Is it even possible to have a Caliphate?

[6644kp]

One political entity to unite all Muslim peoples under one flag. Since this is the supreme aim of groups like Hizb al Tahrir and Al Qaeda etc. They argue that Muslims should form one nation because they are a religous community and they have been divided into nation states by the West. However if you look at history only the first and only unified Muslim Empire 620-750 was a single power to rule all Muslims. After 750 and the coming of the Abbasids the Muslims would become divided and as the Abbasids declined in power more and more Muslims states appeared. So historically Muslim were only unified for a brief period in its 1400 year history. And that Muslim Empire was Arab dominated. The Caliphate title became more and more a symbolic title as powerfull empires of the time claimed the title for various periods of time. The last one to claim it were the Ottomans.

Today Islam has spread to far more peoples and races than it did by 750 and when I think of my own country of how different ethnic groups hat eachothers guts. Also the Arabs and Persians are certainly not as liberaly thinking in tolerating other races. For example in Basra, the mixed race descandants of the African Slaves brought there by the Abbasids are still called Abd which means slave. This would be like a American man calling a full grown black man BOY.

Even within the religion there is Sunni, Shia differnence and people seems to never be able to agree on religion, so even these major groups have smaller sects and schools. The Arabs could not unite even though the were pretty much had the same lanuage and religion.

So what chance is there of a Caliphate, its seems like pure fantasy considering all of this.

[Lysimachus]

So what chance is there of a Caliphate,

None.

[karo]

One political entity to unite all Muslim peoples under one flag. Since this is the supreme aim of groups like Hizb al Tahrir and Al Qaeda etc. They argue that Muslims should form one nation because they are a religous community and they have been divided into nation states by the West. However if you look at history only the first and only unified Muslim Empire 620-750 was a single power to rule all Muslims. After 750 and the coming of the Abbasids the Muslims would become divided and as the Abbasids declined in power more and more Muslims states appeared. So historically Muslim were only unified for a brief period in its 1400 year history. And that Muslim Empire was Arab dominated. The Caliphate title became more and more a symbolic title as powerfull empires of the time claimed the title for various periods of time. The last one to claim it were the Ottomans.

Today Islam has spread to far more peoples and races than it did by 750 and when I think of my own country of how different ethnic groups hat eachothers guts. Also the Arabs and Persians are certainly not as liberaly thinking in tolerating other races. For example in Basra, the mixed race descandants of the African Slaves brought there by the Abbasids are still called Abd which means slave. This would be like a American man calling a full grown black man BOY.

Even within the religion there is Sunni, Shia differnence and people seems to never be able to agree on religion, so even these major groups have smaller sects and schools. The Arabs could not unite even though the were pretty much had the same lanuage and religion.

So what chance is there of a Caliphate, its seems like pure fantasy considering all of this.

Well the Muslims are to divided and the only that is connecting them is their religion and that's not enough and the fact that nationalism is there as well it makes it impossible to have a Caliphate.

[Poet]

First of all Al-Qaeda and Hizbotehrir are not one thing. The first is a terrorist org and second believes in getting her objectives by peaceful means. Secondly, now-a-days watching bully of western nations on Islam, surprisingly even highly qualified Muslims also talk of caliphate. No doubt that Turkish caliphate in it's last age was not different than monarchy but even then it was a biggest barrier in the way of anti-Islam powers and was a barrier in way of Jewish state in middle east. Yes we need caliphate, if you keenly observe you would come to know that to defend their interests and to carry on their bully, western powers have been adopted the same way of unity and intra-national harmony, which caliphate creates between different nations of Muslims. If I am wrong, what should I call European Union and Nato forces?

Edit: I suggest you to make it a poll.

[Lysimachus]

First of all Al-Qaeda and Hizbotehrir are not one thing. The first is a terrorist org and second believes in getting her objectives by peaceful means. Secondly, now-a-days watching bully of western nations on Islam, surprisingly even highly qualified Muslims also talk of caliphate. No doubt that Turkish caliphate in it's last age was not different than monarchy but even then it was a biggest barrier in the way of anti-Islam powers and was a barrier in way of Jewish state in middle east. Yes we need caliphate, if you keenly observe you would come to know that to defend their interests and to carry on their bully, western powers have been adopted the same way of unity and intra-national harmony, which caliphate creates between different nations of Muslims. If I am wrong, what should I call European Union and Nato forces?

