Posted on 06/13/2025 10:02:41 AM PDT by USA-FRANCE
---------Gemini
In Iranian Shiite Twelver Islam, the concept of the End Times is deeply intertwined with the belief in the Mahdi, specifically the Twelfth Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi. This eschatological figure plays a central role in their understanding of the future and the ultimate triumph of justice.
Here's a breakdown of their core beliefs regarding the End Times: zz 1. The Hidden Imam (Mahdi): * Identity: Twelver Shiites believe that Muhammad al-Mahdi, born in 868 CE, is the twelfth and final Imam in the lineage of Prophet Muhammad. Zz * Occultation (Ghayba): He is believed to have gone into a state of "occultation" (divine concealment) in 874 CE, meaning he is alive but hidden from human sight.
* Return (Reappearance): The central tenet of Twelver eschatology is the eventual reappearance of the Mahdi at the End of Times. He is also referred to as "al-Qa'im" (he who will rise), signifying his uprising against tyranny. Zz 2. Purpose of the Mahdi's Return: zz * Establish Justice and Peace: The Mahdi is expected to return to rid the world of evil and injustice, establishing a global government based on divine justice and peace under Islamic rule. Zz * Defeat Tyranny: He will defeat tyrannical forces and bring about a golden age for humanity.
* Unite the World under Islam: He is anticipated to unite the world under a single Islamic leadership.
3. Signs and Events Preceding the Mahdi's Return:
* While there isn't a single standardized version, apocalyptic literature and Hadith (sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad and the Imams) describe various signs and conflicts.
* These include events in regions like Syria (rise of a tyrannical leader, Sufyani) and Yemen (emergence of a righteous leader, Yamani), which are believed to precede the Mahdi's emergence.
* The world will be plagued by corruption, injustice, and chaos before his return.
4. Role of Jesus Christ (Isa):
* Twelver Shiites also believe that Jesus Christ (Isa in Islam) will return alongside the Mahdi.
* In their belief, Jesus will serve as a dep uty to the Mahdi, and will help in defeating the Dajjal (an Antichrist-like figure) and converting people to Shia Islam. C
5. Impact on Iranian Politics and Ideology:
* Mahdism is a significant ideological force in Iran, the only country where Twelver Shi'ism is the state religion.
* Some Iranian leaders have promoted Mahdism, at times hinting at a direct connection with the Mahdi or emphasizing the need to prepare for his return.
* The concept influences strategic thinking, with some arguing that certain actions, such as hostility towards the U.S. and the eradication of Israel, are seen as prerequisites or accelerators for the Twelfth Imam's reappearance.
* The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is described as an "ideological army" with a mission to prepare the foundations for the Mahdi's return.
6. Contrast with Sunni Beliefs:
* While both Shia and Sunni Muslims believe in the Mahdi, their understanding differs significantly.
* Sunnis generally believe the Mahdi has not yet been born and will be a righteous leader from the Prophet Muhammad's family, but they do not consider him infallible or divinely appointed as Twelvers do.
* For Twelvers, the Mahdi is a specific historical figure who went into occultation.
In essence, Iranian Shiite Twelvers' End Times beliefs revolve around the fervent expectation of the Mahdi's return, who will bring about a global era of justice, peace, and true Islamic rule, fulfilling divine prophecies and culminating in the ultimate triumph of good over evil.
When you start an unnecessary conflicts, it usually results in more conflicts erupting.
Except, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons (Budapest Memorandum) for guarantees by Russia to respect its borders.
But hey, don't let facts get in the way to claim what Ukraine did.
Russia also got verbal promises that NATO would not expand into eastern Europe, which was not honored, because there was no written agreements.
Once you become known as a habitual liar, then trust in anything that is promised verbally, becomes a deal breaker down the road. Democrats are habitual liars, as are RINOs as well. Otherwise referred to as the Uni-party which works for the Deep State, not the citizens or the nation, and they ignore the Constitution, because they have control. Which is not what the founding fathers of this nation had created.
