MemriTV thread again please

MemriTV thread again please
I love these

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Iraq_War#After_the_Iranian_Revolution
america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/8/iraq-sectarianismshiassunniskurdsnourialmalaki.html
xvideos.com/video4817485/blonde_reporter_gangraped_by_3_terrorists_forced_sex_
memritv.org/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Anyone lurking?

Keep going brah, these are great.

Have a bump.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Keep posting dude, Kosovo je srbska.

...

...

what is the name of the girl pls?

>r9k

...

9/11 top tier bantz

...

...

Best one

...

BUMP

I NEED TO KNOW THE GIRLS NAME PLS

I don't have any more

MOAR

...

kek

Oshit

wow that's a really shitty disease

Now this is /r9k/

...

...

Memri was founded by mossad agents

...

Where
>GIVE ME THE DOCUMENTS FARFOUR
at

kek

...

...

Where the Middle East be headed?

HELLOOÒOOO

SOMEONE TELL ME

Fuuuuuuuuuck
I'll never look at a PEPSI can the same way again.

Sorry, bruh. No idea.

Is this the most redpilled channel in the world?

>THESE TRANSLATIONS ARE REAL AND NOT PHOTOSHOPPED

WHY CAN'T WE GET ALONG WITH MUSLIMS

WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

>A
>FUCKING
>CROC

this is the best fucking one

I saw the clip on video where he's ranting about how mice are absolutely haram

...

...

I love the batshit Muslim shit, but be aware that Memri is a Zionist psyop. The enemy of my enemy is still a fucking Zionist and should be glassed.

>The institute was co-founded in 1998 by Yigal Carmon, a former Israeli military intelligence officer and Meyrav Wurmser, an Israeli-born American political scientist.

balgarians are more based than expected

>Memri is a Zionist psyop
I think its already pretty obvious how antisemitic the middle east is

Yeah but the people on it are still serious, memri tv merely compiles and translates it(maybe a bit on its own terms)

>Sup Forums discovering memri

get spicy'd

its not obvious for the average anglo that's why they translate these cherry picked segments

i've never seen that flag before
also the more I watch memri TV the more I want to move to saudi arabia

He's not wrong.

Topkek

thanks for this pic oldest ally.

the best parts of memri are in the levant AKA Egypt / Iraq / Lebanon / Syria

The farfour / kids' animated show are from Palestine

Gulf is cancer and in terms of memri really only has the religious fundamentalist memes

We don't want all americans gone ofc, just zionist bots

>TFW NO ARAB QT

>This thread

what the fuck i love muslims now

...

...

...

...

Gosh, the girl above is suck a beauty. Would convert to smell her pussy aroma.

Also, now that this thread has attracted enough attention, time to redpill about arabs

>How well-off were Iraqis during Saddam’s rule?
When Saddam rose to power in the late 60’s he identified the biggest issue facing Iraq at the time: sectarianism, which he sought to resolve through massively raising the quality of life for all Iraqis and advancing Iraq forward. Saddam saw that improving living standards was the only way for a stable and prosperous Iraq. (Another pillar of stability was squashing dissent, more on that later).
His efforts were successful, and by the 80’s Iraq was the most advanced Arab country by far, and one of the most developed in the world outside of America/Europe and East Asia. In fact Iraq was well on its way to reaching “developed country” status as opposed to “developing” during that time period up until the gulf war. Some of Saddam’s accomplishments include:

Free education for all levels including postgraduate studies and scholarships abroad. Skipping school was made illegal for both sexes and by 1982 illiteracy was eradicated in the country, a feat recognized by UNESCO who awarded Saddam for it.
Every village in Iraq had a school. Every province had at least one University. Before Saddam’s time Iraq only had four Universities. Iraqi society was famous for being highly educated in the 80’s.
Free healthcare for every Iraqi. Every village had a clinic, every city had a hospital, and vaccines were mandatory by law. Iraq’s healthcare system was heralded as one of the most advanced in the region at the time.
Unprecedented women rights. Women enjoyed free education (almost complete gender parity in school enrollment) and were protected by the law from sexual harassment, granted equal pay, a six month maternal leave, and had the rights to enter politics and own property/businesses. Source.
Secular code of law that granted freedom of religion for Muslims across all sects as well as Christians, who were allowed to practice openly.

