Scrypt

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla 😂 You really brought a random poem to a historical debate? At this point, you’ve gone from “sources” to poetry… that tells me everything. This conversation is already over.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Lmao. You got smoked. Here, a late 19th century poem by an Iraqi about Kuwait, for you to cope: aldiwan.net/poem54189.html

This is historical illiteracy dressed up as confidence. Kuwait was not “stolen” from Iraq. The Al-Sabah dynasty has governed Kuwait since 1752. The modern state of Iraq was created in 1920, 168 years later. You cannot steal something from a country that didn’t yet exist. Bahrain was not “stolen” from Iran. In 1970, a UN process confirmed the will of the Bahraini people for independence. That is called self-determination, not theft. Iran’s own Shah said publicly he would “never resort to force” over Bahrain. You’re more Persian-expansionist than the Shah. UAE “stolen from Saudi Arabia”? The Trucial sheikhdoms had their own distinct identities, rulers and tribal structures for centuries. This is basic geography, not even law. That’s not theft. That’s called a map. As for your dramatic “these thefts may be reversed” line, borders are not changed by nostalgic tweets. A clear enough pattern, George: three confident claims, three historical fabrications, all pointing conveniently toward the same conclusion. This isn’t geopolitical analysis. It’s a bumper sticker with a PhD font.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla There was an 1899 agreement with Britain but it placed Kuwait under British protection and restricted its foreign sovereignty. That doesn’t prove long-standing independence; it shows Kuwait moving from Ottoman influence into British control. I feel sorry for your brain my god.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla I already explained this was post Medhat, and I’ve provided two sources that described it as symbolic, and that Kuwait was self-administrating and practically independent. This temporary Ottoman encroachment resulted in the eventual protection deal between Kuwait and the British.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla i think you’re brain rot or delusional is most likely your sad case. I destroyed every single of your claims. Thank god i studied this for many years, as an academic, there’s nothing left to debate. Eat machboos for me.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla This is the non sequitur: “That doesn’t happen in a fully consolidated, historically uncontested state.” Learn to logic. You haven’t explained was “closer alignment to Iraq”, conveniently leaving it to imagination that it meana desired annexation (fallacious Iraqi propaganda).

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla No, you haven’t addressed it, you’ve just repeated a selective interpretation. You keep ignoring documented facts: Kuwait’s ruler was recognized as an Ottoman qaimmaqam, it was tied administratively to Basra, and even the 1913 Anglo-Ottoman Convention its defined as Ottoman.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla I already responded to this. All Western sources, Russians included (web.archive.org/web/2009010602…), ackowledged that Ottoman suzerainty post Medhat was symbolic. At this point, I suspect you are using AI to flood the zone.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla historian Mary Ann Tétreault in Stories of Democracy: Politics and Society in Contemporary Kuwait explains that the 1938 movement involved merchants seeking political reform and, in some cases, closer alignment with Iraq. So this isn’t a “non sequitur” it’s documented.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla This is an Iraqi claim, highly propagandised. Your takeway on this nonsense is also a non sequitur.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Kuwait was under the Ottoman framework particularly after 1871, when Ottoman authority was reasserted in the region. It was subsequently incorporated into the Basra Vilayet around 1875, and its ruler was formally recognized by the Ottomans as a qaimmaqa, an district governor.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Except Medhaf Pasha admitted Kuwait was independent until he forced it into suzerainty. His stated reason was for Kuwait’s large naval fleet to fly the Ottoman flag. Still, Vital Cuinet(1893) states Kuwait was absolutely independent, and that the Ottoman claim to it is symbolic

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Since you like moving centuries, In 1938, Kuwait’s own political leadership driven by merchant elites formally demanded unification with Iraq, even sending a letter requesting immediate annexation. That doesn’t happen in a fully consolidated, historically uncontested state.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla what happened under Midhat Pasha was not creation from nothing, but a tightening and formalization of control that already existed in looser form.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Niebuhr’s book doesn’t say what you think it says. Even in Description of Arabia, his references to Kuwait are brief and descriptive identifying a coastal settlement within regional trade routes. He doesn’t document state institutions, administration, or sovereignty structures.

@scryptbtc @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla I was citing to Carsten Niebuhrs exhaustive book, not his marginal cartography.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla and regional tribal power structure, rather than as a fully independent, institutionalized sovereign state in the 18th century.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Kuwait’s early development cannot be separated from this broader tribal and imperial environment. So the historical record supports a clear distinction: Kuwait functioned as a locally governed settlement, but within the Ottoman-Basra administrative sphere..

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla structured bureaucracy, or codified administrative apparatus in the 18th century. So while Kuwait was described as local self-governing in later 19th century, it is misleading to use those descriptions as proof of an already established, fully institutionalized state in 1700s.

@ZizoBisou @Q8Strategic @DrHabibAlMulla Buckingham (1830) and Pelly (1865), for example, are describing a Kuwait that had already evolved into a more established settlement. Their accounts are observational and descriptive; they do not provide evidence of formal state institutions such as..