The whole conflict could have been avoided by taking NATO membership for Ukraine the off the table. After all, it was never a sincere offer to begin with because of the corruption that exists in Ukraine. It is right up there as what exists in Russia.
Iran was being just as disingenuous with the nuclear talks, as the west was with the Minsk Accords. I have no idea if Trump okayed the strike carried out by Israel, but Trump had given the talks 60 days, which ran out just before Israel launched the attacks.
The reality is that Russia is pointing out the hypocrisy that our nation has become. We were for many years beholding to the Lord, which they have no abandoned.
You're a foolish person that really pays little attention to reality. Instead, you are controlled by propaganda under the delusional belief that this nation is still the nation that as involved in the two previous world wars, but that is so far removed from reality.
“The whole conflict could have been avoided by taking NATO membership for Ukraine the off the table. After all, it was never a sincere offer to begin with because of the corruption that exists in Ukraine. It is right up there as what exists in Russia.”
Did Ukraine accept this offer and joined NATO? If not, why not?
“Except, Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons (Budapest Memorandum) for guarantees by Russia to respect its borders.”
There ware plenty of Ukrainian scientists and engineers who helped USSR/Russia develop and manufacture their nuclear weapons. So when USSR collapsed, Ukraine certainly had every right to hold onto the nuclear weapons stationed in Ukraine. Plus with these nukes being closer to Europe than Russia’s nuclear weapons, Ukraine would have been obliterated first. Ukraine took on this burden for decades.
You miss the point. Russia controlled the launch codes, not Ukraine. Just like you couldn’t break in & launch a nuclear weapon regardless if you were involved in them, they couldn’t launch them. The fact that they were located in Ukraine doesn’t mean that Ukraine had the capability to launch them.
The Soviets and Russian have far more invasions, which do not leave the conquered better off under Soviet rule, while the few prolonged US forever wars is because it overall did not fight to win due the political powers, or like the Communists,
And just why would you be biased toward Russia???
| Era | Countries/Regions (selected major examples) |
|---|---|
| Russian Empire | Poland, Finland, Baltics, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Crimea, Central Asia, Moldova, Romania, Persia, Turkey, Manchuria, Afghanistan |
| Soviet Union | Poland, Finland, Baltics, Romania, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Austria, Iran, Manchuria, Afghanistan, Mongolia, Korea, Moldova, Yemen, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Congo, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Egypt, Syria, Cuba, China, Japan, Eastern Europe |
| Russian Federation | Moldova, Georgia, Tajikistan, Chechnya, Ukraine, Syria, Kazakhstan, Nagorno-Karabakh |
Combined, the Russian state (in its various forms) has invaded or militarily intervened in at least 25–30 modern countries over the past two centuries. The exact number can vary depending on how one defines "invasion" versus "military intervention" or "occupation," but the above list covers the major, internationally recognized cases.
List of countries Russia invaded and remains occupied:
As of May 2025, Russia continues to invade and occupy parts of several countries, primarily in the post-Soviet space. The following list summarizes the countries where Russian military forces are present and maintain de facto control over territory against the will of the internationally recognized government:Countries with Russian-Occupied Territories1. UkraineCrimea: Fully occupied and annexed by Russia since 2014. Not internationally recognized.
Parts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts: Occupied since 2014, with expanded control and claimed annexation since 2022.
Parts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson Oblasts: Occupied and claimed as Russian territory since the 2022 full-scale invasion, though Russia does not control the entirety of these regions.
Current status: As of 2025, Russia occupies nearly 20% of Ukraine, including all of Crimea and significant portions of the above-mentioned oblasts. Severe human rights abuses and forced Russification are reported in these areas .
2. MoldovaTransnistria: A breakaway region on the eastern border of Moldova, under de facto Russian military control since 1992. Russia maintains a military presence despite Moldovan objections and international recognition of Moldova's sovereignty over the region .
