Islamist bloc?

Could there ever be a bloc of Islamist countries, all allied together against NATO/the Soviets/whomever else is a bloc? Who would lead it? When would it arise?
 

Don Grey

Banned
Could there ever be a bloc of Islamist countries, all allied together against NATO/the Soviets/whomever else is a bloc? Who would lead it? When would it arise?

That seem preety hard most of the muslim nations out there are failed states ,puppet states,totalitarian or under too much influence of western nations out of fear of invation. Plus there too far behind the west in pretty much every aspect for them to be a conventional threat. Hell most of them are screwed when the oil runs out. The ones that dont play ball are singled out of the herd to wait until the necassery contruction of consent is achived for invasion such as iran. So some are carefull not to pick fights with the west. And the fact that quite a bit of muslim leaders in the world are insane megolomaniacs doesnt help there cause either.

What you need for a proper muslim block to be on par with nato would need some sort of an empire/union etc with perferably a cahliphat at the head to take the entire muslim world. Advance it intelectualy militarily and economicaly to be on par with the west. But then you would have a billion people educated technologicaly intelectualy economicly and militarily on par with the west with unquestioning devotion to the caliphat. Filled with religious ferver and ideology of martyrdom and controling the majority of the world energy supply.

Would you realy want this?
 
What high-larious prejudice!

The question is basically unanswerable until we know what is meant by Islamist (which does not mean the same thing as Muslim): Iran's Islamist, certainly, but would we include, say, Turkey? And when's the PoD? It's pretty damn easy to change which countries are Islamist.
 
What high-larious prejudice!

The question is basically unanswerable until we know what is meant by Islamist (which does not mean the same thing as Muslim): Iran's Islamist, certainly, but would we include, say, Turkey? And when's the PoD? It's pretty damn easy to change which countries are Islamist.

The Ottoman Empire leads an anticolonial movement based upon self rule and democracy.

This is obviously a clever Islamist ploy. The presence of the Kuomintang and Nehru is a fig leaf for their bid to control the world's raw materials.
 

Don Grey

Banned
What high-larious prejudice!

The question is basically unanswerable until we know what is meant by Islamist (which does not mean the same thing as Muslim): Iran's Islamist, certainly, but would we include, say, Turkey? And when's the PoD? It's pretty damn easy to change which countries are Islamist.

I didnt say it couldnt be done i just said ti wouldnt be easy. An islamic union does exsist but so far it was done jack and shit. Im hoping he give an early pod then i can change alot of things. I just dont want to get rid of all the islamist states through handwavium. I was thinking of something equvalent to the EU but muslim this time. And for that to happen the muslim world would need to modernize like europe did.
 
I think the best POD is a massive Muslim uprising against the Soviets, Pan-Turanists, hordes of Chechens, Azeris, and who knows what. All being funded by a joint Nazi and British Empire, League of Imperialism. This would of course take the place of WWII Hitler and Churchill would be best buds, and Atatürk would live longer to launch an invasion of Ukraine. Muezzins on the Neva I tell ya.

I think it should end with Nazi nuclear scientists working with the Islamic Bloc to set a nuke off in Moscow cunningly placed in the Kremlin where the Soviets hold their marches. Oh and duel between british agents and Beria on the roof of the Lubyanka.

:p
 
I didnt say it couldnt be done i just said ti wouldnt be easy.

You said...

- Most Muslim countries are "failed states, puppet states, totalitarian, or live in fear of western invasion". 'Totalitarian', by the way, is a bit like 'Islamist': a word with an actual meaning which people keep gratuitously chucking about. Stalin's Russia was totalitarian. North Korea still is. Iran ain't, by any stretch of the imagination. As for the rest, balls.

- Most Muslim countries are screwed when the oil runs out. This is balls.

- A considerable portion of Muslim leaders are "insane megalomaniacs". Plenty of Muslim countries have nasty regimes, unfortunately, but do we really believe that, I dunno, Islam Karimov is an "insane megalomaniac"?