Western nations bully Islam? Links please. By the way, a Caliphate wouldn't create unity because as you know full well there are different sects of Islam. I highly doubt, for example that Shi'a Muslims would be content with living with Sunni Muslims and secondly all of the religions in this theoretical Caliphate would need to be equally represented. Since it would cover a wide area of space, it would include Orthodox Christians, Catholics, Jews and many more. What would this Caliphate do, expell all of them out of the new state? Finally, the EU and NATO are loose confederations of states who all maintain their own autonomy. If you compare a possible Caliphate to that of the Ottoman Empire then you're claiming that the EU is one large empire under one specific ruler which it is not.

[Poet]

It's too bad that Muslim countries can't even agree what to do about Israel. And now you want them to unite and form a Caliphate? Like I said the only thing that is connecting all those country it's the Islam nothing else. Syria and Iraq are very different countries. Than you got the the countries in Arabia and those countries have their own league of crazy *cough*SA*cough*

You said Islam is the only thing common in Muslims countries, I say yes, and only Islam, if we hold it tight, can unite us again as it did in age of Caliphate. Yes we have different sects, but differences are of minor importance, it is just that we are idiot enough to be black mailed by some clerics and enemies of Islam, to fight on disputes of Caliphate of Ali or Abu Bakr (r.a.). Luckily, we do not have big differences and even in Ottoman empire of last ages, Shias and Sunni were being ruled by one Caliph. I think where there is a will, there is a way. We can form a lose confederation like European Union and then we can advance on our way to a real Caliphate slowly.

Western nations bully Islam? Links please. By the way, a Caliphate wouldn't create unity because as you know full well there are different sects of Islam. I highly doubt, for example that Shi'a Muslims would be content with living with Sunni Muslims and secondly all of the religions in this theoretical Caliphate would need to be equally represented. Since it would cover a wide area of space, it would include Orthodox Christians, Catholics, Jews and many more. What would this Caliphate do, expell all of them out of the new state? Finally, the EU and NATO are loose confederations of states who all maintain their own autonomy. If you compare a possible Caliphate to that of the Ottoman Empire then you're claiming that the EU is one large empire under one specific ruler which it is not.

Iraq and Afghanistan are enough proofs of that bully I talked about. After sacking Ottoman Caliphate, western powers, realized that they need to divide the region into small countries, to increase number of rulers so that they can easily deal with them. Like if there was only one ruler of all ex-Ottoman Empire, he could have been a strong one and could easily denying from accepting "advices" of those powers. Rest is history that how Muslims were divided in small countries to easily cause foundation of Israel in the region. Now after 9/11, same powers have again decided to divide some powerful Muslim countries into small regions so they can easily get their objectives for this century, this time in these countries, Iraq, Iran and Pakistan are included, as we know practically Iraq has been divided and American think tanks are making maps of new Pakistan which wouldn't have Baluchistan in it.

[karo]

You said Islam is the only thing common in Muslims countries, I say yes, and only Islam, if we hold it tight, can unite us again as it did in age of Caliphate. Yes we have different sects, but differences are of minor importance, it is just that we are idiot enough to be black mailed by some clerics and enemies of Islam, to fight on disputes of Caliphate of Ali or Abu Bakr (r.a.). Luckily, we do not have big differences and even in Ottoman empire of last ages, Shias and Sunni were being ruled by one Caliph. I think where there is a will, there is a way. We can form a lose confederation like European Union and then we can advance on our way to a real Caliphate slowly.

This is BS and you know it, look at the ME today and how the countries act. The Muslim countries can't even agree about the simple fact, what they should do with Israel. And than there are the states that are supporting the US and the West against the anti-Western states. And the fact that some countries like AS go crazy with Islam and all of their retarded laws vs countries like Syria and Lebanon with more freedom. Those are all facts that work against the idea of a Caliphate. You look at one fact and start dreaming instead of looking at the reality.

