Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: March 22, 2026, 05:53:30 pm »

Hormuz folkism:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/21/iran-says-it-will-allow-japanese-ships-to-transit-the-strait-of-hormuz

Quote
Iran says Japanese ships will be allowed to transit the Strait of Hormuz, in the latest sign that Tehran has started pursuing a selective blockade of the strategic waterway.

“We have not closed the strait. In our opinion, the strait is open. It is closed only to ships belonging to our enemies, countries that attack us. For other countries, ships can pass through the strait ,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Japan’s Kyodo News late on Friday.
...
Japan may soon join the small cohort of countries – mainly China, India, and Pakistan – whose vessels have been allowed to transit the waterway in recent days, with approval from Iranian authorities.

That Iran is not accepting the usual narrative of Japan and China being adversarial or India and Pakistan being adversarial by choosing to open only Hormuz to one supposed side, but instead opening Hormuz to both supposed sides, is exactly the correct approach from a folkist perspective. This is the opportunity we have been waiting for!

But will Japan accept the offer? It would be stupid not to, yet can we expect better from Eurocentrist Takaichi?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-03-22/japan-says-not-considering-unilateral-talks-with-iran-on-hormuz

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: January 16, 2026, 09:13:42 pm »

Folkism always welcome:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjeCSbSB6zk

Background:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_relations

Quote
Both states have history that extends for millennia into the past. Iran and Iraq share a long border (the longest border for both nations) and an ancient cultural and religious heritage.
...
Akkadian Empire
...
Sargon of Akkad (r. 2334–2279 BC) was an Akkadian king who conquered Sumer and was the reason of moving the power from Southern Mesopotamia (southern Iraq) to central Mesopotamia (central Iraq). Sargon's vast empire is known to have extended from Elam to the Mediterranean sea, including Mesopotamia, parts of modern-day Iran and Syria
...
Sumerian Empire
...
The Third Dynasty of Ur (2119–2004 BC), or 'Neo-Sumerian Empire' was a Sumerian ruling dynasty based in the city of Ur (southern Iraq). The Third Dynasty of Ur came to preeminent power in Mesopotamia after several centuries of Akkadian and Gutian rule. It controlled the cities of Isin, Larsa and Eshnunna, and extended from the Mediterranean (north Syrian) coast to the Persian Gulf and Western Iran.
...
Sassanid Iranian Empire
...
During the time of the Sassanid Empire, from the 3rd century to the 7th century, the major part of Iraq was called in Persian Del-e Īrānshahr (lit. "the heart of Iran"), and its metropolis Ctesiphon (not far from present-day Baghdad) functioned for more than 800 years as the capital city of Iran.[1][10]

According to Sassanian documents, Persians distinguished two kinds of land within their empire: [the heartlands] "Īrān", and [the colonies] "Anīrān" ("non-Īrān"). Iraq was considered to be part of Īrān [the heartlands].[11] As Wilhelm Eilers observes: "For the Sassanians, too [as it was for the Parthians], the lowlands of Iraq constituted the heart of their dominions". This shows that Iraq was not simply part of the Persian Empire—it was the heart of Persia.[11]
...
Abbasid Caliphate
...
The Abbasid Caliphate of circa 750 A.D. was the second of the two great Islamic caliphates. It was ruled by the Abbasid dynasty of caliphs, who built their capital in Baghdad (Iraq). The Abbasids had depended heavily on the support of Persians in their overthrow of the Umayyads.
...
Late Middle Ages
Iran and Iraq both fell to the Mongols during the 13th century.

Who caused the modern hostility between Iran and Iraq?

Quote
"From 1921, when Britain installed Faysal Ibn Hussein as the king of the newly formed Iraq ... until 2003 ... Iraq was Iran's most hostile neighbor."
...
Also in 1921, the British played a role in the 1921 Persian coup d'etat, which led to the rise of the Pahlavi dynasty as rulers of Iran in 1925.