- And finally, of course, Muslims are "filled with religious fervor and ideology of martyrdom". Haw haw.
 
I think the best POD is a massive Muslim uprising against the Soviets, Pan-Turanists, hordes of Chechens, Azeris, and who knows what. All being funded by a joint Nazi and British Empire, League of Imperialism. This would of course take the place of WWII Hitler and Churchill would be best buds, and Atatürk would live longer to launch an invasion of Ukraine. Muezzins on the Neva I tell ya.

I think it should end with Nazi nuclear scientists working with the Islamic Bloc to set a nuke off in Moscow cunningly placed in the Kremlin where the Soviets hold their marches. Oh and duel between british agents and Beria on the roof of the Lubyanka.

:p

My god! It's a post mathematically designed to drive me mental!

Unfortunately, you didn't neglect Scotland or slander the First Czechoslovak Republic. Try harder next time! :p;)
 
Probably not, even if by Islamist you mean muslim. There is simply too much differences between them. Hell, look at MidEast. The only thing they could agree on is that they really didn't like Israel yet that didn't prevent each of them from porsuing independant goals (Egypt with Camp David, Jordan drifting to US camp, Syria porsuing their own baathist policy, Iraq again looking elsewhere, Lebanon trying to wiggle it's way toward Israel etc.

If failure of UAR doesn't show you how much disunity there is then nothing does.
 
My god! It's a post mathematically designed to drive me mental!

Unfortunately, you didn't neglect Scotland or slander the First Czechoslovak Republic. Try harder next time! :p;)

Just imagine that as a best selling novel. With a quote on the back:

"A well thought extrapolation of Soviet ethnic policies told through an action packed narrative."
-Newt Gingrich
 

Don Grey

Banned
You said...

- Most Muslim countries are "failed states, puppet states, totalitarian, or live in fear of western invasion". 'Totalitarian', by the way, is a bit like 'Islamist': a word with an actual meaning which people keep gratuitously chucking about. Stalin's Russia was totalitarian. North Korea still is. Iran ain't, by any stretch of the imagination. As for the rest, balls.

- Most Muslim countries are screwed when the oil runs out. This is balls.

- A considerable portion of Muslim leaders are "insane megalomaniacs". Plenty of Muslim countries have nasty regimes, unfortunately, but do we really believe that, I dunno, Islam Karimov is an "insane megalomaniac"?

- And finally, of course, Muslims are "filled with religious fervor and ideology of martyrdom". Haw haw.

Its not prejudice i am a devote muslim i would like nothing more then a strong muslim block dont jump the gone. Maybe my command if english isnt so good and i didnt use the right words. But there are muslim dictatorships there are theocracies there are puppet states there are failed muslim states and there not all on par with the west. And some are screwed when the oil runs out. This is isnt balls. Not all of there land is usable. And if there leader keep wasting there oil money on lavish palacies and hotels that hardly get filled up and not diversify there economies and invest in education and infrastructer they will be screwed.
 

Teleology

Banned
How about a Titoist Turkey, a pro-West Iran, and a pro-Soviet Arab Federation...all either possessing their own nukes (Turkey) or nuclear bases for one of the two superpowers?
 
what about nasser of egypt leading an alliance that is pro soviet and cooperating with the commies to develop an egyptian a-bomb?

Possible i think because he combined islamic principles,nationalism, and socialism into a pan-arabic ideology that could easily adapt to most countries in the middle east.
 
What high-larious prejudice!

The question is basically unanswerable until we know what is meant by Islamist (which does not mean the same thing as Muslim): Iran's Islamist, certainly, but would we include, say, Turkey? And when's the PoD? It's pretty damn easy to change which countries are Islamist.

Islamism refers to whatever he's talking about in this three-way Cold War timeline:
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8120259&postcount=98
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8127056&postcount=104

What's more likely, a pan-Arabist (Arab socialist) bloc of nations, or an Islamist one?
 
Top