How come Iran was only able to thrive during Turkic rule while native dynasties tended to be jokes that never amounted to anything?
How come Iran was only able to thrive during Turkic rule while native dynasties tended to be jokes that never amounted to anything?
That doesn't make sense. Any normie will tell you about Iranian kings but struggle to name a single Turkic one. On the other hand historians note that the biggest empires centered in Iran were native ones, not Turkic.
Safavids
Qajar
Seljuks
Timurids
Ilkhanate
Aq qoyunlu
Kara qoyunlu
Kharawezm
>thrived
Are you serious ?
Timur butchered so many iranians that they never recovered their numbers of the pre timurid period even today
That's great but normies only know like 2 kings. Xerxes and Pahlavi, while a prominent one like Hulagu is still unknown.
>Safavids
>Turkic
Only two of those are "Turkic".
How long have you been spamming this shit for and how many times have you cited real sources, if any at all?
Native Dynasties
>Achaemenids
beaten by the tiny Greeks multiple times.
>Sassanids
decent I suppose
>Tahirids
glorified governors who remained loyal to the arab caliphs
>Saffarids
Rose quickly and fell quickly
>Samanids
Were doing okay but then got buckbroken by Turks.
>Buyids
Buckbroken by Turks
>Post Mongol Muzaffarids, Sardabars, Injuids, etc
absolute jokes who were all BTFO'd by the Turkic Tamerlane
>Zand
quite literally buckbroken by a Turkic Eunuch
>Pahlavi
famous for being mogged by the Soviets and British in WW1 and WW2 and begged the British to take their oil. Also loved larping.
Turkic Dynasties
>Seljuks
Powerful dynasty that completely changed the political landscape and actually made inroads into Anatolia spreading the persian language and their new and improved culture from the turkic conquest into new areas
>Ghaznavids
Another Powerful Turkic dynasty that expanded into South Asia as well spreading Persian language and culture into South Asia
>timurid empire
Massive empire and successful in both culture and war
>Kara and Aq Qoyunlu
powerful post mongol and post Tamerlane states
>Safavids
The dynasty Iranians love larping as since it made Iran a geopolitical entity once more and gave the region a prosperous two centuries. Iranians will never ever admit they were turks though. That would be too embarrassing. Maybe I'm being too harsh and one day they will thank the turks for being the reason there is even an entity called Iran today.
>Afsharids
Once the Safavids fell and parts of Iran were conquered by the Ottomans, Russians, and Afghans this lowborn turk rose up and reconquered all lost territory
>Qajars
admittedly meh but they kept the state together and we all know a native dynasty would have just been conquered and directly colonized
>Were doing okay but then got buckbroken by Turks.
Really the opposite. Samanids conquered and enslaved Turkics then forced them at swordpoint to convert. If not for them keeping Turkic slaves for centuries, Turkics might've kept their religion like Mongols.
>Really the opposite
Yeah okay that's why Tajiks only exist in small parts of Central Asia and why the Turkic Ghaznavids conquered former Samanid territories.
Tajiks are still a big population in Central Asia. Ghaznavids were self-described slaves. Their masters were Samanids. They were conquered, captured, enslaved, Persianized, and Islamicized. This is apocalyptic level buck breaking. A coup isn't going to change that.
I'm an Azeri, and I hate Turk nationalist LARPing trash.
We are technically Iranians, and even the ancient Turks were largely of Iran_Neolithic stock + Steppe + East Eurasian ancestry. The only thing that racially set Turkics apart from the Iranics was East Eurasian ancestry.
Iran/Persian gave Turks a REAL culture.
If I had a child with a Far Easterner, then that's very close to what ancient Turkics were like.
Turkey is an abomination.
>I'm an Azeri
Somehow I doubt that.
>We are technically Iranians, and even the ancient Turks were largely of Iran_Neolithic stock + Steppe + East Eurasian ancestry. The only thing that racially set Turkics apart from the Iranics was East Eurasian ancestry.
>Iran/Persian gave Turks a REAL culture.
