuneiform in a way that's nice and suits the flag, then I'd be all for it.
This is beyond the point.

If you're so confused and spend so much time wondering why there are so many Iraqis that are indifferent to ancient Iraqi history perhaps you should take a look at the current Iraq. Huge huge huge mess. Shithole. If I saw an ounce of the civilisation, sophistication, intelligence and cultural significance of the ancient Iraq in the new one maybe I would be more proud. There is absolutely no similarity whatsover? I've been reassured that it certainly was not the same people (not even one drop of blood) and now I really wonder HOW ON EARTH it was even the same land? Completely completely different place.

Many Iraqis now can't help but feel that it was a different place and that would be your answer.

Alulim

August 16th, 2012, 01:55 PM

I totally agree with everything Chounz says, give up SumerianAkkadian. We must have different opinions and taste in thing else we'd be copies of each other and that isn't anything good for the country but I do agree with you that we need to be more proud of being Iraqis.

SumerianAkkadian

August 16th, 2012, 04:06 PM

Al-Hashimi

August 16th, 2012, 04:15 PM

First of all thank you for your post SumerianAkkadian and kind words. I have seen that you have made quite a fuss here, LOL, so let's take it easy next time.:)

Let me just correct you. The Maltese do not speak Arabic. They speak their own Maltese language which is a mixture of Arabic, Italian and recent French and English loanwords. The Maltese today are mostly Italian immigrants but the ancient Maltese population are mostly from an ancient Semetic stock due to the Phoenicians and later Arabs. But in short they are a mixture of different peoples throughout the history like every other nation and people.

I saw your reply and due to my reply being over 5000 characters, LOL, then I am forced to reply here. I have not quoted your post here, since I assume you want to keep that part in private but here you have my reply at least:):

Here it comes:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
وعليكم السلام

First of all welcome.

I am not sure if I would call myself an intellectual since I am too young for that, LOL, and I am not sure what you mean when you say you disagree with me? On what front exactly?
I am afraid that I am not a Wikipedia editor at all. I actually made my first Wikipedia user back in July to correct the article called "Mesopotamia" from stating which countries today were part of it to where the cultures/civilizations were native to and that is obviously modern-day Iraq.

I don't know about the Western editors, nor would I take it serious for obvious reasons, since that's just Wikipedia and in practice anybody can edit it.

If you want serious material on Iraq I suggest you read local Iraqi Arabic ones, encyclopedias or well respected books.

Look bro, being an Arab in Iraq is not easy for political reasons due to the majority (60 percent) being Shi'ah. That's because of the political situation in our region. But this should not lead to self-hate. In Yemen half of the population is Shi'ah. In Saudi Arabia 1/4 of the population is Shi'ah. There are large Shi'ah minorities all over the Arab world. For that reason some Iraqi Shi'ah Arabs try to renounce their heritage and claim a Persian for example, which in my eyes is a disgrace and I would be ashamed of myself for saying such nonsense.

It's a shame that they have become Persianized because I consider Iranians enemies of Iraqis, Arabs and Semetics on most issues due to their strong nationalism and disregard for Semetic people WHICH we Iraqis undoubtedly are. We have the oldest Semetic civilization (Akkadian) which I hope you know all about it. Renouncing that in favour of the primitive Persian nomadic culture (less than 2800 years) is a crime against humanity. Even their language irritates me. I hope you can understand the sentiments many Iraqis have against Iran and their claim of "owning" Iraq just because they ruled PARTS of modern-day Iraq for some years. In a Iranian eyes Iraqi history starts when they conquered Babylon. You only see them claiming Iraqi history and no other nation or people. That's a sad fact. Of course not all Iranians are like that but all the nationalistic ones (which they have in great numbers) are. Sadly.

I suggest you visit an Iranian forum and you would get a very unpleasant surprise when you will see that they say Iraqis are Iranians.:lol:

Excuse me bro, but what do you mean don't look "Arabic" You do know that the ancient Sumerians, Akkadians and Assyrians you admire so much are related to Arabs? The language, genetics not to mention the fact that they come from the same region. They were neigbhours for thousands of years and intermarried! The word Arab first came to existence 2800 years ago to describe nomads/farmers living outside the main cities in Mesopotamia/Babylonia/Assyria.

That was first used in Assyrian scriptures in modern-day Iraq and Eastern Syria (Syrian Desert which form great parts of Iraq and Syria as you might know).

There is no Arab look per se. Not all Arabs look like OBL for example or an angry wahhabi cleric. People come in all shapes, sizes, colours etc. Semetic people are not like Japanese or Chinese or some Africans. You see the same in Europe. French and Spaniards for example, my mother's side of the family, come in all forms. But they are still the same people more or less, although we are all mixed.

