John Stone Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 13 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said: You have been misinformed or one of those leftists inventing or rewriting history. First off, it was Mossadegh who staged a coup against the Shah. He was never elected but appointed by the Shah at the first place but when he messed up the country by fighting the British in a non-political way the Shah ordered him down but he disobeyed and tried to arrest the Shah and his family and they had to secretly fly out of Iran to Rome or face execution. What followed was a rise up by Shah supporters ia few days later leading to arrest of Mossadegh. The CIA did play a role in the pro-Shah uprising and spent about 50 million dollars to buy off some army officers but many thousands of ordinary people rose up and took over streets and demand the return of monarch. This is hardly a coup. The Shah had constitutional right as a King to order PM down. These are all lies. Savak was a secret police like CIA, MI6 OR CISIS. It was mostly acing against foreign enemies like Soviets and Arab states like Iraq and Egypt. Its counter-intelligent was the main part. You are right though it had an eye over enemies within Iran too. On the Soviet stooges like Tudeh party and Islamic terrorists like current murderous leader Khamenei was a prisoner of Savak and we all saw what kind of people Savak arrested like this son of the b*tch who upon release they started killing thousands of people and spreading hate and terror all over middle east. Iranians realized now that if the Shad had killed these bastards instead of just putting them in prison, Iran and Iranians and the ME and the world would have been a much better place. The people who last week ordered and supervised the mass murder of now believed to be 30,000 innocent defenseless civilians were among the Savak prisoners . Iran was making fast progress with double digits economic growth and total absolute freedom except political freedom. Women got the right to vote before the women in Switzerland and it was a happy and prosperous nation. It was socially more advanced than many Europeans. It was the time that half of Europe and all of South America was under absolute dictatorship. This was 70 years ago. What did you expect? A total democracy in Iran when more advanced countries were under total dictatorship. THIS IS WHY IRANIANS IN TENS OF MILLIONS ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES ON STREETS AND CAL FOR THE RETURN OF PAHLAVI and you step in here and spread all these leftist lies? Mohammad Mosaddegh was democratically elected as the 30th Prime Minister of Iran and served 1951 - 1953. Mosaddegh was overthrown by a coup d'etat in 1953 - basically orchestrated by big oil Mosaddegh condemned the Shah's regime - and for good reason. Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 18 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said: Sorry, I’m not Iranian, nor am particularly familiar with Iran. I have watched the Kurds in multiple countries, eg, Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran, fight for more autonomy. If Iran was plunged into chaos, why wouldn’t the Kurds, for example, fight to create an independent Kurdistan where they would be safer and would have their own country? Because under Reza Pahlavi, the Kurds will take part in a free referendum if they wish to have autonomy and if a majority wish it then they will be granted what they want through ballet boxes so why they need to fight? Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 (edited) 6 hours ago, John Stone said: Mohammad Mosaddegh was democratically elected as the 30th Prime Minister of Iran and served 1951 - 1953. Mosaddegh was overthrown by a coup d'etat in 1953 - basically orchestrated by big oil Mosaddegh condemned the Shah's regime - and for good reason. Please do not post incorrect information. Please don't teach an Iranian the history of Iran. Mossadegh was NEVER elected as a Prime Minister. He was APPOINTED by the Shah as a PM. But he started acting as a brainless warrior rather than a politician. The country plunged into chaos and economic crisis as he started fighting against a then superpower. So the Shah ordered him down but he refused and sent his soldiers to arrest the Shah and his family and Shah fled the country before being arrested to Rome. So THIS was a 1953 coup. He never condemned the Shah's regime. He was a part of it for 2 years. Edited January 22 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 Is it possible that Erdoğan and Aliyev could support Azeri separatism and ultimately union with Azerbaijan? Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
John Stone Posted January 22 Report Posted January 22 11 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said: Please do not post incorrect information. Please don't teach an Iranian the history of Iran. Mossadegh was NEVER elected as a Prime Minister. He was APPOINTED by the Shah as a PM. But he started acting as a brainless warrior rather than a politician. The country plunged into chaos and economic crisis as he started fighting against a then superpower. So the Shah ordered him down but he refused and sent his soldiers to arrest the Shah and his family and Shah fled the country before being arrested to Rome. So THIS was a 1953 coup. He never condemned the Shah's regime. He was a part of it for 2 years. Irresistible force meets immovable object? Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 22 Author Report Posted January 22 2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said: Is it possible that Erdoğan and Aliyev could support Azeri separatism and ultimately union with Azerbaijan? They may try but very unlikely it would succeed because the Azeris share a divide history with Iran. over many decades they resisted the Turks being an empire two three hundred years ago when they invaded Iran. Under the Pahlavi King it will be a democracy. If a majority want autonomy they will get it. In my view zero chances for Azeris but a good chance for Kurds wanting autonomy as high a 70% Quote