>If I had a child with a Far Easterner, then that's very close to what ancient Turkics were like.
>Turkey is an abomination.
All garbage a persian would say
>Somehow I doubt that.
I am Azeri, you dumb c**t. You can tell where an Iranian is from based on their last name, and I come from a small village in Iranian Azerbaijan. Some of the biggest Iranian nationalists were Azeri, dumb c**t. Frick off mentally ill Turk LARPer.
An example of an Iranian Azerbaijani who valued the Iranian side of his identity more than Turkic is Mirza Fatali Akhundov.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirza_Fatali_Akhundov
some mentally ill larper is your best example. LMAO
Modern Turkey's entire identity is based on being mentally ill larpers whereas in the case of Mirza Fatali Akhundov's ideas, it is much more sensible.
That's stop trying to break Iran into multiple countries with your revisionist nonsense. Kys, LARPer trash. Most Iranian Azeris consider themselves Iranian first and foremost, and most of us are fine with the Azeri language dying out. Persian and Avestan sound better anyways.
>Mirza Fatali Akhundov's ideas, it is much more sensible.
>WE WUZ ARYANS WESTERNERS PLEASE ACCEPT US
>dude lets all hecking become zoroastrians.
I still can't believe you're using this dude as your example. Such is the fate of a turk who abandons his identity. So he tries to fill the void but never does no matter how outlandish his ideas get
>WESTERNERS PLEASE ACCEPT US
Don't put words into my mouth.
>>dude lets all hecking become zoroastrians.
Zoroastrianism is philosophically better than Abrahamism, but I believe there are better options than Zoroastrianism too such as Mahayana.
>Such is the fate of a turk who abandons his identity.
Turks never had a rich identity, and Turkey is not even racially or ethnically close to ancient Turks. You pretty much adopted an Arabic religion like everyone else that neighbors you.
>Don't put words into my mouth.
I'm not that's the shit your hero Mirza Fatali Akhundov was saying according to his wikipedia article
I never claimed he is a hero, but I'm just saying he is right in privileging his Iranian identity over Turkic one.
Most Turkic rulers were big Perseboos for a reason.
>Most Turkic rulers were big Perseboos for a reason.
I love this iranian cope the most. As if a relatively tiny group speaking the language of its conquered subjects, employing those subjects in governing the land, etc is a sign that preferred their so called persian identity over their turkic one. Well that's complete bullshit. Turkic languages continued to be spoken and supported by all of these dynasties. Ask yourself why Iran is 1/3 turkic.
Why didn't they employ those 1/3 turkics in governing the land? Why not make them the viziers? How did they know turkics are moronic?
Your country is being ruled by by a turk right now. dumbass
No it isn't. Actually a Persianate Georgian is ruling yours which is hilarious.
People from Turkey racially cluster closer to Iranians than they do to actual ancient Turks. You literally have more Iranian ancestry than Turkic if you are living in Turkey.
Several samples are closer than Iranians. Also, Anatolian ancestry is not Iranian, it only carries some traces of it from the Chalcolithic era. Iranians overall cluster pretty far from most Turks.
Yahbu turks who made the Seljuks were pretty "white" though they were mixed.
>Turks never had a rich identity
Ottomans were one of the greatest and longest lasting empires in the planet's history. Turks were ruling from the Mediterranean all the way to China. Our history is great only those who seethe at us claim otherwise
I don't find your history culturally impressive.
Abrahamism is spiritually bereft of any positive qualities. The farther I am from Abrahamism, the better.
All Muslims are effectively Arab, and all Christians are israelites. Simple as.
>identity
What identity is that? Copying the identity of Armenians? Greeks? Persians? Arabs? Kurds? LARPing and wuwuzzing each one of them to make up for your own lack?
t. subhuman persian
I'm an Azeri, and I think it's you mentally ill Anatolians that are subhuman. Stop trying to divide the country. Most Azeris aren't moronic to fall for your divisive tactics.
Turkey doesn't even have a real culture.