Brother, the Akkadian and Sumerians were brown people. I am sure you have heard the theories of Sumerians being from India right? That was ruled out recently due to DNA test on the Marsh Arabs who were long thought to be descendents of Sumerians. It turned out that 85 percent of the Marsh Arabs belong to the Haplogroup J1 Y-DNA which is a strong Semetic marker and very popular in Iraq and the Arabian Peninsula. In fact it's the most popular haplogroup in our region. This screams of a common Semetic background.

I understand that there is not much to be proud of being Arab now, but from your post I understand that you acknowledged your Arabic side. Arabs are not what the Western "experts" try to portray. Arabs have a wonderful and ancient history that is older than most cultures on this world. You have magnificent and old buildings such as Palmyra, Petra, Hatra, Mada'in Salah etc. I suggest you read about it. Not everything is Islamic, there was a long culture before that as well. In most of Southern Iraq ancient Arabs build cities (Lakhmids) that were fought to equal everything sophisticated on this earth. You have travellers from outside of our region writing about the grandeur of the region. Let's not even talk about the Islamic grandeur or the Islamic Empires that ruled half of the world and built wonderful mosques, palaces, castles, the Islamic Golden Age that was far ahead of everything else etc. There is much to be proud of, trust me. I have not even talked about poetry.

What I am trying to tell you is that Iraq's demographics are no way the same as for 10.000 years ago. This is impossible for various reasons such as deadly invasions, CONSTANT immigrations, massacres, wars etc. When the Mongols sacked Baghdad 800 years ago (the main city in current day Iraq and our region) they killed most of the population... And that was 5000 years before the Sumerians, thousands of other wars, massacres, destructions, migrations, immigrations, mixing etc.

It was in fact mostly Northern Iraq who was fairly isolated and it's no wonder that they are the most diverse region of Iraq and have large minorities who have kept their distinct cultures intact.

Today most of Iraq is Arab but that does not mean that we do not have Assyrian (Semetic people closely related to Arabs as you know) ancestry or the more ancient Akkadian, Babylonian (also ancient Semetic people) or the even older Sumerians.

You must know that Arabs, like any other people on this earth, are mixed with other peoples. There is nothing wrong with this. It's normal human behaviour to travel, expand and thus mix with others. ESPECIALLY in a major crossroad like the Middle East, not to mention it's heart and center (modern-day Iraq and the cradle of civilization)

That's why we look different. I am not sure if you have been to Iraq but if you have you would notice that most Iraqis are very Semetic looking and you will find few that very few look fully European like you say you look or have blond hair.

I am here talking about Iraqi Arabs and Assyrians since both are Semetic and not Iraqi Turkmens or Iraqi Kurds .Just look at our parents for God's sake:)

How do you explain this? In ancient times race had very little importance, I suggest you read about this matter, if you don't believe what I say. Back in the day only wealth, social status, religion etc. was important. Look, maybe our descendents in 4-5 generations will not even relate to our past but more to their recent descendents such as Chinese, European or African. Who knows?

Before you say anything else I would also like you to take a look at the most common haplogroups in our Semetic world. We all share the same haplogroups. If you go to North Africa, Turkey or Iran those haplogroups differ significantly from ours. This is again another proof of our common ancestry and relations here in the Semetic world.

Having said that I am myself concious about my ancestry just as every Iraqi is that I know. I have even taken an DNA test which very few people have, LOL.

Yes, we have had discussions (me and my friends, relatives included) about whether we had some long decaesed ancestors from the ancient Semetic civilizations and we all came to that agreement that we had. Just like most other Semetic people today. If you are more interested in our genetic past (which is the only real proof) then I suggest you take a look at the DNA family project on Iraq, Arabs and other Semetic peoples/nations.

If you know Arabic you will quickly figure out you is Iraqi Arab and who is Iraqi Kurd, Turkmen etc. You will also quickly see how similar we are in terms of ancient ancestry. I also suggest you talk with an Iraqi genetic expert on this issue, maybe he will further explain what I said. I can lead you to one clever man if you want.

Worth noticing is also the fact that neither the Sumerians or Akkadians were homogenous groups. In fact they were mixtures themselves as most other people in the Middle East. I mean our region was the main crossroad for centuries, it was the cradle of civilization etc. Huge migrations took place both to and from the Middle East. It's not like we are an isolated region like the Native Americans or Japanese, That's why I said that they are probably one of the few people on this earth who can genuinly say that they are direct ancestors of their ancient cultures and not any other race. And that's even debatable as well, since I read that most Japanese, Chinese, Koreans, Indonesians etc. have an common root long ago.

And if we look far back enough, according to the scientists and experts, we are all from Africa...

