LOL Khuzistan isn't even majority Arab, enough of the Saddamesque BS, and Northern Iraq is majority Kurdish speaking a non-Arab language, so they are not part of the so called "Arab" world, and I am sure the Amazighs/Berbers have something to say about their situation too.

You must sympathize with Baathist ideology right? The same Baathists that claim Salahudin as an ethnic Arab.

You know who Ibn Khaldun is?  Baathists hated him so much they burned his books.

I love keepers of history such as Ibn Khaldun who gave credit where it was due:

"…It is a remarkable fact that, with few exceptions, most Muslim scholars…in the intellectual sciences have been non-Arabs…thus the founders of grammar were Sibawaih and after him, al-Farisi and Az-Zajjaj. All of them were of Persian descent…they invented rules of (Arabic) grammar…great jurists were Persians… only the Persians engaged in the task of preserving knowledge and writing systematic scholarly works. Thus the truth of the statement of the prophet becomes apparent, 'If learning were suspended in the highest parts of heaven the Persians would attain it"…The intellectual sciences were also the preserve of the Persians, left alone by the Arabs, who did not cultivate them…as was the case with all crafts…This situation continued in the cities as long as the Persians and Persian countries, Iraq, Khorasan and Transoxiana (modern Central Asia), retained their sedentary culture."

The Muqaddimah Translated by F. Rosenthal (III, pp. 311-15, 271-4 [Arabic]; R.N. Frye (p.91)

Please don't call Algerians Arab that is insulting as I am sure it would be for many others you have included. As for the garbage you have posted just read this post I had made previously it explains your behavior:

This is interesting, after reading through all these thread is seems that I am starting to understand some of the problems in the middle-east. There seems to be two younger cultures, turkic and arabic which are sounded by some of the oldest in the world, and they are under pressure because of that. To fix the problem turks and arabs seems to have taken different and at the same time similar approaches

First turkish approach, if you don’t have enough history make your own. What exactly is Turanoid. Has anyone studying anthropology in a reputable school ever heard of it? NO Turks have decided that there were these imaginary people that people lived in southern Russia looked white (with almond eyes) and had a native language that resembled closely to Mongolian. These people moved south and somehow magically all the people that lived there disappeared or got assimilated to these imaginary people. In fact Turks have made such a delusional version of history that they seems to have to fight with all their neighbors (Iranians, Kurds, Greek, Armenian, and Arabs) because their version of history does not match anyone else’s. I am not sure if there is any other group that has to fight in this many fronts

Second arab approach, if you don’t have enough history use linguistics. There were these people that lived in the Middle East long time ago. They somehow lost their identity and don’t exist in today’s Middle East. So when arabs come short they pull out the Semitic card. Because arabic has a few words that have similar roots as the language these people used that means these people  are related. Armenians speak a language that is in the same family as greeks. How often do you see an Armenian use greek history as if the are the same as Armenian. They don’t do that because Armenians have their own history and don’t need to borrow someone else’s, also geerks are still around to own their own history.

There is nothing wrong with not having a long history. If you want to identify yourself as turks and arabs then accepts that these people were nomads recently and don’t have much of a history and culture, or accept that many people that today are called turk and arab are just simply descendant of people whose identity was lost to invaders, and move on

Yes, camels show qualities of high moral character, such as courage, generosity, or honor

Yes, only spain and sicily escaped, but the rest many be digging tunnels under walls getting ready to escape. Have you seen escape from Alcatraz

this is from Britannica about khuzistan

also spelled Khuzistan, formerly ʿarabestân, geographic region in southwestern Iran, lying at the head of the Persian Gulf and bordering Iraq on the west. It is notable for its oil resources.

More than half the population are Arabs who live in the plains; the rest are Bakhtyârîs and other Lurs (peoples of West Persia), with many Persians in the cities. Some of the Bakhtyârîs and Lurs are still nomads.