Kys
Cope
Nope, you kys, split yourself in two and any checks after this mean nothing.
The "22222" just mean you should split yourself in 2.
>I'm an Azeri
No you aren't because we call ourselves AZERBAIJANIS. Azeri is used by Persian nationalist frickwits trying to LARP as Azerbaijanis.
When you remove the "i" from my last name, it indicates I come from a village in either East or West Azerbaijan, and I cluster with Azerbaijanis on PCA autosomal DNA plots. My great grandfather was an Azerbaijani that migrated into Isfahan.
Most Azeris don't hold their Turk identity highly. Turks were historically uncultured and stupid. Being descended from Persians is much more noble.
moron
no Iranian Azeri calls themselves Azerbaijani you homosexual
b-but russified caucasus tatars larping as azeris call themselves azerbaijanis!
This is gigacope, the Ancient Turkics were primarily Steppe + Siberian with some BMAC input, nowhere close genetically to Iranians, the Turkic input Turks carry is nothing like Iranians. Only modern Turkmen might be close to Iranians since they got mutted.
>the Ancient Turkics were primarily Steppe + Siberian with some BMAC input
That describes anyone such as Iranians better than "ancient Turkics". Ancient Turkics were Siberians and only later Turkics had steppe ancestry.
>Only modern Turkmen might be close to Iranians since they got mutted.
Turkmens are the fathers of Turks and they are further from Iranians than modern "Turkish" mutts.
>That describes anyone such as Iranians better than "ancient Turkics". Ancient Turkics were Siberians and only later Turkics had steppe ancestry.
It absolutely does not as Turks carry more East-asian or Steppe than any Iranian.
>Turkmens are the fathers of Turks and they are further from Iranians than modern "Turkish" mutts.
moronic argument, they share only Ancient Turkic ancestry which is not the majority of the Turks DNA, It's not even 25%. Turks are closer to Iranians to Turkmen because the Neolithic Anatolians raped the Iranians, that's why Iranians are 25-35% EEF. Turks inherit Neolithic Iranian ancestry from the chalcholithic Anatolians, not Turkics. They also carry it in far less amounts than Iranians.
Cringe
>Saffarids
>Samanids
>Buyids
Irrelevant shitholes whose influence was a tiny fraction of the old Persian empire, and either collapsed on their own quickly or got shreked by turks. Buyids broke caliphs but remained muslim, massive cucks
It's like you didn't even read my post
They were all tiny fractions of the old Persian empire, but the influence of Saffarids and Samanids ended up deeply affecting every future dynasty in the region.
And while all of them may be shells of the former Persian empires, the legacy of the Turkic Qajars and Qoyonulu is one of complete failure, while even a small dynasty like the Buyids shaped modern Iran.
>small dynasty like the Buyids
actually they were about as large as your earlier examples. Nice to see that deep down you acknowledge your inferiority
Buyids were 1/4 the size of the Qajars and 1/6 the Qoyonlu and were still more successful and important than either Turkic.
>buyids
Area
980 est.[4][5] 1,600,000 km2 (620,000 sq mi)
>Qajars
Area
1873[5] 1,300,000 km2 (500,000 sq mi)
Ignore their peaks? Buyids didn't even control Iran idiot. That's why I said they were a small dynasty. At their peak Buyids controlled southwestern Iran and southern Iraq. At their peak Qajars controlled all of modern Iran as well as Armenia, Caucasus, Turkestan, and western Afghanistan.
>their peaks
the dynasty under Adud al Dawla
This includes allied emirates in Iraq, Syria, and Balochistan, but it still isn't as big as the Qajar peak.
homie where are you getting these numbers, looking at literally any map of the Buyids and I can tell you're spouting total bullshit
stop seething I literally got them from wikipedia.
Lmao are you a qajar or something. Why seethe over a past dynasty being better than yours?
>no argument
I accept your concession.
there is no fricking argument needed for the land area of an empire. Get over it.