3. GeorgiaAbkhazia: Russian troops have occupied this region since the 2008 Russo-Georgian War. Russia recognizes it as an independent state, but most of the world considers it part of Georgia.South Ossetia: Similarly occupied by Russian forces since 2008, recognized by Russia as independent but internationally regarded as Georgian territory
Summary Table of Russian-Occupied Territories (2025)
Country Occupied Territory Since Status/Notes Ukraine Crimea 2014 Annexed by Russia, not internationally recognized Ukraine Parts of Donetsk & Luhansk 2014/2022 Occupied/claimed annexed, active war zone Ukraine Parts of Zaporizhzhia & Kherson 2022 Occupied/claimed annexed, partial control Moldova Transnistria 1992 De facto Russian military presence, unrecognized separatist regime Georgia Abkhazia 2008 Russian-occupied, recognized by Russia as independent, not by most countries Georgia South Ossetia 2008 Russian-occupied, recognized by Russia as independent, not by most countries
All these occupations are considered illegal by the United Nations and most of the international community.
Russia maintains military forces and administrative control in these territories, often supporting separatist regimes or claiming formal annexation.
Ukraine is the largest and most active war zone, with Russia holding major portions of its internationally recognized territory as of 2025.
In summary:As of 2025, Russia continues to occupy parts of Ukraine (Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson), Moldova (Transnistria), and Georgia (Abkhazia, South Ossetia).
Countries the U.S. Has Invaded or Occupied
The United States has invaded or militarily intervened in a large number of countries since its founding, but the number of countries it has "conquered" and continues to occupy is very limited. Most U.S. invasions have resulted in temporary occupations, regime change, or military bases, rather than long-term annexation or permanent conquest. Below is a summary based on the search results and historical records:
Mexico (1846–1848): U.S. invaded and conquered large territories (now the American Southwest), which were annexed after the Mexican-American War.
Philippines (1898–1946): Invaded and colonized after the Spanish-American War; occupied for decades before independence.
Cuba (1898, 1906–1909, 1917–1922): Invaded and occupied multiple times; Guantanamo Bay remains under U.S. control.
Puerto Rico, Guam, Wake Island (1898): Invaded and annexed from Spain; remain U.S. territories.
Panama (multiple times): Invaded and occupied, notably in 1989 (Operation Just Cause); U.S. controlled the Panama Canal Zone (1903–1999).
Dominican Republic (1916–1924, 1965): Invaded and occupied.
Haiti (1915–1934, 1994–1996, 2004): Invaded and occupied.
Nicaragua (multiple times, 1912–1933): Invaded and occupied.
Germany & Japan (1945–1952): Occupied after World War II, but not annexed.
Iraq (2003–2011): Invaded and occupied, but not annexed.
Afghanistan (2001–2021): Invaded and occupied, but not annexed.
South Korea (1950–present): U.S. military presence since the Korean War, but not an occupation in the sense of conquest.
Other countries: U.S. has intervened or occupied parts of many other nations temporarily (see Puerto Rico Guam American Samoa Northern Mariana Islands Wake Island Guantanamo Bay (Cuba) (naval base, not sovereign U.S. territory) The U.S. has invaded or intervened in nearly half the countries in the world In summary: While the U.S. has invaded or intervened in many countries, it has only permanently "conquered" and continues to control a handful of territories, mostly island possessions acquired in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Most other occupations were temporary and ended with independence or withdrawal -https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-700-tire-size-is-compatib-neQZZp0PQIGqXZIM6YBm8g#53
Countries the U.S. Has Invaded and Still Occupies or Controls Territory
Ukraine could have modded out the launch codes. This just takes time and effort. Ukraine helped design these nukes and many other USSR weaponry. In battle today. Ukraine is well versed in Soviet era weapons that Putin is deploying............ Anyways Possession is 9/10ths of the law. And Ukraine had possession of these nuclear weapons.
Apparently the international community disagree with you, but they are the ones that ultimately made the decision, with strong prodding by President Clinton & the Deep State. Russia honored that agreement.
However, another issue popped up, which was the verbal promise made that NATO would not expand into eastern Europe, and that verbal promise was broken, therefore, why should Russia have to hold to their promise, is I'm sure what passed through Putin's mind?
