From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Modern Times"...

Saddam Husseins strategy in al-Anfal campaign was not fuelled with an intention to "Arabize" Kurdish-speaking groups in Kirkuk. He was in fact trying to spread out the opposers of the solidarity of the state. If the rebellion against him wasn't staged for political and economical gain by the Kurds, the Anfal campaign wouldn't have come to fruitition, thereby debunking any claim that it was "forced" Arabization. I think we need to revise that section. 213.42.2.11

Early Antiquity

The Neo-Babylonians spoke Aramaic, not Akkadian (the language of the Old Babylonian Empire with Sargon, etc...). A reference for claiming that Akkadian was particularly close to Arabic would be useful. Anyway, the passage down to the Nabateans is pretty much off the mark

Arabic vs. Arab

Arabic is the language. Arab is the race/ethnicity/culture/identity. If you do not know the difference between Arabic and Arab, please do not edit the article and fill it with inaccurate terminology.

what of political, socioeconomic consequences

if the priority was to 'arabify' and 'islamise' populations not natively either, shouldn't it be compared with other potential programs, such that would've prioritized economic and other 'well being' of the peoples, over religious doctrine and ethnic identity politics, including externally standing reputation and perceptions. also, it'd seem relevant to mention if any pressure to 'thoroughly' arabize, came at least in part from previously migrated tribes from arabia, given their relatively large numbers, and varying distance from historical arabia.

for example, if there's any research on where those countries might've been located on various economic, health, life expectancy international indexes, and if as far down on such lists, yet practically as high on arab and muslim identity as arabia, as since forced arabization programs took effect.. 12.146.12.12 ( talk) 09:25, 14 JuneC)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Modern Times"...

Saddam Husseins strategy in al-Anfal campaign was not fuelled with an intention to "Arabize" Kurdish-speaking groups in Kirkuk. He was in fact trying to spread out the opposers of the solidarity of the state. If the rebellion against him wasn't staged for political and economical gain by the Kurds, the Anfal campaign wouldn't have come to fruitition, thereby debunking any claim that it was "forced" Arabization. I think we need to revise that section. 213.42.2.11

Early Antiquity

The Neo-Babylonians spoke Aramaic, not Akkadian (the language of the Old Babylonian Empire with Sargon, etc...). A reference for claiming that Akkadian was particularly close to Arabic would be useful. Anyway, the passage down to the Nabateans is pretty much off the mark

Arabic vs. Arab

Arabic is the language. Arab is the race/ethnicity/culture/identity. If you do not know the difference between Arabic and Arab, please do not edit the article and fill it with inaccurate terminology.

what of political, socioeconomic consequences

if the priority was to 'arabify' and 'islamise' populations not natively either, shouldn't it be compared with other potential programs, such that would've prioritized economic and other 'well being' of the peoples, over religious doctrine and ethnic identity politics, including externally standing reputation and perceptions. also, it'd seem relevant to mention if any pressure to 'thoroughly' arabize, came at least in part from previously migrated tribes from arabia, given their relatively large numbers, and varying distance from historical arabia.

for example, if there's any research on where those countries might've been located on various economic, health, life expectancy international indexes, and if as far down on such lists, yet practically as high on arab and muslim identity as arabia, as since forced arabization programs took effect.. 12.146.12.12 ( talk) 09:25, 14 JuneC)


Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook