Oh, okay. I'm not correct in asserting there are fuck all christians left in Saudi Arabia, around 5% in Turkey, a once xtian country, millions of coptic xtians and other religions still living in Egypt, North Africa, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. That islam is not a supreme mono-cultural political system. That it's a tolerant peaceful religion, something like the Jesus People once were. If that's so, WTF happened to the Buddhist culture of Afghanistan, the Berber culture of North Africa, the xtian culture of iraq, the Zoroastrian culture of of Iran? Etc etc! I know, it was the wicked corrupted regimes of the West who annihilated them!!!
Jesus, how ignorant is it possible to get. There is no religion in history that has used genocide so efficiently and systematically as Christianity. What do you think the Inquisition was about? The Crusades? Nazism and the holocaust? Studying history we learn that there are political reasons for this rather than teachings in the Bible. But the truth is the truth. It did happen. It's hard to find a religion that has been more intolerant than Christianity. This too has historical explanations. When kings try to build empires that cross several religions they have to become tolerant to keep the empire together. And it's not faux toleration. It's real toleration. And they have to enforce the toleration with the army. For geographic reasons European kings have had difficulties building empires. So this evolution of ideas hasn't taken place until really very recently. Only in the last couple of hundred years did Christian nations start building empires. They weren't tolerant at all. No shit western imperialism fell apart about as rapidly as it started. Caliphs managed to keep together multi-faith Caliphates for over a thousand years with little ethnic friction. Islam has a way better track record than Christian rulers has.
It seems just hard for you to grasp the concept of people freely converting to religions. People haven't converted to Islam through mass conversions. Islamic countries have never forced non-muslims to convert. Historically that hasn't happened. It's also forbidden in the Quran. You might argue that they've forced people to convert indirectly. Like having higher taxes for non-Muslims making it financially beneficial to convert. But that's not the same thing as forcing people. Whatever the dominant religion is people have a tendency to convert to it. It's human nature. We often confuse being powerful with being correct.
As for the specifics. Zoroastrianism is alive and well in Iran. Christianity, Judaism, Zoroastrianism are officially recognized by the government, and have reserved seats in the Iranian Parliament. The Iranian government has gone out of their way to prevent persecution of those groups. To make sure they have a say in how Iran is run they get more say than their actual numbers. They have disproportionally more power in Iran than if all Iranian's votes were worth as much. Zoroastrians aren't persecuted in Iran.
The persecution of Copts in Egypt is a very modern development. If I know my history correctly it has it's roots in Nasser's take-over in the 1950'ies and socialism. Nasser made an effort to include Copts into the governement. This had historically been a group that kept mostly to themselves in a separate but equal kind of arrangement. Then the "Islamic awakening" happened in Egypt which was a militant form of Islam with a target to take down the socialist regime. Copts came to be seen (by the Muslims) as complicit and part of the secular and socialist government. Which doesn't really have anything to do with religion at all. It's just politics. Egypt still has this problem. Islam in Egypt is seen as the main force against oppression. Too bad that same political party is also opposed to democracy. They have a view of democracy more in line with Iran than Montesquieu which arguably isn't democracy at all.