[karo]

First of all Al-Qaeda and Hizbotehrir are not one thing. The first is a terrorist org and second believes in getting her objectives by peaceful means. Secondly, now-a-days watching bully of western nations on Islam, surprisingly even highly qualified Muslims also talk of caliphate. No doubt that Turkish caliphate in it's last age was not different than monarchy but even then it was a biggest barrier in the way of anti-Islam powers and was a barrier in way of Jewish state in middle east. Yes we need caliphate, if you keenly observe you would come to know that to defend their interests and to carry on their bully, western powers have been adopted the same way of unity and intra-national harmony, which caliphate creates between different nations of Muslims. If I am wrong, what should I call European Union and Nato forces?

Edit: I suggest you to make it a poll.

It's too bad that Muslim countries can't even agree what to do about Israel. And now you want them to unite and form a Caliphate? Like I said the only thing that is connecting all those country it's the Islam nothing else. Syria and Iraq are very different countries. Than you got the the countries in Arabia and those countries have their own league of crazy *cough*SA*cough*

[removeduser_052420]

First of all Al-Qaeda and Hizbotehrir are not one thing. The first is a terrorist org and second believes in getting her objectives by peaceful means. Secondly, now-a-days watching bully of western nations on Islam, surprisingly even highly qualified Muslims also talk of caliphate. No doubt that Turkish caliphate in it's last age was not different than monarchy but even then it was a biggest barrier in the way of anti-Islam powers and was a barrier in way of Jewish state in middle east. Yes we need caliphate, if you keenly observe you would come to know that to defend their interests and to carry on their bully, western powers have been adopted the same way of unity and intra-national harmony, which caliphate creates between different nations of Muslims. If I am wrong, what should I call European Union and Nato forces?

Edit: I suggest you to make it a poll.

How exactly would this caliphate be created then? Why would individual nations give up their sovereignty? What would give the arabs a incentive to side with "inferior" mulims like pakistanis or indonesians? What sect of Islam will this caliphate follow? What will happen to muslims from minority sects?

What will stop other nations from talking Pakistan's nuclear missles? I mean, if i remember, most Pakistanis are afflicted with some sort of arabophilia, what insures that our nuclear missles aern't distributed throughout the muslim world?

Just give it up Poet, and don't know why you and the other people from the middle class of pakistan keep having wet dreams about a caliphate. Just fix the damn country first before you go around talking about some Islamic Utopia.

[Treize]

First of all Al-Qaeda and Hizbotehrir are not one thing. The first is a terrorist org and second believes in getting her objectives by peaceful means. Secondly, now-a-days watching bully of western nations on Islam, surprisingly even highly qualified Muslims also talk of caliphate. No doubt that Turkish caliphate in it's last age was not different than monarchy but even then it was a biggest barrier in the way of anti-Islam powers and was a barrier in way of Jewish state in middle east. Yes we need caliphate, if you keenly observe you would come to know that to defend their interests and to carry on their bully, western powers have been adopted the same way of unity and intra-national harmony, which caliphate creates between different nations of Muslims. If I am wrong, what should I call European Union and Nato forces?

Edit: I suggest you to make it a poll.

What regions would have to be part of it?

[Poet]

What regions would have to be part of it?

To start a process which would end in Caliphate, some Muslims countries of same region would have to sign defense and trade treaties, I am a Pakistani, so I think they can be, Pakistan, Iran, S.A., Turkey first and then they can engage others.

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD THE WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE TRYING TO HELP THE MUSLIM COUNTRIES. YOU GOT TAKEN OVER BY EXTREMIST GOVERNMENTS AND NATO WALKED IN TO TRY AND RESTORE ORDER

WHAT PART OF THAT AREN'T YOU GETTING?

I was hoping I could have a civil debate with you, but it's just impossible!

I do not buy this . Iraq invasion was a clear bully and Afghanistan invasion was on an evidence found "after" attack. It's crusade. So said G.W. Bush, not me. And stop shouting on me.

