They were murderous ambush backstabbers in the days of Mohammad. The Islamic expansion happened when they convinced non-Arabs to join their religion and fight for them.
Saladin was a Kurd as an example.
>The Islamic expansion happened when they convinced non-Arabs to join their religion and fight for them
Islam didn't seriously take off with non-Arabs until after the Caliphate reached it's greatest extant under the Umayyads. It was after the Arabs reverted back to their backstabbing ways, that non-Arabs like Persians, Turks, and Berbers were left to carry the torch.
The real reason is that Arabs are extremely fucking clannish. Why promote someone competent who might backstab you when you can trust good ol' cousin Abdul? Same reason for
The in-laws are sure to be nicer if they're your aunt and uncle.
>500 years of marrying their first cousins has resulted in significant reduction in average IQ of Arabs.
look at this gay who hates money and would rather dilute his family wealth by sharing it with strangers and not keeping wealth within the family and fucking his cute cousin.
In the context of arab, they are more concerned about the history of the family rather the wealth. They are particularly anal about the past deed of their ancestors. For example, you, Ahmad want to marry to some nice girl from random village. They will investigate the entire family tree of the girls way to Abraham time and found out that her ancestor accidentally stepped on their ancestor's shoes. The marriage is canceled because of that. That is why they prefer consanguineous. Because they hate and distrust anyone that is not their tribe and their families.
they talk like arabs, worship a pedophile like arabs and look like arabs but i guess the towel on the head of the arab is what separates the two worthless groups
sorry turdworlder, but beating american proxies(the ANA) isn't beating america. You just beat yourselves. I guess by your low standards, that would be considered a victory.
cause the soviets taught them; as individuals they're fine warriors, and the failings / inflexibilities seen of 20th century arab forces are endemic to the soviet command system that was inherited along with weapon donations or purchases
there was an article by some American officer I read on it a while ago but the tldr was that Arab governments are ridiculously corrupt, officers are where they are because of nepotism, and the conscripts have low morale and get treated like slaves by their officers
The great irony is that they CAN fight. They’re dumb but they are absolutely NOT pussies. They just need high-quality direction. When drilled hard for specific jobs they will succeed, that’s why Arab armies naturally tend towards strict top-down affairs. The problem is their societies don’t produce high-quality leadership due to the classic low-IQ problem. Could Arabs return to a Nasser setup? Seems unlikely tbh.
>Could Arabs return to a Nasser setup?
Yes because Nasser was a genius
Lemme put it in simple terms >Nasser: We'll destroy israel! >Israel: So, you're saying you're gonna attack us? >Nasser: Yes >Israel: Kay *destroys the egyptian air force in a day)
Dont bother, shitskins and vatnigs inherently believe their lives are worth far less than even a Hispanic American to the point that losing a hundred of their own is worth it if one scholar American dies
It's not actually Arabs, it's Islam, and the idea that Allah will guide your bullets and shit. The Chechen troops in ukraine get up to the same hipfiring bullshit as well.
They have an average IQ of 80, so they can't coordinate or problem solve worth a fuck. They need a strongman to keep them in line and tell them what to do, but that makes them inflexible and thus vulnerable to a western military.
Arabs can fight just fine. They almost conquered Europe during the middle ages and gave Christians hell during the various crusades. They just never moved past that.
They were a warlord society less than 100 years ago and they never had any kind of cultural Revolution to unfuck themselves.
They are good at being raiders or Guerillas but any kind of mass scale organised warfare is still a bridge too far.
Honestly because most couldn't care less about keeping their authoritarian government in power.
Why fight for people that treat you like slaves when you can run away and the worst that happens is you get a new slave master.
When they actually care (holy wars, tribal wars ect.) they can beat the USSR and USA.
They CAN fight. They're good warriors competent in tribal warfare, but shit soldiers and commanders for modern industrial wars due to their backward culture
>government gets btfo in 2 months >wage 20 years of insurgency without achieving a single victory >take control after they leave
"We beat the Americans!!!!!"
I absolutely recommend Armies of Sand by Kenneth Pollack.
Arab culture has great contempt for imagination and innovation. These values are stamped out at a young age through education and parenting etc. Successful military operations rely heavily on the initiative of tactical commanders. And as a result, we have embarrassing military failures like the Six-Day war and the Yon Kippur war.
also fun fact. In Arab culture, saying no is really taboo. So if you ask an Arab to do something, they'll say yeah without ever intending on doing it. Instead they'll either cut contact with you or look for an excuse as to why they never did it.
>why cant arabs fight?