Even so:

Quote
Iraq War
...
After the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, the Iranian government strongly opposed the war and called for a key role for the UN in Iraq's reconstruction.
...
Iran then offered assistance to Iraq's post-war reconstruction and bilateral relations began to improve. In May 2005, a transitional government led by Ibrahim al-Jaafari of the pro-Iran Islamist Dawa party was established in Iraq. In mid May, Iranian foreign minister Kamal Kharazi visited Iraq and Jaafari paid a visit to Iran in July. In November, Iraqi president Jalal Talabani visited Iran, becoming the first Iraqi head of state to visit Iran in almost four decades.

Iran–Iraq relations have flourished since 2005 by the exchange of high level visits: Former Iraqi PM Nouri al-Maliki makes frequent visits, along with Jalal Talabani visiting numerous times, to help boost bilateral cooperation in all fields. A conflict occurred in December 2009, when Iraq accused Iran of seizing an oil well on the border.[36]

On April 24, 2011, Iran and Iraq signed an extradition accord. The high-level meeting by the justice ministers of both countries in Tehran followed in the aftermath of a raid by Iraqi forces on Camp Ashraf, home of the People's Mujahedin of Iran (MEK). The MEK is designated as a terrorist organization by Iran and Iraq.[37]

Iran has taken an increasingly salient role within the Iraqi government and security forces since the United States originally withdrew and ISIS rose to power. In Basra alone, there are numerous stories of Iranian militant factions harassing and kidnapping civilians.[3] On September 7, 2018, several months of protest and arson erupted into an attack against the Iranian consulate within Iraq, where it was set ablaze by rocket fire.[4]

On 9 April 2019, a day after the United States placed Iran's IRGC in the list of "Foreign Terrorist Organizations", Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi said he had talked to all sides and tried to stop the designation.[38]
Posted by: SodaPop
« on: December 30, 2025, 10:03:46 pm »

End Of Singapore-U.S Ties? PM Wong Roars Against America & Trump Tariffs; 'First You Championed...''
Quote
The Prime Minister of Singapore Lawrence Wong delivered a powerful speech in Parliament regarding Trump's tariffs, vowing not to back down. He assured Singaporeans that they will not be intimidated and are not afraid. Watch as Wong challenges Trump tariffs amid global market turmoil.

#singapore #lawrencewong #singaporepm #trumptariffs #unitedstates #trump #usa #trumpnews #reciprocaltariffs #singapore #usa  #trumpnews #TOILive #TOIVideos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_Zo0zg7-Ko
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: November 20, 2025, 05:44:38 pm »

This could have been a good move, but unfortunately Eurocentrist Xi also did this at roughly the same time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVilwk4lIfI

thereby precluding any folkist interpretation of the Vajiralongkorn visit.

See also:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/colonial-era/portugal-colonialism/msg31265/#msg31265
Posted by: SodaPop
« on: November 20, 2025, 12:28:19 am »

Thai king travels to Beijing: First visit for a monarch to China in 50 years
Quote
Thai King is in Beijing for the first visit to China by a Thai monarch since relations began in 1975.
Thailand has a constitutional monarchy, but the king is powerful, and close to Beijing.

Both sides have hailed this visit as a historic milestone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MujUDDhHbU

No one can trust the U.S. under Trumpism. This sentiment will linger for a long time after Trump is gone, I'm afraid.

The U.S. was SO different when my family and I moved here 36 years ago. The people were so much better too. These politicians really managed to **** up a good thing pretty quickly. Seems 9/11 was one of the last few nails in the coffin...
Posted by: rp
« on: October 09, 2025, 12:43:39 am »

"Another factor is from where India is now buying those products that it used to buy from the US. If India is buying from fellow former victims of Western colonialism, then OK, it is decolonization. But if India is buying from other Western countries, then it is not decolonization."
They are encouraging "Swadeshi"/made in India products.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 08, 2025, 11:16:17 pm »

Oh, now I see what you mean! Still, if India's reaction to the US tariff was to instead abandon the deal with Russia, the net effect would be less revenue by Russia, whereas by boycotting US goods, although you could argue this would leave the US with less money with which to itself buy from Russia, whether this ultimately results in less net revenue by Russia would depend on how the US allocates its decreased money.