Note that when I say Iraqi I don’t mean Sunni Arab. These advancements were provided for all Iraqi citizens regardless of their religion or ethnicity or social status, and in some cases were even granted to foreigners working in Iraq. In fact some minorities were given extra rights, like the Kurds in the north who were granted semi-autonomy in 1970 with their schools teaching Kurdish language and culture, rights they never dreamed of having in Syria, Iran, and Turkey for example.

>So what? He was bankrolled by nationalizing the oil!
It’s a very common misconception that simply having oil will result in a prosperous nation. The "Resource Curse" and "Dutch Disease" are the most common outcomes of oil wealth, and there are many more failure stories than there are success stories when it comes to a country having abundant natural resources. The world is filled with such stories; need I remind you which two countries have the largest oil reserves in the world? (Venezuela and Saudi Arabia)

>How were things in the 1990’s?
The sanctions destroyed Iraq and in the 90’s everything went to shit. After the Gulf War ended Iraq was placed under full embargo and even though the U.S. decided most of Iraq would be a no-fly zone, it decided against toppling Saddam as Cheney feared it would create a power vacuum. The embargo and UN sanctions destroyed Iraq’s economy and its infrastructure, over time, instead. Public spending decreased by up to 90%, the army was crippled, and the population were in dire need of food and medicine. Despite Iraq agreeing to all UN terms and destroying its chemical weapons arsenal by 1994 [See Box 2-2], the sanctions were never lifted. The embargo destroyed everything and for 13 years Iraq was being drained out before the invasion, all of its progress erased. The embargo was described as Iraq’s very own Treaty of Versailles.

>Who started the Iraq-Iran War?
Iraq was one of the very first countries to open friendly diplomatic relations with Khomeini when Khomeini took over Iran because the Shah was a long time enemy of Iraq as well, having funded Kurdish insurgency inside Iraq for decades. However, Khomeini had none of it and responded by denouncing Saddam and promising to overthrow him and take over Iraq as well. When Saddam made a second attempt (as he was confused by the first) at calling for cooperation between the two countries, Khomeini, again, aggressively refused to talk and called for an Islamic revolution inside Iraq, rallying the shia Arabs around him.
Almost all media outlets say that Iraq attacked first, but they never mention that it was a preemptive strike. Iran committed border raids against Iraq and equipped their army with top of-the-line high-tech American weaponry preparing for war. They were going to invade and so Iraq struck first.
Let me reiterate the facts: Khomeini publicly called for the ousting of Saddam and instigated Iraqi Shia to overthrow the Iraqi government, trying to export his Islamic revolution across the border. Iran had over 3 times the available population (and more since the Kurdistan region was exempted from the Iraqi draft) and despite their purges and change of government, it remained the larger and much more powerful country.

Khomeini was a radical religious extremist waging jihad to institute his same fundamentalist government on Iraq. What would you have Iraq do, wait for Iran to attack (beyond the terrorist bombings and border raids, including an attempt on the life of Saddam’s deputy minister) right after they had finished prepping up their army with shiny new American weapons? A preemptive strike was the only rational option, like Israel in 1967 (whom no one accuses of starting the war despite being first to attack as well) in order to blunt the Iranian army before facing the full power of one of the strongest militaries at that time.

Even after the war started Saddam offered a truce in 1982 which was rejected by Khomeini; if he was so peaceful the war would have ended six years before it actually did. He was a no-negotiation extremist and rebuffed peace notions in the same manner he refused cooperation and friendship earlier.
In fact Khomeini proved beyond doubt the he was the one who wanted the war because he's the only reason it went so long as it did. He refused any peace or negotiation until his military was decisively defeated and he was forced to conditionally surrender and accept peace, which he said was "worse than drinking poison." The war ended in 1988 on the back of a string of very successful victories by the Iraqi army to ended the Iranian aggression once and for all, but people still believe Saddam to have lost the war not knowing it was a defensive war in the first place against a much more powerful aggressor. Had Saddam not signed the UN treaty giving away the large swaths of land Iraq ended up conquering from Iran this claim wouldn’t be so popular.
Khomeini gave Iraq more casus belli than almost any country did in the 20th century, and anyone who claims Iraq was the instigator doesn’t know what the fuck they’re talking about. For those looking for a source, here is what Wikipedia says about it. Note that the Wikipedia article’s intro is extremely misleading by painting it as an act of aggression by Iraq, but if you take the time to scroll down and actually do some reading you’ll get to this section shedding more light into the origin of conflict (emphasis mine): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Iraq_War#After_the_Iranian_Revolution

i read this on some facebook page and forgot to cap it
whats its name again ?

spicy saddam memes, but it died
join spicy af needs more mustard and wait until an admin accepts you