--------

still it is not part of the Arabic World  its part of iran and all Arabic countries recognise that.

and as for north Africa  its all Considered Arabic States and they are members of Arab league. 

so Officially they are Arabic States and that is not an Insult.

and what Ibn Khaldoon and this transilated article has to do with this subject?!

off course Arabs didnt need to make Grammer for their own language since it comes naturally, while non-Arabs who needed to learn the language would need to make grammers for it so it would be easier for them to understand and learn the language.

and Ibn Khaldoon is considered one of the respected scientists to Arabs.

lol hani

as i replied to you previously  give us proofs of what you are talking about.

at least examples that Arabs lost their Identity and dont exist in ME,

that so we would consider your statments for disscussion otherwise its nothing but  false and represent your own opinions.

and about North Africa being Arabic is an insult i think Al Bedawi's replay on that is enough.

Originally posted by Oguzoglu How can all related/unrelated topics turn into "bad Turks" thinggyys? Interesting...

lol

i dont know!!

Lors and Bakhtiars are related to Persians, infact they can be considered nomadic Persians.

And I would like to see one legit map where Khuzestan is referred to as Arabistan, a name we call Saudi Arabia. 

And Baathists burned Ibn Khaldun's books because he dared speak the truth and cast shadow over their supremacist nonsense.

This was largely the structure of the caliphate:

Rulers: Arabs; Intellectuals and Scientists: Iranians; Soldiers: Turks

I believe he is talking about Egyptians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, Assyrians etc..........

losing their identify and being called Arab today. Do you need proof of that?

Also, Arab league is just a political organization country being member of Arab league does not mean all/most people from that country consider themselves to be Arab

no he is Not talking about Egyptians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, Assyrians etc...

he is saying Arabs lost their Identity and they dont exist anymore, and that Arabs claims to be of Semitic roots while they are not.

and Yes i need proofs about that.

of course Arab league does not  mean all/most people from that country consider themselves to Arab. IT means that this state Consider it self as an ARABIC STATE.

To me that dones not sound like Arabs lost their identity it means today's Arabs trying to link their history  to the like of Babylonians based on language roots.

oh ok that makes more sense then ( the paragraph i meant not the statment itself), and when Arabs claimed that Babylonians are Arabs?! Arabs are always Arabs and both of them are considered Semitic aren't they?

and examples he gives such as how often Armenians use Greek history as if they are the same as Armenians?  are not logical example for what he is talking about

ok my Question to answer that would be How often did Arabs actully used Babylonians History as it is Arabic History?

i didnt come across such Arabs who called Babylonians as Arabs, they are mentioned when  Semitic History is in Address and Arabs are big part of that for sure. Also when talking about Arabs pre Islam we must get to the point when there were Semitic people which Arabs are from.!

whats strange about that?! unless he is saying that Arabs are not semitics then he needs to read more .

ok what about the rest?

we dont have long history?  long history compared to which civilisations? if you go to the World's history i guess we as Arabs would fall in long history which is said to be more than 5000 years old. iam Talking about Arabic not all semitics here.

This guy just used Petra as history of Arabs, and you think Arabs don't have history complex

I hope Al Badawi hangs around for a while he is just too funny

wa aleeekum alsam wa rahmat allah o barakatu ( Peace be upon you)

yes i know that the term Simetics came from the bible but it is the modern classification of many groups now. so lets say that Semitics means people who had closer relation to each other (language and Blood)  in comparison with other groups.

well i dont think that pure Arabs ( Al Arab Al Aaarebah) are actully a mixuter between Ham and shem ( Sam).

and off course Today's Arabs are not all Semitics, i think there are no pure race exist in the world everybody mixed , but relatively we can say Semitics who have more relation to the ancient Semitics and that would be a minority in the Arab World since after the rise of Islam many older civilisations adapted the Arabic language and became what is called "Arabized" which makes them Arabs now. and there are alot of Tribes in North Africa are as Arab as the Arabs in the Arabian peninsula.

To  hani

well i dont know exactly what is the idea you have about Arabs "stealing" others History but just let me make something clear here.