If you and I as neighbors agreed to certain promises to get along as good neighbors, and I broke the promise, would you still honor the agreement on your end? I doubt it, but I will be honest and say that I would not hold up my end of the promise, had you been the one to break the promise.
Problem with you, is that you can only see the issue from a standpoint that advantages you, but you are incapable of realizing that that when they continued to break that NATO expansion which prompted Russia & Putin in 2008 to set red lines that if NATO tried to expand into either Ukraine or Georgia Russia would not stand for it.
So, they knew what this push for NATO expansion would place Putin into a position of either defending his red line proclamation or to capitulate.
He refused to capitulate. The only logical conclusion is that this was done intentionally in order to wage a proxy war.
The argument may or may not have been possible regarding the ability to modify the nuclear weapons. I have little knowledge if this is even possible. I also do not know, to what level Ukraine participated in the construction process. I doubt you do either. Therefore, I have my serious doubts about the validity of that claim.
I like how your crowd always finds way to sympathize with the Russians position on x y and z. How many agreements has Putin broken? It is a way of life for him. I get that you are entranced by Putin due to him being the worlds top anti-Globohomo. Amirite or amirite!
You are under Putin’s sway but have a nice day.
Its not so much that NATO wanted to expand. It was the sovereign nation of Ukraine wanting to prosper. The way was to have better economic relations with the EU/Western Europe. Ukraine wanted to diversify its economy, away from being so tied to the Russians. They were not rejecting Russia 100%, via a NATO takeover, which is how drama queen Putin behaves.
The top 2 WarPig nations are Russia and Iran. And they are allies!
The color revolution led to Putin retaking that Crimea, that they had originally acquired by defeating the Ottoman empire,, who controlled that landmass, in the late 1700s, around the time we declared our independence from Great Britain. We could do that because Great Britain was not located next door, it was ill-advised for Ukraine to try & poke the Bear, but then Zelenskyy was being assured by Biden & Boris Johnson, that they had his back. Nothing could have been further from the truth.
When the hostilities began in eastern Ukraine Putin tried for many years to secure a peaceful resolution with the Minsk Accords, which of course we now know was nothing more than a ruse to buy time in order to to arm & train Ukraine's military, along with the dedicated Nazi's that most of you seem to think is not a reality. Angela Merkle thought it would be cute to announce that after she had stepped down. Putin began amassing troops along the border, and he dd so for almost a full year before actually making an incursion into Ukraine. It was such a mild mannered one that Russia lost a lot of troops in that opening move. His heart didn't seem hell-bent upon taking the nation, as so many like to claim. He certainly had no designs to take all of Europe that was bantered about as propaganda to make people support the claim of Russian aggression.
But you still to this day believe that nonsense.
The goal was to wage a proxy war, with Ukraine as the battlefield, and the Ukrainians as the combatants. It wasn't to save Ukraine's sovereignty, it was to weaken Russia's military with hopes that a regime change would happen in Russia. Had that been successful, you can rest assured that Putin's replacement would have been much worse that Putin.
It was a geopolitical blunder, and it failed miserably, and you still do not understand the evil that was behind this conflict, because you refuse to wake up to the realities.
We are 37 trillion dollars in debt with no signs of the legislature, even under Republican control, of stopping the out-of-control spending. This is unsustainable.
Try thinking beyond the obvious, and then perhaps even you will begin to see the con game that endless wars do to ordinary citizens. The large middle class is what made this country unique, and it is rapidly disappearing. Keep going with your stupidity and this nation will fall. When it dies, there will be no one to come save you.
You still view our nation as the force of good in the world. Wake up man, there are more than enough sings blinking to make Las Vegas look like a dark town.
Perhaps you are afraid, which you should be. For the enemy from within is far more dangerous than the enemy from without.
“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”
― Abraham Lincoln
"America goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy"
John Quincy Adams
We got involved in 2 world wars, and what was are reward, becoming the world's policeman.
Do you think it's time to start saving our nation??
