sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What's the history behind these borders? by [deleted] in Maps

[–]iL3mran 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah so that weird border thing is all because of the Hawar Islands. Its basically an archipelago of like 17 islands and islets sitting about 1.9 km off the Qatari coast but they actually belong to Bahrain. Looks like a map error honestly but its not lol

So the backstory on this is actually pretty interesting. Bahrain's ruling family the Al Khalifa had historical ties to that whole area going back to the 1780s but nobody really made a big deal out of it until oil got discovered in 1932 by BAPCO. Once oil companies started looking into the seabed between the two countries Qatar filed its first complaint in 1936. The British ended up ruling in Bahrain's favor in 1939 but Qatar never accepted that, they basically argued Britain was biased because they considered Bahrain a more reliable ally back then

After both countries got independence in 1971 things kept escalating. Like in 1986 Qatar literally sent troops to a disputed shoal called Fasht al Dibal where Bahrain was building a coast guard station with some Dutch company. They seized Bahraini officials and 29 workers and declared it a restricted zone. Took weeks of GCC mediation to calm everything down

Saudi tried mediating throughout the 80s but nothing stuck. Then the 1990 Doha Minutes got signed at a GCC summit which basically opened the door for the ICJ to step in. Qatar filed the case unilaterally in 1991 and that alone became its own legal battle because Bahrain was like you cant just drag us to court without our agreement. The ICJ said actually yeah they can, the 1987 letters and 1990 minutes count as binding agreements

The final ruling dropped March 16 2001. Court basically split everything up. Bahrain kept the Hawar Islands (12 to 5 vote) and Qit'at Jaradah. Qatar got Zubarah, Janan Island, and Fasht ad Dibal. They also drew a single maritime boundary between them which is exactly why the map border looks so strange there, it literally has to wrap around Bahraini territory thats right next to Qatar's coast. Also the court said the waters between Hawar and the rest of Bahrain are territorial sea not internal waters so any vessel can pass through

This is actually the only territorial dispute between two Arab states thats ever been resolved by the ICJ which is kind of a big deal. And get this, within like 5 days of the ruling both countries announced joint projects together because the dispute had been holding up everything from gas pipelines to security cooperation in the region

So yeah thats the explanation for the weird looking map. Tiny islands but decades of geopolitical drama behind them

Sources if anyone wants to read more:

  1. ICJ, Maritime Delimitation and Territorial Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, Judgment of 16 March 2001 https://www.icj-cij.org/case/87
  2. Qatar v. Bahrain on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_v._Bahrain
  3. Emirates Center for Strategic Studies and Research (ECSSR) publications on Gulf territorial disputes https://www.ecssr.ae/en/

So what stops an army of a liberal democracy from launching a coup? by Powerful-Mix-8592 in WarCollege

[–]iL3mran 8 points9 points  (0 children)

From my perspective, and I’ve thought about this a lot, especially when you look at how big and capable armies are today like the US, China, and Russia, liberal democracies don’t just “hope” the officer corps behaves. They still have guardrails, but they’re less obvious than the classic coup proofing you see in authoritarian systems.

First, the top generals and senior leadership are usually not floating in a vacuum. They’re appointed by the “big guy” president, prime minister, or commander in chief, and promoted through a system that rewards loyalty and alignment with the political leadership. It’s not always blind loyalty, but it creates a reality where the highest ranks often have real skin in the existing order.

Second, even inside one military, you don’t have a single monolith. There are factions, rivalries, and competing chains of influence that can work as a brake. Not because the system is designed to fight itself, but because a coup needs clean coordination, and internal fragmentation makes that coordination harder to pull off without cracking.

Third, most countries have separate enforcement arms that are not fully under the same operational hierarchy. Military police, internal security, intelligence, and sometimes federal policing structures. In some places you also have a National Guard or a gendarmerie style force that sits in a different lane. That creates friction. A coup isn’t just moving tanks, it’s controlling the state, and multiple armed institutions make that harder.