John Stone Posted January 23 Report Posted January 23 (edited) Quite likely Iran's civil unrest will be crushed through continued ruthlessness. Contrary to the rhetoric, the slaughter has not stopped - it can't stop. What is significant re: Iran is that there is no organized opposition ....... a nod to remote diaspora but all indication is that it has no political network within the country. It rants and it roars........ but likely a non player. The oxygen for the regime is the IRGC - they make believers of the regime critics or martyrs........ they're also corrupt. Iran is an economic disaster -largely due to international sanctions - the population is starving and inflation is rampant. ..... the dist of wealth(?) thru oil sales has been .................. poor(?) A U.S. Carrier Strike Group is enroute to the Persian Gulf. What good will that do ............ regionally the U.S. is being urged to stay out of it. ........ this is largely due to oil price concerns. Trump's play might be to decapitate the Islamic Republic - not regime change per se ......... a Venezuela play with cruise. By applying enough pressure through selective targeting - a fracture could develop with the ruling class - particularly the military (IRGC / Iranian Army) The objective would be a coup de etat. A so-called 'strong man' could emerge that (crucial) the U.S. could deal with.... likely HE would want to deal. The Islamic Republic would remain in place - but (crucial) sanctions would be lifted. The spoiler is Iran's Nuc program - any negotiation would have to include regular inspections to ensure Iran is abiding by any nuclear restriction agreement - this would be particularly important to Israel. ya think. It would also be degrading. Somewhat akin to the arrangement Iran's deposed Monarchy enjoyed. However, the Islamic Republic would remain - but controlled. Ya gotta love geo-politics ......... big stick diplomacy. In this case, (IF) with international intervention - put the humanitarian aspect aside ......an intervention is basically self interest discreetly veiled by a facade of your own country's self determination. haha Edited January 23 by John Stone Quote
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Posted January 23 Pretty terrible, how this story has evaporated from the Western Zeitgeist... Quote Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase ! Michael Hardner
John Stone Posted January 23 Report Posted January 23 28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Pretty terrible, how this story has evaporated from the Western Zeitgeist... Terrible would have been an intact Hussein regime invading Iran and being declared a hero internationally. Gawd, THAT murderous bast'd must have some regrets laying in the arms of his Sunni virgins sporting a pudgy. .. Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 24 Report Posted January 24 If the mullahs were pro-American we’d hear an awful lot less about their human rights abuses, like the lads next door who buy lovely houses in London and race their horses in Ireland. Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
John Stone Posted January 24 Report Posted January 24 5 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said: If the mullahs were pro-American we’d hear an awful lot less about their human rights abuses, like the lads next door who buy lovely houses in London and race their horses in Ireland. haha Of course. It worked for the Shah .......... until a tipping point was reached. His western stance, corruption, SAVAK (pseudo IRGC) provided an Aegis, up until the people threw him out. Daresay the population now has some regret over dumping the devil they knew. There will be peace ............ but it depends on when oil is not so globally strategic. Iran's future will largely be determined by Israel tho.............. it is Israel that crafts the U.S. actions. The Abraham Accords are dead .......... likely forever, Iran can take satisfaction over that, a nod to Hezbollah, Hamas. Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 24 Author Report Posted January 24 (edited) 5 hours ago, John Stone said: haha Of course. It worked for the Shah .......... until a tipping point was reached. His western stance, corruption, SAVAK (pseudo IRGC) provided an Aegis, up until the people threw him out. Daresay the population now has some regret over dumping the devil they knew. There will be peace ............ but it depends on when oil is not so globally strategic. Iran's future will largely be determined by Israel tho.............. it is Israel that crafts the U.S. actions. The Abraham Accords are dead .......... likely forever, Iran can take satisfaction over that, a nod to Hezbollah, Hamas. Damn the leftists who are bunch of hypocrites when it came to Gaza they torn off their shirts shouting for Palestine and occupying campuses illegally but when it comes to Iranians being massacred an estimated 40,000+ in just 48 hours purposely targeted not only they are f*cking silent but by trying to go back in history some 70 years and make lies about what has happened they try to cover up or divert attention from the genocide ongoing against defenseless civilians in Iran. Damn the leftists who share the mass crime against the nation of Iran. Palestinian supporters in Denmark were today making fun of Iranian demonstrators who were asking for genocide again the nation of Iran to stop. F*ck f*ck Palestine. Long Live Israel. The left is traditionally and by nature traitor to their countries. Right now they oppose cuts to immigration while Canadians have difficulties with housing, health and education overcrowded, as just one example. And oppose a ban on Muslim fanatic immigrants who are a danger to our western lifestyle and democratic way of life and equality for women. Edited January 24 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote
John Stone Posted January 25 Report Posted January 25 (edited) 19 hours ago, CITIZEN_2015 said: Damn the leftists who are bunch of hypocrites when it came to Gaza they torn off their shirts shouting for Palestine and occupying campuses illegally but when it comes to Iranians being massacred an estimated 40,000+ in just 48 hours purposely targeted not only they are f*cking silent but by trying to go back in history some 70 years and make lies about what has happened they try to cover up or divert attention from the genocide ongoing against defenseless civilians in Iran. Damn the leftists who share the mass crime against the nation of Iran. Palestinian supporters in Denmark were today making fun of Iranian demonstrators who were asking for genocide again the nation of Iran to stop. F*ck f*ck Palestine. Long Live Israel. The left is traditionally and by nature traitor to their countries. Right now they oppose cuts to immigration while Canadians have difficulties with housing, health and education overcrowded, as just one example. And oppose a ban on Muslim fanatic immigrants who are a danger to our western lifestyle and democratic way of life and equality for women. Iran is suffering the so-called, 'Israel' syndrome. To paraphrase, 'the World doesn't give-a-fk concerning Israel and ditto for Iran - likely more so. The so-called Palestinians have organization in diaspora abroad, funding (Iran), political advantage, romanticism in struggle (akin to Spain - 1930s), wedge political issue domestic and aboard, HUGE media coverage c/w vetting, a history of insane struggle, ........... and on and on! Iran has, 'from the river to the sea', a legacy of exported terror, nuc program aimed at destroying a peaceable state (until provoked), lousy corner store proprietors, proxy terrorism ............ the legacy is ALL bad. The majority of the West are likely leaning towards hoping Iran's protests continue to last man / woman and the fight continues with Allah determining the winner............ for the men bonus virgins ......... the women get assorted hijabs. Edited January 25 by John Stone Quote
WestCanMan Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 On 1/17/2026 at 10:44 AM, SpankyMcFarland said: This is an odd admission from the Supreme Leader: If I’d been out defending the regime and getting in my quota of kills I’d be a bit confused by that. There’s an element of regret in there. The intelligent members of the regime must know what a horrible cul-de-sac they’ve driven their country into. Some of them are surely looking for a way out for themselves and their country. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/17/senior-iranian-cleric-calls-for-protester-executions-in-defiance-of-trump-claims A lot will depend on Khamenei‘s successor. Let’s hope that is soon. If a person with genuinely religious ambitions is chosen, like Iraq’s Sistani, the country could begin to heal. WTF are you talking about? " If a person with genuinely religious ambitions is chosen, like Iraq’s Sistani, the country could begin to heal. " You think that a different ayatollah will make things better? How about: That position is gone and will never be filled again. If successive popes were slaughtering people and trampling their human rightsfor generations would we be looking for a better one or just call it a day? Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
WestCanMan Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 Check it out: @Gaétan, the guy who froths at the mouth during his "I care about anti-ICE protesters and Gazans" rants, doesn't have anything to say about murdered Iranian protesters. Should all those people just STFU and obey the ayatollah, Gaetan? Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 (edited) 1 hour ago, WestCanMan said: WTF are you talking about? " If a person with genuinely religious ambitions is chosen, like Iraq’s Sistani, the country could begin to heal. " You think that a different ayatollah will make things better? How about: That position is gone and will never be filled again. If successive popes were slaughtering people and trampling their human rightsfor generations would we be looking for a better one or just call it a day? I believe in secular social democracy as the best form of government but the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. As in the US, many Iranians are deeply religious. Most have known nothing but theocracy their entire lives. Have you followed Sistani’s conduct in Iraq and compared it to the mullahs in Iran? Perhaps you should examine that first. From Google AI: Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is the most influential, non-state political actor in post-2003 Iraq, acting as the supreme Shiite religious authority (Marja’iyya) that provides moral guidance, political stability, and legitimacy to the government . While not holding office, he has influenced constitutional development, endorsed elections, and mobilized against ISIS in 