>Did Saddam have prejudice against Shia and Kurds?
Saddam never attacked a group that never gave him a good reason to, and he was popular in Iraq across all ethnic and religious divides. Tons of Shi'a and many Kurds supported him, and he extensively developed cities in the south and in the Kurdistan region (which he gave autonomy yet still invested heavily). Not to forget Baghdad was mostly Shi'a and that was the best city in the country.
The blame lies on the Barzani and Talabani families for always pushing Kurdish violence and warfare against Iraqis and the Iraqi government. They could have lived better than anyone else in Iraq had that not been the case, and they were even exempted from any conscription during the Iran war, but that didn’t make a difference to them.

Committing insurgencies and terrorism with Iranian backing isn't a good idea, something Barzani/Talabani have been doing since the 1940’s and what Shi'a extremist groups founded in Iran have been doing since the 1980’s. Before Iran proxy extremist groups cropped up, no Shi'a were touched by Saddam or his predecessors. Pro-government Kurds fought extensively against insurgent Kurds, both in the National Defense Battalions and in the military. Also the military was overwhelmingly Shi'a so when you think about it, the Shi'a were doing most of the fighting and killing during the Iran war. On the other side Sunnis were also killed and fought in kind when they'd revolt. Kurds were Sunni but suffered 50 times the number of casualties the Shi’a did. Things weren't as sectarian as commonly depicted.

TLDR Post more dank pics

omg it's muslim alex jones

Also the common tendency of referring to ethno-religious groups as single-bloc hivemind monoliths is inaccurate and over-simplifying a very complex situation. If Sunni Arabs were a hivemind, there would be a single country right now stretching from Morocco to Iraq. The fact of the matter is if you turn to violence and warfare, especially during a major war where you're fighting for the enemy (who happens to be one of the most radical jihadists in the history of Islam), then don't be surprised that the army comes down on you. And it's the same way in any country in the world, nevermind a developing country with an excessively volatile society and tribal structure.
Also, let us not forget the hundreds of thousands of pro-government Kurds in the National Defense Battalions, nevermind Kurds in the army, who fought against the Peshmerga. Why were Kurds overwhelmingly fighting against Kurds? Not everything is about sectarianism and ethnic divides.

"But throughout, he was ruthless against all Islamist organizations, regardless of whether their movements were peaceful or violent, Sunni or Shia. Political affiliation in Iraq was largely based on secular ideologies. In fact, it was considered taboo to inquire about or divulge one’s religious persuasion. Saddam’s Sunni-dominated regime boasted a significant Shia presence even in the upper echelons of power. He ensured that no one group or person grew too strong. His security forces would indiscriminately purge anyone perceived as a threat. Whenever possible, he also attempted to co-opt leaders of socioeconomic minority groups, striking deals with them to keep a lid on indigenous resistance. " ( america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/8/iraq-sectarianismshiassunniskurdsnourialmalaki.html )

>Could anyone other than Saddam have done better?

Very doubtful. Iraq is a very turbulent country comprised of people of a dozen different cultures, ethnicities, religions, sects within religions, etc., all of whom hate each other’s guts. In addition, Iraq was under threats both internal and external, literally from all sides, so to take all this mess and not only achieve relative stability but to actually manage to move the country forward and improve it against all odds, is a very impressive task. The full force and influence of a sole superpower in a time period where there was absolutely no one to balance them (USSR was dissolving/dissolved), is something Iraq couldn’t handle in the end.Ultimately Saddam was a reflection of the Iraqi people, and if it took someone like him with all his positives and negatives to develop and advance the country then what does that say about the cluster-fuck that is Iraqi society? Imagine Iraq was more like Egypt: No shitty tribal warfare, population almost exclusively one ethnicity, all the Muslims the same sect, etc., it would’ve been paradise on Earth.
Without any reasonable doubt, even with his many faults, Saddam was 100 times better than the current status quo. The only people who I've seen deny this are American Bushists and Middle Eastern sectarianists, or people who repeat buzzwords lacking in context. Today, Iraq is the gutter even the rats avoid, and is one of the worst countries in the world. No surprise why the nostalgia is so strong even among Shi'a Arabs and Kurds, who miss not living like dogs with no education, no opportunities, no stability or order, no peace, with armed gangs running the streets.