Back then, it was shitty soviet "instructors" and their assbackwards tactics. The only operation arabs did without them, crossing the channel in 1973, was their most successeful one, and also pretty inventive (using water cannons, commando groups armed with ATGMs and night vision devices). Nowadays, arab states aren't fighting that much and the fighting that happens is counter insurgency operations or insurgency action.
They've been relying on corrupt empires to invade them and literally fall apart. The Taliban literally just drove around Marines/Army instead of fighting them.
500 years of marrying their first cousins has resulted in significant reduction in average IQ of Arabs.
They were murderous ambush backstabbers in the days of Mohammad. The Islamic expansion happened when they convinced non-Arabs to join their religion and fight for them.
Saladin was a Kurd as an example.
>The Islamic expansion happened when they convinced non-Arabs to join their religion and fight for them
Islam didn't seriously take off with non-Arabs until after the Caliphate reached it's greatest extant under the Umayyads. It was after the Arabs reverted back to their backstabbing ways, that non-Arabs like Persians, Turks, and Berbers were left to carry the torch.
The real reason is that Arabs are extremely fucking clannish. Why promote someone competent who might backstab you when you can trust good ol' cousin Abdul? Same reason for
The in-laws are sure to be nicer if they're your aunt and uncle.
>500 years of marrying their first cousins has resulted in significant reduction in average IQ of Arabs.
look at this gay who hates money and would rather dilute his family wealth by sharing it with strangers and not keeping wealth within the family and fucking his cute cousin.
Shut up, Rothschild.
>would rather have inbred incest babies just so he can have more money
turns out that Arabs were the real garden gnomes all along.
In the context of arab, they are more concerned about the history of the family rather the wealth. They are particularly anal about the past deed of their ancestors. For example, you, Ahmad want to marry to some nice girl from random village. They will investigate the entire family tree of the girls way to Abraham time and found out that her ancestor accidentally stepped on their ancestor's shoes. The marriage is canceled because of that. That is why they prefer consanguineous. Because they hate and distrust anyone that is not their tribe and their families.
>inbreeding is why Arabs cant fight
>thats why they kept losing to the even more inbred Israelis
>unwieldy clothing
>badly maintained r*ssian weapons
>long periods of fasting
Yeah.
>long periods of fasting
Worked for the Crusaders at Antioch in 1098
they beat america
Nah.
Whose flag is hanging in Kabul rn?
Pashtuns aren't Arabs retard.
>AKCHUALLY
next youre gonna tell us that hondurans arent also beaners
By this logic Iranians are also Arab
they talk like arabs, worship a pedophile like arabs and look like arabs but i guess the towel on the head of the arab is what separates the two worthless groups
you will never be white, pablo
kys garden gnome
Afghans aren't Arabs, pidor
It might surprise you, but not all brown desert peoples are Arabs. Afghanistan doesn't even border an Arabic country.
shut up sandmutt
fuck ya mudda
Most educated AmeriLard
Afghanistan isn't Arab
>europoor education
>Kabul
>Arab
>Arabs
Kabul is in Afghanistan
You just lump all the countries together
Afghanistan is a part of Central Asia like Uzbekistan
Afghans are Pashtun, Tajik, Uzbek, and many other groups.
Many Arabs are also Christian including civilians being killed in Palestine. In Bethlehem, where Jesus Christ was born.
Count the rings.
in the same way that a fungus still grows underground away from the burning sun
Afghans aren’t Arab.
sorry turdworlder, but beating american proxies(the ANA) isn't beating america. You just beat yourselves. I guess by your low standards, that would be considered a victory.
Shall I push the button
cause the soviets taught them; as individuals they're fine warriors, and the failings / inflexibilities seen of 20th century arab forces are endemic to the soviet command system that was inherited along with weapon donations or purchases
there was an article by some American officer I read on it a while ago but the tldr was that Arab governments are ridiculously corrupt, officers are where they are because of nepotism, and the conscripts have low morale and get treated like slaves by their officers
They have retarded leadership
Brown people are dumb. It's LITERALLY that simple. Read The Bell Curve.
The great irony is that they CAN fight. They’re dumb but they are absolutely NOT pussies. They just need high-quality direction. When drilled hard for specific jobs they will succeed, that’s why Arab armies naturally tend towards strict top-down affairs. The problem is their societies don’t produce high-quality leadership due to the classic low-IQ problem. Could Arabs return to a Nasser setup? Seems unlikely tbh.
>Could Arabs return to a Nasser setup?