And yes, take care as well.:)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lastly you are completely wrong when you say that Iraqis are not concious about their history or don't have any nationalistic movements. Not sure if you are serious. I suggest you take a look at those guys who ruled Iraq from 1958 until 2003. And being an Persianized Iraqi is not an Iraqi if we follow your logic, bro.

Alulim

August 16th, 2012, 05:26 PM

Look bro, being an Arab in Iraq is not easy for political reasons due to the majority (60 percent) being Shi'ah. That's because of the political situation in our region. But this should not lead to self-hate. In Yemen half of the population is Shi'ah. In Saudi Arabia 1/4 of the population is Shi'ah. There are large Shi'ah minorities all over the Arab world. For that reason some Iraqi Shi'ah Arabs try to renounce their heritage and claim a Persian for example, which in my eyes is a disgrace and I would be ashamed of myself for saying such nonsense.

It's a shame that they have become Persianized because I consider Iranians enemies of Iraqis, Arabs and Semetics on most issues due to their strong nationalism and disregard for Semetic people WHICH we Iraqis undoubtedly are. We have the oldest Semetic civilization (Akkadian) which I hope you know all about it. Renouncing that in favour of the primitive Persian nomadic culture (less than 2800 years) is a crime against humanity. Even their language irritates me. I hope you can understand the sentiments many Iraqis have against Iran and their claim of "owning" Iraq just because they ruled PARTS of modern-day Iraq for some years. In a Iranian eyes Iraqi history starts when they conquered Babylon. You only see them claiming Iraqi history and no other nation or people. That's a sad fact. Of course not all Iranians are like that but all the nationalistic ones (which they have in great numbers) are. Sadly.

I suggest you visit an Iranian forum and you would get a very unpleasant surprise when you will see that they say Iraqis are Iranians.:lol:

So that is how you see the Shias. Actually pretty interesting view you Wahabis/Sunnis/Salafis got on the Shias. So we're claiming to be Persians, well that is interesting too.

Al-Hashimi

August 16th, 2012, 05:31 PM

So that is how you see the Shias. Actually pretty interesting view you Wahabis/Sunnis/Salafis got on the Shias. So we're claiming to be Persians, well that is interesting too.

Care to elaborate? Who the hell said that Iraqi Shi'ah Arabs are claiming to be Iranians? I stated that a lot of Iranians consider Shi'ah Iraqi Arabs to be Iranians and Iraq to be part of Iran. If you don't believe me then I can send you the link to the thread I am talking about.The rest of your posts make no sense. What are you talking about when you say "how we" view Shi'ah?:nuts:

SumerianAkkadian

August 16th, 2012, 05:38 PM

Alulim

August 16th, 2012, 05:45 PM

Care to elaborate? Who the hell said that Iraqi Shi'ah Arabs are claiming to be Iranians? I stated that a lot of Iranians consider Shi'ah Iraqi Arabs to be Iranians and Iraq to be part of Iran. If you don't believe me then I can send you the link to the thread I am talking about.The rest of your posts make no sense. What are you talking about when you say "how we" view Shi'ah?:nuts:

Habibi you said this:

Look bro, being an Arab in Iraq is not easy for political reasons due to the majority (60 percent) being Shi'ah. That's because of the political situation in our region. But this should not lead to self-hate. In Yemen half of the population is Shi'ah. In Saudi Arabia 1/4 of the population is Shi'ah. There are large Shi'ah minorities all over the Arab world. For that reason some Iraqi Shi'ah Arabs try to renounce their heritage and claim a Persian for example, which in my eyes is a disgrace and I would be ashamed of myself for saying such nonsense.

It's a shame that they have become Persianized because I consider Iranians enemies of Iraqis, Arabs and Semetics on most issues due to their strong nationalism and disregard for Semetic people WHICH we Iraqis undoubtedly are. We have the oldest Semetic civilization (Akkadian) which I hope you know all about it. Renouncing that in favour of the primitive Persian nomadic culture (less than 2800 years) is a crime against humanity. Even their language irritates me. I hope you can understand the sentiments many Iraqis have against Iran and their claim of "owning" Iraq just because they ruled PARTS of modern-day Iraq for some years. In a Iranian eyes Iraqi history starts when they conquered Babylon. You only see them claiming Iraqi history and no other nation or people. That's a sad fact. Of course not all Iranians are like that but all the nationalistic ones (which they have in great numbers) are. Sadly.

I suggest you visit an Iranian forum and you would get a very unpleasant surprise when you will see that they say Iraqis are Iranians.:lol:

You literally said it's hard to be Arab in Iraq because the majority is Shia. And later on you claimed the we Shia are claiming to be Persian.

Thanks for saying this bro, you see the Shias as Persians it's your problem but we have never and will never be anything other than Iraqi Arabs not general Arabs but Iraqi Arabs.