Another factor is from where India is now buying those products that it used to buy from the US. If India is buying from fellow former victims of Western colonialism, then OK, it is decolonization. But if India is buying from other Western countries, then it is not decolonization.
Posted by: rp
« on: October 08, 2025, 08:51:15 pm »

I think you are mixing two things up. Boycotting of general goods in response to tariffs is a separate issue from choosing Russia over the US for oil (which triggered the tariffs).

"I consider Russia more Western than the US (though you can disagree on this part).)"
Culturally/aesthetically perhaps. But under the hood the U.S. is still very close. Consider the machinism of Silicon Valley/various Army labs. Although perhaps Russia is only behind because they lag behind in per capita income.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 08, 2025, 08:40:58 pm »

"Boycotting the American goods"

In order for something to be a boycott, the boycotter would have to be willing to buy the same product at a higher cost elsewhere. For example, I boycott Israel. Therefore, if a non-Zionist coffee shop sells the same drink as Starbucks does but at 150% the price, I will still buy from the non-Zionist coffee shop. But you just said:

Quote
they chose Russia over the US due to Russia offering a better deal

So there is no evidence here that India is boycotting the US. If Russia were offering India a worse deal than the US, and India still took the Russian deal, then we could say India is boycotting the US. (But even in that case I would not call it decolonization because I consider Russia more Western than the US (though you can disagree on this part).)
Posted by: rp
« on: October 08, 2025, 08:14:12 pm »

Boycotting the American goods is not decolonization, in response to the US's (obviously racist) double standards on oil deals vis a vis Russia?
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 08, 2025, 05:43:43 pm »

"they chose Russia over the US due to Russia offering a better deal"

In other words, this was a pragmatic decision, not one motivated by decolonization. Which is why it does not belong in this topic.
Posted by: rp
« on: October 08, 2025, 07:44:36 am »

The US cannot claim to oppose any deal with Russia, as they themselves have made similar deals with Russia. Also, they chose Russia over the US due to Russia offering a better deal, not because the latter is more Western.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: October 07, 2025, 05:32:24 pm »

According to the video (0:35), the tariff by the US was in response to an oil deal between India and Russia. Since we view Russia as more Western than the US, choosing Russia over the US is not an example of diplomatic decolonization.
Posted by: rp
« on: October 07, 2025, 05:12:14 pm »

www.youtube.com/watch?si=Fjk5riY5yUg29cZe&v=hTeXskKdod8
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 28, 2025, 06:34:05 pm »

Well done Petro!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJU6dGAPNN0

Previous Petro coverage:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/diplomatic-decolonization/msg22855/#msg22855

Further information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustavo_Petro#Palestine

Quote
Petro condemned Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip during the Gaza war and accused Israel of committing genocide against the Palestinians.[174] Petro expressed outrage after the 13 July 2024 al-Mawasi airstrikes.[175], and he was one of the very first world leaders to condemn the Israeli blockade on Gaza immediately following the October 7 attacks.[176]

Colombia formally supported South Africa's case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).[177] In May 2024, Colombia suspended diplomatic relations with Israel.[178] Subsequently, Colombia announced the opening of a diplomatic mission in Ramallah, headed by an ambassador to Palestine.[179] In July 2025, Colombia was reported to have promoted an agreement with other nations to cease purchasing weapons from Israeli companies.[180]

Petro's stance escalated significantly in September 2025 during the UN General Assembly. In his speech, he declared that diplomacy had failed and called for the formation of a "powerful army" from countries that "do not accept genocide" to "liberate Palestine".[181] He argued that "words are no longer enough"