People in Egypt can consider Ancient Egypt's History as it is theirs since the Ancient Egyptians didnt Vanish they just changed as per the invaders not only by Arabs by romans too.

the same with the Iraqis, Lebanese, Libyans, algerians, Morrocan ....etc. its part of their History and they have a strong relation to that history even if they are not speaking the same as the Ancient people did.

Yes you are absolutely correct, they did not vanish to the thin air, and that is why Egyptians are not Arabs neither are Lebanese, or Iraqis, etc... They just speak a foreign language that was imposed on their ancestors a few centuries ago (aka Arabic) and that is why I don't think Algerian are Arabs and find that map insulting, and the Irony would be for Arab to try and get credit for the history of these people Arabs were just the last invader. Invading a land may have made invader entitled to the contemporary resource of the land but does not make them entitled to their history and heritage. I hope you see the contradiction in your statement

i think there are some confusions here, it really depends on which Arabs are trying to take credit on which people's History.

for example Arabs in north Africa are for sure mixed with the people who where there before  so that would make a big percentage of the population  from both races.

there are no pure Arabs or any other pure race in the world , mixing between races are common and that can happen in one century or 10 centures its the same,  people are still mixed.

i think it is so normal for people in Tunisia claim both the History of Arabs and the History of Carthage simply because they are consist of both cultures. the same applies with the rest of Arabic Stats.

but that is clear that it is part of their history but it is not part of all Arabs histroy since Arabs History is manily in the Arabian Penisula.

i think the Main reason for making Arabic language is the main (first) language is that  the Umayyads made it the Official language of the Caliphate.i think the main reasons for Iran and countries beyond Iran to keep their own language was that Iran became Shiite who hated Umayyads and didnt follow orders and that Iran got its Independece from the Abbasides who lost controle of the Shiites.

other than that it is not an Insult to Call Algeria an Arabic State since its popuation is a mixure of many races and Non-Arab algerian accepted Arabic to be the official language of the country  also your Governmet accepeted to be Arabic State by joining Arab legue. iam sure if it is by anyway an Insult then your governmet or at least the majority of Non-Arabic algerian would protest and change Algeria from an Arab State to A Barbar State.

North Africans are not a mix of local people and Arabs. Arabs were one of the invaders that passed through north Africa and like many other invaders eventually were absorbed into the local population. French were here also. Should Algerians feel affinity with Frank's history also. Connecting north African to Arab history is just as ridiculous.

Originally posted by Cengiz Kagan Originally posted by hani First turkish approach, if you don’t have enough history make your own. What exactly is Turanoid. Has anyone studying anthropology in a reputable school ever heard of it? NO Turks have decided that there were these imaginary people that people lived in southern Russia looked white (with almond eyes) and had a native language that resembled closely to Mongolian. These people moved south and somehow magically all the people that lived there disappeared or got assimilated to these imaginary people. In fact Turks have made such a delusional version of history that they seems to have to fight with all their neighbors (Iranians, Kurds, Greek, Armenian, and Arabs) because their version of history does not match anyone else’s. I am not sure if there is any other group that has to fight in this many fronts What is your problem with Turks? Are you jealous? Turks/Mongols have concurred most the world on more than one occasion. Berbers on the other hand have never won a war, they lived under Arabs, Turks, Americans, Italian, Spanish, French, English etc......Somehow you like being dominated by other nations. I assume you're a Berber. Let me tell you a few other things about your people: I know you're not Arabs. You speak a different language and your culture is dissimilar to that of Arabs. But in addition to Islam, the other thing you have in common with Arabs is that Berbers are the biggest losers on this planet. More than 80% of Morocco and Algeria is Berber but the ones in power, the royal family for instance, are all Arabs. You are so dumb that you let yourself be dominated by a bunch of Arabs(less than 20% of the population). On top of that, most Berbers are proud that they are seen as Arabs by foreigners and behave in a very submissive manner towards Arabs. I SUGGEST YOU TAKE A VERY GOOD LOOK IN THE MIRROR BEFORE YOU INSULT OTHER PEOPLE

This sort of stuff is very well tolerated if it comes from a Turkish Keyboard, is there any sort of moderation here at all?