Their actual size was nowhere near that made up area. The dynasty was
and would've been no more than 500,000 km.
https://escholarship.org/content/qt3cn68807/qt3cn68807.pdf
take it up with someone else. I don't care.
That makes more sense. They are considering the Buyids as Iran.
They're not. but whatever makes you happy
They lasted a little over a century. That's a pretty long time.
>left nearly zero impact
Seljuk institutions were all copies of buyid ones. They ended the relevance of the caliphate. There's was one of the last few dynasties to support massive amounts scholarship. Their biggest legacy is twelver shi'ism which was largely their creation. Those are all pretty significant
>They lasted a little over a century. That's a pretty long time
Compared to the far more important Persian dynasties that's nothing lmao
No the Buyids are up there in terms of the length of their rule. Only the Achaemenids, Parthians, Sassanids, and Safavids lasted longer. After that the most significant dynasties in terms of length are the buyids and samanids.
>Western Gokturk Khaganate
Area
630[6] 3,500,000 km2 (1,400,000 sq mi)
>Sassanids
Area
550[7][8] 3,500,000 km2 (1,400,000 sq mi)
Yes even half of an empire is as big as the Sassanid one.
>desert
lmao and what exactly does the Sassanid empire contain?
>Yes even half of an empire is as big as the Sassanid one.
That's the peak Khaganate size. The Sassanid size peaks after that and is greater than the Khaganate.
>lmao and what exactly does the Sassanid empire contain?
Humans. Cities. Towns. Education. Things the turkoid Khaganate lacked.
>Western Gokturk Khaganate
dumbass. this empire came from a split between the eastern and western halves of the original khanate
It wasn't a Turk empire. It was a Saka Iranian royal family ruling over Turkic tribes.
>It was a Saka Iranian royal family ruling over Turkic tribes
just when I thought Iranians couldn't sink any lower
The entire empire was Saka Iranians kings and Sogdian Iranian merchants ruling over conquered Turkic tribes.
The exact opposite
Gokturks were Iranian Sakas and Iranian Sogdians ruling over conquered Turkic slaves. The royalty and government were non-Turkic.
>The Ashina (Chinese: 阿史那; pinyin: Āshǐnà; Wade–Giles: A-shih-na; Middle Chinese: (Guangyun) [ʔɑʃi̯ə˥nɑ˩]), were a tribe and the ruling dynasty of the Göktürks.
>American historian Peter Golden has reported that genetic testing of the proposed descendants of the Ashina tribe does seem to confirm a link to the Indo-Iranians, emphasizing that "the Turks as a whole ‘were made up of heterogeneous and somatically dissimilar populations'".[68]
>Although the Göktürks spoke Old Turkic, the Khaganate's early official texts and coins were written in Sogdian.[5][13]
>Muqan Qaghan, the third Qaghan of the First Turkic Khaganate, was described by Chinese authors as having an unusual appearance. His eyes were blue,[60] he had a red complexion, and his face was wide.[61][62]
>According to Chinese scientist Xue Zongzheng, the early members of the Ashina tribe had physical features that were quite different from those of East Asian people. These would include deep eye sockets, prominent noses, and light eye or hair color. However, over time, members of the Ashina tribe intermarried with Chinese nobility, which shifted their physical appearance to a more East Asian one.[63]
>He also adds that Turk system of beliefs linking at least some sections of the Turk ruling class to the Sogdians and, beyond them, to the Wusun.[38]
>American historian
>chinese historian
these reek of falsehoods and iranian cope.
Turks who lived in the western steppes never looked east asian. So that's a useless observation and since when do iranians have blue eyes and light complexations? What a dumbass
historian
historian
>these reek of falsehoods and iranian cope.
How is this "falsehoods and iranian cope" because it made you seethe? You're crying about it so it's wrong? Cry to scholars about Saka Sogdians ruling the Turks.
>Turks who lived in the western steppes never looked east asian.
Sure thing Anatolian mutt.
>So that's a useless observation and since when do iranians have blue eyes and light complexations?