Why do many Shi'a and Kurds miss Saddam or at least his era? Why are the religious minorities all eliminated from Iraq in one of the most successful extermination campaigns since WW2? The remnants of Christians, Yazidis, Mandaens, and others are practically nothing anymore. No doubt, all non-Muslims in Iraq don't combine for a million people anymore. And regardless of whether you like him or hate him, almost every Iraqi today misses his time. The Kurds in Iraq for example have a saying among them; “We used to have 1 Saddam. Now we have 100 Saddams.”

And finally...

>Is it true that Ba’athists formed the core of ISIS?
This is another misconception parroted by the media and repeated everywhere without fact checking just because it makes for a nice story straight out of Hollywood. It also goes well with the “Kurds are only ones fighting ISIS” fairytale.
The first thing ISIS did after capturing Mosul and Tikrmt was massacre Ba’athists, because they saw them as the biggest threat to them. Even Shi'a and Kurdish sectarians have applauded ISIS on killing former Ba’ath members who were just random civilians, claiming the only positive notion of ISIS is it’s the most effective Ba’ath extermination force in Iraq.

The ~5 high ranking guys ISIS had from the old military weren't even Baathist by anything reported on them. They were just ex-military men. Some people, including media, think that being in the military made you a Ba’ath party member but it doesn’t; you need to become a member of the party to be a Baathist, and millions in the military or working in the public sector were not Ba’athists. I honestly don't know where those failures of journalism pull this shit out of. Not only that, but out of these five people 2 of them are Turkmen, not Arab (Abu Ali al Turkmani and another guy), and all of them are dead now anyway.
Even if those guys were hardcore Baathists, like Haji Bakr, Abu Ali al Turkmani, and whatever other few guys, think about it this way: That's several guys out of 100,000s. A drop in the bucket.
It’s worth mentioning that one of Saddam's generals, Khaled Al Obeidi, is the current Defense Minister and runs the Iraqi military. He's also fully responsible for getting them back into fighting shape and right now ISIS is losing major ground in Iraq due to PMU and the Iraqi Army. How come no one talks about how a "Ba’athist" runs the Iraqi military right now? If you really get down to it, ISIS probably has more Kurdish members in it than ex-Ba’athist Arabs.

Those are some pretty good posts
No time to look up how actually factual they are, they do make some sort of sense nonetheless

Somehow I'm suprised by the quality of maghreb posters on this board...

...

Where's this shit from

Is that Ray Winston?

pic related

I'm not the one who wrote this originally, all credit goes to Husam from spicy saddam memes.

xvideos.com/video4817485/blonde_reporter_gangraped_by_3_terrorists_forced_sex_

Then I kindly invite more red-pilled arabs and the like to enlighten us on what the hell has been going on in the past decades in your respective countries

Lots of disinformation and skeletons in the closet that would need some clarifying, really

Not muslim, he's Assyrian and a bishop of the orthodox church.

>what the hell has been going on in the past decades in your respective countries

Every conflict right now has most of its historical roots in the US- and UK-backed 1953 coup in Iran, that ousted Mossadegh and put in place the highly unpopular shah as the head of state. This led to the 1979 cultural revolution, which created an extremist islamist state that would wage war on every nation around it.

Add to that conflicts between two branches of the ba'ath party: the Iraqi branch (Saddam and Aflaq) against the pro-iran Syrian branch (Assad family). By cutting oil pipelines to Iraq during the Iraq-Iran war, Syria betrayed and forced Iraq to borrow money from Kuwait. After the war, unable to pay those debts, they were forced to annex Kuwait, which led to operation Desert Storm which definitely ruined the region.

Combine all that with tensions in the region due to Israel and constant US backing of aggressive gulf monarchies, and you have a region that's ready to explode at any moment.

Of course, if the US hadn't been meddling as much as it did so much in there, a lot of what happened wouldn't have and the region would be in a much better state. Ousting Saddam when Iraq needed him most, creating ISIS, transforming Libya into a shithole and attempting to do the same with Syria in the name of "liberation" proves that the US isn't done yet there, though.

Seriously, when the fucking UK House of Commons releases a report saying that Gaddafi posed no real threat to his population and that the islamist components in the rebels were incredibly underestimated, there's a problem here.

Good read, thank you. You should've posted this on /his/ though, this board is semi-retarded.

>influenced an american presidential election
>retarded

The CIA does seem to have an unhealthy obsession with fucking up countries by killing/exiling competent leaders and replacing them with complete lunatics

It's pretty convenient also, that all of this can be cleanly under rug swept because FUCKING TERRORISTS.. now Europe has to fucking pay for this mess, of all continents..

holy crap this stuff is for real. memritv.org/