Yes because Nasser was a genius
Lemme put it in simple terms
>Nasser: We'll destroy israel!
>Israel: So, you're saying you're gonna attack us?
>Nasser: Yes
>Israel: Kay *destroys the egyptian air force in a day)
> return to a Nasser setup
Pan-Arabism destroyed the Middle East, maybe permanently
>Nasser
I was just looking for an excuse to post this cover.
AK'S FOR EVERYOOOOOONE
yay
How does the gunner fit into the van cabin? He's huge!
They clearly can considering 22 years in afghanistan amerimutts sharted and lost
Weak b8
Russia lost more guys in a single week trying to take Bakhmut than the yanks did in 20 years of Afghanistan.
Dont bother, shitskins and vatnigs inherently believe their lives are worth far less than even a Hispanic American to the point that losing a hundred of their own is worth it if one scholar American dies
Last time Russia tried that they lost hundreds and the only casualty on the US side was a local yokel who tripped and sprained his ankle.
It's not actually Arabs, it's Islam, and the idea that Allah will guide your bullets and shit. The Chechen troops in ukraine get up to the same hipfiring bullshit as well.
>posts a Mexican
Why do Europeons do this? It's the equivalent of calling Turks "European".
They're only good at terrorism, but they get humbled really fast when a real military confronts them.
Russians seem to have the same issue.
Anon, Afghans are not Arabs.
sure thing, because the US totally won that war right?
>gets routed in 2 months and flee to pakistan
>Americans cuck your country for 20 years
Cope ibrahim.
They have an average IQ of 80, so they can't coordinate or problem solve worth a fuck. They need a strongman to keep them in line and tell them what to do, but that makes them inflexible and thus vulnerable to a western military.
Arabs can fight just fine. They almost conquered Europe during the middle ages and gave Christians hell during the various crusades. They just never moved past that.
They were a warlord society less than 100 years ago and they never had any kind of cultural Revolution to unfuck themselves.
They are good at being raiders or Guerillas but any kind of mass scale organised warfare is still a bridge too far.
Honestly because most couldn't care less about keeping their authoritarian government in power.
Why fight for people that treat you like slaves when you can run away and the worst that happens is you get a new slave master.
When they actually care (holy wars, tribal wars ect.) they can beat the USSR and USA.
They CAN fight. They're good warriors competent in tribal warfare, but shit soldiers and commanders for modern industrial wars due to their backward culture
They defeated both Russians and Americansdhhmgk, I think they are doing great lmao
>Taliban
>Arabs
>government gets btfo in 2 months
>wage 20 years of insurgency without achieving a single victory
>take control after they leave
"We beat the Americans!!!!!"
i love that you fags use the same cope for Vietnam that you use for Afghanistan. america lost. accept it.
We gave them humvees instead of shoes
All the best and brightest went to Constantinople. And inbreeding
I absolutely recommend Armies of Sand by Kenneth Pollack.
Arab culture has great contempt for imagination and innovation. These values are stamped out at a young age through education and parenting etc. Successful military operations rely heavily on the initiative of tactical commanders. And as a result, we have embarrassing military failures like the Six-Day war and the Yon Kippur war.
also fun fact. In Arab culture, saying no is really taboo. So if you ask an Arab to do something, they'll say yeah without ever intending on doing it. Instead they'll either cut contact with you or look for an excuse as to why they never did it.
A vidya image to an offtopic thread does not a videogame thread make.
>why cant arabs fight?
Back then, it was shitty soviet "instructors" and their assbackwards tactics. The only operation arabs did without them, crossing the channel in 1973, was their most successeful one, and also pretty inventive (using water cannons, commando groups armed with ATGMs and night vision devices). Nowadays, arab states aren't fighting that much and the fighting that happens is counter insurgency operations or insurgency action.
They rehearsed the crossing over and over. One unit spent years rehearsing how to carry pipes over water barriers.
They did these exercises so often that when the real invasion began, the Israeli's thought it was just another rehearsal.
But no plan survives contact with the enemy...
They've been relying on corrupt empires to invade them and literally fall apart. The Taliban literally just drove around Marines/Army instead of fighting them.
Can not we live in peace?
Buckbroken by mongols and mindbroken by crusaders. Ever since the 14th century they are basically a prolonged version of post-Soviet Russia.
Seeing how troops in Ukraine often prefer to ride on top of their ifvs, I wonder if open topped designs will make a come back?
https://www.meforum.org/441/why-arabs-lose-wars
Basically too divided. Its hard to have a united army when everyone just cares about their own clans and disdain for govermental agencies.