i didnt say Arab's History is connected with North Afican History, well somehow it is for more than 1300 years, other than that they are two different histories.

also what i meant is that Not All Arabs should consider North African history as it is theirs,   for example  Arabs in Egypt can take credit for the Ancient egyptain history only not any other Arabs can consider that history part of their own except the Egyptians who ALSO can take credit for the Arabic history too.

so its Just the people who are living in that land can consider both Histories simply because they are the same people who got mixed and effected by Arabs and the religion Arabs brought.

but anyway you are represnting your own opinion and clearly Algerian Governmet Has different opinion about this otherwise Algeria wont be considered Officially Arabic even the Direct Arabic rule from the ME was ended at the Time of the Abbasids.  theyn came the Turkish and the French and both had some effects on your culture and language but still Arabic is the Official.

Why is that??!!

Originally posted by Cengiz Kagan Originally posted by hani First turkish approach, if you don’t have enough history make your own. What exactly is Turanoid. Has anyone studying anthropology in a reputable school ever heard of it? NO Turks have decided that there were these imaginary people that people lived in southern Russia looked white (with almond eyes) and had a native language that resembled closely to Mongolian. These people moved south and somehow magically all the people that lived there disappeared or got assimilated to these imaginary people. In fact Turks have made such a delusional version of history that they seems to have to fight with all their neighbors (Iranians, Kurds, Greek, Armenian, and Arabs) because their version of history does not match anyone else’s. I am not sure if there is any other group that has to fight in this many fronts What is your problem with Turks? Are you jealous? Turks/Mongols have concurred most the world on more than one occasion. Berbers on the other hand have never won a war, they lived under Arabs, Turks, Americans, Italian, Spanish, French, English etc......Somehow you like being dominated by other nations. I assume you're a Berber. Let me tell you a few other things about your people: I know you're not Arabs. You speak a different language and your culture is dissimilar to that of Arabs. But in addition to Islam, the other thing you have in common with Arabs is that Berbers are the biggest losers on this planet. More than 80% of Morocco and Algeria is Berber but the ones in power, the royal family for instance, are all Arabs. You are so dumb that you let yourself be dominated by a bunch of Arabs(less than 20% of the population). On top of that, most Berbers are proud that they are seen as Arabs by foreigners and behave in a very submissive manner towards Arabs. I SUGGEST YOU TAKE A VERY GOOD LOOK IN THE MIRROR BEFORE YOU INSULT OTHER PEOPLE

would you Stop using the same insulting Style and discuss what you like in a civilised manners without insulting and looking down at others?

well to be honest not only Turkish keyboards are tolerated here

Please read my post and your response again. I am say that Arab Heritage and history has nothing to do with us north african and you say that north African history belongs to north African. Yes north African history belongs to north African and Arab history does not. Arab history belong to people western Arabian peninsula only. For the same reason that we don't have affinity for French or ottoman history. Arab heritage is not different than that

Oh, please don't use Islam to push Arab nationalism

considered by whom? based on what? Because Algeria is member of Arab league. That is only a political organization not a racial based club. Cuba and China are members of non aligned nations does that give them the same ethnicity

English is an official and governmental language of India, should Indians be considered English because of that?

Say no to pan-arabism.

I think that the words Lybia and Lybian comes from the Egyptian Lubu, a word used to designate the people living to their west.

I think that Esau was Israel's brother. And I do believe that Ishmael was a man, so I don't see how him and Esau could have reproduced.

80% of ALgeria Babar? I doubt it. Isnt the majority of ALgeria mixed Barbar-Arab.

Anyway, i dont see why ALgerians show much Frenh culture, it is as if they are proud that they conquered by them. Algeria was under Arab and Turkish influence for longer. Many a time i have seen Algerian shops claiming to be French.

Al-Bedawi, in the first page you said first Muslim, second Arab and third Barbar. Why? Yes agreed Islam first, however i do not see why Arab blood should be in any way better then any other nation.

"Arab is not better then a non Arab, and a non Arab is not better than an Arab"

People should love what they are, not try to be some thing they are not