[Tiberios]

I do not buy this . Iraq invasion was a clear bully and Afghanistan invasion was on an evidence found "after" attack. It's crusade. So said G.W. Bush, not me. And stop shouting on me.

Ohh god, not the crusade conspiracy again. I already showed you that a crusade has other meanings than a religious war. But of course you choose to ignore that

ISAF is trying it's best to make Afghanistan a stable and peacefull nation. It's the Taliban and their perverted interpretation of Islam that is the problem, not the West.

[Chlodwig I.]

I do not buy this . Iraq invasion was a clear bully.....

What was the Iraq Invasion in Kuwait then?

[Lysimachus]

Iraq and Afghanistan are enough proofs of that bully I talked about.

So you're saying NATO walked in to said countries with imperialistic intentions? Of course not, extremists like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban were taking over the country and something needed to be done about their oppressive regimes. There's no "bullying" involved in saving a country from a far-right authoritarian government with malicious intentions.

After sacking Ottoman Caliphate, western powers, realized that they need to divide the region into small countries, to increase number of rulers so that they can easily deal with them.

Actually Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Israel were all added to their colonial empires, the land the Ottomans had gained at the collapse of Russia were returned back and they initially gave parts of Anatolia to Greece (though these were later returned back to the new Turkish republic). Then gradually, the Western powers gave their colonies more and more independence and by World War II i'm pretty sure a number of their provinces were semi-autonomous. 1918 revolved around self-determination in the world and there were no hostile intentions involved when the Central Powers had their empires carved up, it was simply to release the peoples of the old empires in to their own nations. Sadly, it was simply a case of drawing arbitrary lines on a map since it didn't take in the correct boundaries as proven by the borders in modern-day Africa.

Like if there was only one ruler of all ex-Ottoman Empire, he could have been a strong one and could easily denying from accepting "advices" of those powers.

Yes. "If" is the key word here. The facts are though, that after 1566 the Ottoman Empire lacked strong rulers to maintain such a vast empire. Oh, and define "advices" to me because I don't understand.

Rest is history that how Muslims were divided in small countries to easily cause foundation of Israel in the region.

No, like I said it was all part of the self-determination process. You have to understand that these new countries were not created for some evil purpose.

Now after 9/11, same powers have again decided to divide some powerful Muslim countries into small regions so they can easily get their objectives for this century, this time in these countries, Iraq, Iran and Pakistan are included, as we know practically Iraq has been divided and American think tanks are making maps of new Pakistan which wouldn't have Baluchistan in it.

Objectives like, getting rid of the tight-fisted regimes that control these countries? Secondly, when it comes to the India/Pakistan issue the same applied to them as occured in Africa. When the English crown pulled out of India they hastily drew up borders not taking in to account cultural differences.

[jankren]

the Caliphate. I will accept the Caliphate only if the Caliph is an Indonesian.

[6644kp]

the Caliphate. I will accept the Caliphate only if the Caliph is an Indonesian.

I will NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER accept an Indonesian Caliph

[Babur]

I think Iran and Iraq's history of confrontation is not bigger than that of England or France, if they can do it, so can we. And yes politics, power politics of present world would be hurdle in way of such a lose confederation, but then we should let our enemies do what so ever they are doing as we cannot do anything. Where there is a will, there is a way. If despite of all of power politics and conspiracies, we can make nukes we can form a confederation also.

you're joking right? , or are you seriously overlooking 1400 years of animosities between Iranians and Arabs?.It predates Anglo-French conflicts and on top of that, Iraq and Iran last fought a war as recently as the 1980s.

I will NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER accept an Indonesian Caliph

well this just shows that inevitably such a caliphate would favour certain ethnic groups

[6644kp]

well this just shows that inevitably such a caliphate would favour certain ethnic groups

I woundt accept an Indian one either. Only Arab or Persian.

[Babur]

I woundt accept an Indian one either. Only Arab or Persian.

you just proved my point...

such a caliphate would inevitably break apart

[cenkiss]

Muslims themselves easily killed caliphs,disagreed on many things,went against their caliph to fight for europeans.There is no caliphate.