Early Turkics had light complexions and blue eye rate at 0% it's obvious their paternal Iranian ancestry brought it.
>How is this "falsehoods and iranian cope" because it made you seethe? You're crying about it so it's wrong? Cry to scholars about Saka Sogdians ruling the Turks.
it is false. A turkic khaganate is a turkic khaganate.
>Sure thing Anatolian mutt.
dumbass
>Early Turkics had light complexions and blue eye rate at 0% it's obvious their paternal Iranian ancestry brought it.
iranians don't have light complexions and blue eyes. Fricking moron
>it is false. A turkic khaganate is a turkic khaganate.
Circular logic only convinces low IQ turks. It was an Iranian khaganate that ruled over conquered turkics. The royal family were Saka Iranians. Their government was Sogdian Iranians. Their slaves were turks.
>dumbass
You are not a real Turk. You are a mutt.
>iranians don't have light complexions and blue eyes.
Plenty of them today do, but ancient Iranians would've had more of it before they mixed with dark turks.
>Iranian khaganate
LMAO
If the Safavid sultanate was Turkic without anything making it Turkic, then the Iranian Ashina Khaganate is clearly Iranian.
The Safavids and their court spoke turkic as their language of choice. Ismaili's poetry is like 90% Turkic
The Safavid court language was Persian. The Safavid government language was Persian. The writing was in Persian. The governors were various Iranian ethnics.
>The Safavid court language was Persian
It was Turkic. Only the language of bureacrats and government was in persian
It never was. Ismail wrote poetry in Persian and Turkic, but his government's language was Persian. He was an exception. The rest of them later didn't even bother learning Turkic and only used Persian.
>It never was
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavid_Iran#The_languages_of_the_court,_military,_administration_and_culture
How long? Abbas's court and onwards was already Persian. Perhaps before that too.
they continued to speak Turkish until the end.
I don't know but the language of the court had already shifted to Persian by Abbas and probably before that.
Black Americans are Englishmen according to your fricked up logic.
>samegay who probably was spamming IQfy calling Scythians turk is being this fallacious
lmao
The Saka spoke an Iranic language, yes, but they didn't live within the borders of modern day Iran.
They shared the same languages and bordered each other. What does Turkey have to do with a steppe empire 2000 km away?
BTFO
Sakas spoke an Iranian language, identified as Iranian and referred to their homeland as Iran, yes.
The Iranic languages came from the steppe to the land which is currently Iran, not the other way around.
Essentially both the local inhabitants of Iran and the Gokturks were swarthy peoples conquered by the original Iranic man, which was genetically European.
>inb4 seething
Xiongnu and Saka were already race mixed mutts. This is corroborated by archeogenetic studies. Tl:DR you're all the same gigga mutts to Westerners and Science.
"westerners" are the giga mutts they were raped into existence recently
Professors in Turkey are not allowed to speak of this
Cope and Seethe fars. Timer didn't go far enough
>asiaticturd
Made-up shit from the 20th century.
To be fair, I think the Buyids did a lot of their conquering in the mesopotamia region, but their rule there was incredibly short lived (I'm talking like a quarter of a century if that) and left nearly zero impact outside of maybe persian script being more popular, but that was already happening. Needless to say, It was a very short lived "empire" and declined almost immediately after its peak and does not hold a candle to the old Sassanids, its not even close
>but their rule there was incredibly short lived
That was the second last region to fall to the Seljuks
It was only the area around Baghdad they conquered and their southwestern Iran holdings. They didn't take northern Iraq or Syria either.
They did, The invaded jazira region, but they contracted to just persis region and region around baghdad and all of those peripheral conquests were lost rather quickly, again, barely lasting a quarter of a century
>all of those peripheral conquests were lost rather quickly, again, barely lasting a quarter of a century
Sassanidgays man. Pot meet kettle
At least the sassanids golden age didn't last like 40 year lmao
>no turkic empire was able to do this
feels bad
Reza I...