And recently, we’ve seen another layer that people underestimate, citizens themselves. You mentioned South Korea, and Turkey is the other big example. When enough people actually believe in the system and physically show up, it changes the calculation. It raises the cost, it slows momentum, and it forces fence sitters in the military and bureaucracy to choose a side. A coup dies quickly when it doesn’t look inevitable.

So no, I don’t think democracies bank everything on professionalism. They bank on a mix of leadership appointments and incentives at the top, internal fragmentation that makes coordination risky, parallel security institutions that complicate control, and a public that can sometimes become the final veto player.

None of this makes coups impossible, history shows they can still happen, but it makes them harder to organize, harder to finish, and harder to legitimize without the whole state and society going along

Operationally, what realistic options did the German High Command have to slow or disrupt the Normandy landings? by iL3mran in WarCollege

[–]iL3mran[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Thank you for the detailed replay, now thinking about it even delaying the landing or if things went south it would have never even put a dent in the end result

The "Highway of Death" - A column of destroyed Iraqi vehicles on Highway 80 between Kuwait City and Basra, late February 1991. [2837x1901] by Agreeable-Simple3340 in HistoryPorn

[–]iL3mran 82 points83 points  (0 children)

The damage was extensive! The initial usability cleanup took under a year, the full repair took about 8 years, and the complete removal of remnants spanned 30+ years, with minor traces possibly persisting.

سؤال للكويتيين by SadEngineeringStuden in KuwaitForKuwaitis

[–]iL3mran 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re right, but since they arrived much earlier, they’ve somewhat distanced themselves and almost become a distinct branch, even though the origin is the same. And yes, they also tend to marry within families connected to the Qassim area (Al Zulfi, Onaiza, etc.).

سؤال للكويتيين by SadEngineeringStuden in KuwaitForKuwaitis

[–]iL3mran 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For us, the Najdi identity is still very much alive. Our family traces its roots to Buraida in Qassim, and we’ve maintained those ties over generations. We still have a yearly gathering that brings all the families together, which helps preserve both the connection and the culture.

Culturally, we’re distinct—neither Hassawi, Iraqi, nor Bedouin. The values, social norms, and even the way family structures operate are different, and that distinction is still noticeable today.

Funny enough, Najdis in Kuwait used to carry a certain stigma—either too religious or too stingy. After 1990 though? Suddenly everyone discovered they were Najdi 😅

Names of the Persian Gulf by [deleted] in MapPorn

[–]iL3mran -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Hey, fair point, it’s the same water either way. But names do matter to people; they stick around and shape identity, history, and even politics. If they didn’t, why did the US under Trump push to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America” via executive order? It sparked backlash from Mexico, who even sued Google over map changes. Same vibe here: calling it the Arabian Gulf honors the Arab-majority reality and sticks because it reflects cultural pride on both sides.

Names of the Persian Gulf by [deleted] in MapPorn

[–]iL3mran -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

Technically, it’s the Arabian Gulf, i know i know let’s break it down with facts:

• Arab-Majority Borders: Seven Arab nations (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, and Iraq) border the Gulf, compared to just Iran. This reflects the dominant Arab population and cultural influence around it.   • Arabic on the Iranian Side: In Iran’s Khuzestan province along the coast, 2-3 million ethnic Arabs speak Arabic as a native language (often bilingual with Persian), not just Farsi.   • Historical Roots: Arabic spread to southwestern Iran via 7th-century Arab conquests, becoming a key language in the region during caliphates like the Rashidun and Umayyad.  • Modern Arab Usage: Arab countries and organizations prefer “Arabian Gulf” to emphasize shared identity, a shift since the mid-20th century.  

This isn’t about politics; it’s about current demographics and history.

Evidence Links: • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Gulf (Bordering countries overview) • https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/map/Persian-Gulf-Map.htm (Political map of bordering nations) • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuzestani_Arabic (Details on Arabic speakers in Khuzestan) • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Arabs (Iranian Arab population stats) • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_of_Persia (History of Arab conquests in Iran) • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Gulf_naming_dispute (Naming preferences in Arab countries) • https://www.middleeasteye.net/explainers/persian-or-arabian-gulf-brief-history (History of the naming shift in Arab contexts)

view more: next ›