Instead of posting articles that trash Trump, and acting like the savior of other nations which you know nothing about, and that is quite obvious. Perhaps you should start helping Trump who is the only person that has come along in our lifetime trying to save this nation & return her back to the people as the Founding Fathers had envisioned when they created her, in honor of the Lord who had inspired them.
I am not a fan of Russia, but I will give them credit for what they have become after the fall of the Soviet Union. I also think that if we had treated them differently, instead of being continuously belligerent, that they just might have come a lot further, much like Germany, Japan, & Italy have become since WWII. After all, they fought as allies in WWII to defeat the axis nations, but their leader Stalin was a very evil man. Putin is not Stalin. We can tell by the half-hearted effort he has thus far displayed in this conflict, coupled with his attempts prior, to find a peaceful resolution that was purposely being denied, because the goal was to engage Russia in a proxy war.
Once you drop your hate and begin to look at the conflict with a different prospective, you begin to see the ugly truth. He initially got involved to stop the hostilities, but became responsible for further hostilities, but only because there was no one to help him reach a peaceful resolution, was there.
“We are not sympathizing with Russia, we are speaking the truth, and that truth s that this conflict was started on purpose, and I will not stand for my nation promoting war in order to enrich our crooked politicians via the military-industrial conflict.”
You are so comically blind. This is a very good description of Putin’s warmongering. He just could not leave sovereign nation of Ukraine alone, to live in peace, with improved economic ties to EU leading to a better standard of living for Ukrainians.
Lets say you are the Prime Minister of Ukraine in 2013. Would you see major advantages in doing more trade, more business with the EU? Or would you want to maintain the status quo? Where doing business with Russia is what dominates your foreign trade. We know what Putin wanted in 2013. For Ukraine to remain firmly in the Russian economic orbit.
Here is what Grok3 has to say about part of your post
-
-
-
-
-
YOU POSTED>>>
It was the EU that told Viktor Yanukovych that if he signed the Russian deal, the EU would rescind their trade offer. Viktor had every intention to sign both trade agreements, until they told him that, and then he said well screw them then, and he signed just the Russian trade agreement.
-
-
-
GROK3 REPLIES>>>
Your claim about Viktor Yanukovych and the EU’s stance on Ukraine’s trade agreements needs some clarification based on historical context. In 2013, Ukraine, under Yanukovych’s presidency, was negotiating two significant trade deals: the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement (which included a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area) and a separate trade agreement with Russia, primarily tied to the Customs Union (later part of the Eurasian Economic Union).
The EU did express concerns about Ukraine signing conflicting trade agreements, as the EU Association Agreement and the Russia-led Customs Union were largely incompatible due to differing economic frameworks and obligations. The EU’s position was that Ukraine could not fully integrate into both systems simultaneously, as the Customs Union required unified external tariffs, which would clash with the EU’s free trade provisions. However, there’s no definitive public record of the EU explicitly issuing an ultimatum stating that signing the Russian deal would lead to the EU rescinding its offer outright.
Instead, the EU emphasized the need for Ukraine to commit to one path for deeper economic integration, as dual commitments would create legal and practical conflicts.
Yanukovych initially leaned toward the EU deal, with preparations for signing the Association Agreement at the Vilnius Summit in November 2013. However, Russia applied significant pressure, including threats of trade sanctions and gas supply disruptions, which were critical for Ukraine’s economy. On November 21, 2013, Yanukovych abruptly suspended preparations for the EU deal, citing national security and economic concerns, and pivoted toward closer ties with Russia.
This decision sparked the Euromaidan protests, which ultimately led to his ousting in February 2014.
Your assertion that Yanukovych intended to sign both agreements but was forced to choose due to an EU ultimatum oversimplifies the situation. While the EU’s framework implicitly required a choice, Russia’s coercive economic leverage played a significant role in Yanukovych’s decision to prioritize the Russian deal. No primary source explicitly confirms the EU stating, “If you sign with Russia, we’ll rescind our offer,” but the mutual exclusivity of the agreements was clear to all parties.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.