That's like 20 different states being combined into one by some Turkish larper. Seljuks had already fragmented into different states like the Sultanate of Rum which seceded before this.
Also what are those random holes? Why are there tributaries everywhere? Why is Egypt, Baluchistan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan missing? It still doesn't match the Sassanids.
I will never stop enjoying iranian seething. This khaganate is bigger than any iranian empire in history
Look at all that desert and prairie. Empire of nothing.
Where are the cities of asiaticturd?
Sogdian officials probably set up a city for them lower class Turks somewhere.
They were raiding then. That makes sense as they also didn't conquer northern Iraq.
>They didn't take northern Iraq or Syria either.
they did under adud al dawla. The map I posted earlier was the buyids at his death. You were the one who brought up the peaks of empires so I posted that.
>Buyids broke caliphs but remained muslim, massive cucks
They were Twelver Shias, putting the Abbasid caliphs on a leash like they did was a massive humiliation for Sunnis, which was only washed away by Seljuk rule.
Seljuks only knew Iranian culture, Timurids didn't rule as Turkics, Kara and Aq Qoyunlus were Iranians using Iranianized Turkic mercenaries, Safavid was Iranian using Turkic mercenaries, "Afsharids" isn't a thing and Nader Shah was an Iranian nationalist and Qajar was an Turkic tribe that nearly destroyed Iran.
Try again, spammer.
Seethe persian loser
Just to let you all knows, Turks are an Iranian people
>while native dynasties tended to be jokes that never amounted to anything?
This only applies to the post Islamic conquest with the exception of the Safavids
>Safavids
>Native
They were Turks
>Timur butchered so many iranians that they never recovered their numbers of the pre timurid period even today
stop spreading myths reza. What actually happened was the Mongols killed so many of you that your population only recovered during the 20th century. Guess who led the tiny population back to recovery into the tens of millions. The Turkic Safavids.
There were both Turkic-led and Iranic-led dynasties. Daily threads about Iran involving shitting on one ethnicity or the other are made by autistic weirdos and it's getting tiring.
Both included Iranic and Turkic peoples and was culturally Persian. Even today Khameini is ethnic Azeri, and Khomeini had Indian origins as well iirc. The Iranian government is multi-ethnic but Persianate.
The entire Turkic identity is fake.
>'Although I am apparently a Turk', Akhundzadeh stated in a letter to Maneckji, a leader of Zoroastrians in Tehran, 'I am a Persian by race.'
>Mirza Fatali Akhundov
This, honestly I don't know why people try to separate the 2. Turks and Persians have fought and subjugated one another to such an extent that they're all pretty much the same honestly.
>There were both Turkic-led and Iranic-led dynasties
And the Turkic ones were better than the latter.
classic iranian cope
>Daily threads involving shitting on one ethnicity or the other are made by autistic weirdos
> It is very revealing that Akhundzadeh called Iranians the ‘children’ of the Parsis. He accorded Parsis a genealogical ascendancy that can only be explained by the fact that he considered them as a kind of pure Iranians uncontaminated by Arabs and Islam, who should be ‘followed’ by the contemporary debased Muslim lot. He then added that ‘my appearance is that of a Turk, but I am of the Parsis’ race
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
There is nothing rich in ancient Turkic identity.
Iranic identity was much richer and included things like Zoroastrianism, Mahayana, and more.
Just look at that fricking spawn point, it has to be the most walled off country ever. Not saying your point is true, but it wouldn't surprise me if they benefitted from foreign expertise when expanding outside the homeland. Being insulated from enemy attacks except through Azerbaijan or bactria could make them complacent
Iran has bad soil and constantly faces major earthquakes multiple times a year, it's the worst spawn point. Nile river or the Indus river is the best spawn point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_empires
Unlike trannies, Turks are very well funded and organized. There will come a day when all the world outwardly accepts their narrative, but it will amount to nothing. We know it's bullshit, but at some point there's no reason to argue the same points again. You will never be European. You will never have a central role in world history, except as the orc.
They can't even get the world to accept their Armenian genocide denial despite pouring money into it while Armenians lack political power.
A USSR trained Armenian terror organization is responsible for the event being called a genocide. It was bullshitted to reality so the commies could split Turkey and control the middle east & pass the straits.
literally no one believes in the Armenoid genocide (or even knows about it) other than the west + Eastern Europe because of their anti-Turkey butthurt
in my country the few people who knows about it view it as a desperate Armenian attempt of copying the Holocaust to generate sympathy from the rest of the world, when in reality they were clearly in the wrong and deserved what happened to them
The Buyids were great for Iran. They built up Fars and their other Iranian lands into a prosperous place. I don't know what's up with the vitriol against them here. Is it really just because they weren't muh hecking large empire?
Poorsians aren't human
t. gigamutt wienerroach
You have accomplished nothing. Nothing contributed to arts, sciences, mathamatics, or any sort of advancement of human culture and civilization. Not even to the most basic levels of theology. You are scum, a detriment of human refuse who are products of such massive degrees of miscegenation you bare no resemblance or connection to the "ancestors" you claim to be descendants of.
>How come Iran was only able to thrive during Turkic rule while native dynasties tended to be jokes that never amounted to anything?
Iran is defined as a land between 3 seas ; gulf, caspian, aral. What are you describing as a iran is a STATE , WITH had many regimes. Did you failed your political science coursework
Seeing how arrogant and chauvinistic Turks behave, one would think they descended from Bactrians or Sogdians, who actually had impressive cultural legacies.
Turks are a bunch of cultureless, moronic, and brutish trash, and I say that as someone who most likely descends from Turks, unfortunately. I hope Turkey is destroyed.
Disingenuous lying bastard trash.
Turks wewuz as Bactrians and Sogdians all the time. They also wewuz their descendants.
no turks are just that moronic and larpers
No, it's a sunni arab iraqi living in sweden as a refugee, he got exposed a while ago
He's mentally ill, pretends to be multiple people, talks to himself a lot, hates iranians, LARPs as a greek, pan-turk and so on to get both sides to attack each other instead of him, etc
Because Islam turned Persians into Arabs without an identity. Pre-Islamic Persia was great. Post-Islamic Iran was essentially an Arab country.
When the Turks came to Iran, they had their unique culture and identity which was different to Arabs and Persians. This made them stronger and allowed them to rule over them. You see that once they also mixed with their subjected Arabs and Persians do they also lose their strength and become weak.
>Because Islam turned Persians into Arabs without an identity.
Iranians never stopped identifying as Iranian, never stopped calling their country as Iran and never stopped speaking an Iranian language.
>Post-Islamic Iran was essentially an Arab country.
Keep projecting, israelite cattle.
>When the Turks came to Iran, they had their unique culture and identity
Turkics had no culture and identity. They were converted to Islam and Iranianized by Iranians.
>This made them stronger and allowed them to rule over them
Very strange how Iran is called Iran and has never been called Turkic.
>You see that once they also mixed with their subjected Arabs and Persians
Iranians have very little Arabic and Turkic genes while Arabics and Turkics have lots of Iranian genes.
>do they also lose their strength and become weak.
Iranianized Turkics were stronger. It took Europe 7 centuries to defeat the Ottomans.
Never bother anyone again with your delusions, israelite cattle.
>Achaemenid Empire
>Parthian Empire
>Jokes
t.Gayreek
Yes iranian cuck
Yes. The first was a massive empire that spent its time gettingn BTFO Greeks and was eventually outright conquered by them. Just read about Darius III's prostitute wife, mother, and daughters
Other than Carrhae the Parthians spent their time as a punching bag for the Romans
>redditspacing
>historical illiteracy
woah
The Greeks were literally militarily defeated and forced to leave Egypt after the initial Persian wars in Greece because of over-confidence, you moron.
>ITT: arabs, indians, and turks gathering in their cuckshed echochamber yelling at the clouds like homosexuals
Is there really anything more funny than shitskin infighting?