2014. Key Roles and Influence: Ultimate Arbiter: Sistani intervenes during critical crises to guide, calm, or legitimize political action, including mediating during the 2004 Najaf standoff and urging the appointment of new leadership in 2014. Constitutional and Electoral Authority: He played a pivotal role in ensuring that Iraq’s transition was democratic by demanding elections for a constituent assembly over an appointed council in 2003-2004. Anti-ISIS and National Unity: In 2014, his fatwa for "defensive jihad" against ISIS galvanized Iraqi security forces and volunteers, crossing sectarian lines to prevent further fragmentation. Political Accountability and Reform: Sistani has consistently criticized corruption and, in 2019, supported protests demanding reforms, putting pressure on the ruling political class to improve service delivery and governance. Check on Foreign Influence: As a senior cleric based in Najaf, he acts as a counterweight to Iranian influence, emphasizing a nationalist, independent Iraqi trajectory. Sistani maintains a "quietist" approach, avoiding daily governance, but acts decisively to prevent national collapse or major injustice. So unlike Khamanei he is not involved in the day to day running of the country and cannot be described as slaughtering people. Indeed he has had a polite but public disagreement with Iran on this very matter, preferring a quietist role as described above. Somebody like him would be a distinct improvement in Iran, not ideal but moving in the right direction. In this way Iran might avoid a civil war along Libyan lines, terrorism along Iraqi lines etc. and perhaps the break-up of the state. Edited January 27 by SpankyMcFarland Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 In 1979, a terminally ill ruler lost control against a united opposition. Khomeini was a brilliant tactician, up there with Lenin, and was able to keep the socialists and liberals, whom he hated with a passion, on board until he longer needed them. The subsequent government was exquisitely aware of these events and has spent decades ensuring there would be no repeat. Indeed, maintaining power has been its outstanding achievement among a litany of failures. One key advance has been in control of the Internet which must have involved assistance from China. Expect a level of surveillance in the future that will rival that seen in China or Palestine. One hope would be that the regime’s own leaders reject a future as an impoverished Chinese satellite and move to a more secular state. This may well be authoritarian, however. Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 (edited) On 1/25/2026 at 9:05 AM, John Stone said: Iran is suffering the so-called, 'Israel' syndrome. To paraphrase, 'the World doesn't give-a-fk concerning Israel and ditto for Iran - likely more so. The so-called Palestinians have organization in diaspora abroad, funding (Iran), political advantage, romanticism in struggle (akin to Spain - 1930s), wedge political issue domestic and aboard, HUGE media coverage c/w vetting, a history of insane struggle, ........... and on and on! Iran has, 'from the river to the sea', a legacy of exported terror, nuc program aimed at destroying a peaceable state (until provoked), lousy corner store proprietors, proxy terrorism ............ the legacy is ALL bad. The majority of the West are likely leaning towards hoping Iran's protests continue to last man / woman and the fight continues with Allah determining the winner............ for the men bonus virgins ......... the women get assorted hijabs. River to the sea? You know Likud was keen on something of that sort for a very long time? In their original party platform it was right at the top of the agenda: Quote a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty. b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party Personally, I think actions are more serious than words. Edited January 27 by SpankyMcFarland Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
WestCanMan Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said: I believe in secular social democracy as the best form of government but the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. As in the US, many Iranians are deeply religious. Most have known nothing but theocracy their entire lives. Have you followed Sistani’s conduct in Iraq and compared it to the mullahs in Iran? Perhaps you should examine that first. From Google AI: Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is the most influential, non-state political actor in post-2003 Iraq, acting as the supreme Shiite religious authority (Marja’iyya) that provides moral guidance, political stability, and legitimacy to the government . While not holding office, he has influenced constitutional development, endorsed elections, and mobilized against ISIS in 2014. Key Roles and Influence: Ultimate Arbiter: Sistani intervenes during critical crises to guide, calm, or legitimize political action, including mediating during the 2004 Najaf standoff and urging the appointment of new leadership in 2014. Constitutional and Electoral Authority: He played a pivotal role in ensuring that Iraq’s transition was democratic by demanding elections for a constituent assembly over an appointed council in 2003-2004. Anti-ISIS and National Unity: In 2014, his fatwa for "defensive jihad" against ISIS galvanized Iraqi security forces and volunteers, crossing sectarian lines to prevent further fragmentation. Political Accountability and Reform: Sistani has consistently criticized corruption and, in 2019, supported protests demanding reforms, putting pressure on the ruling political class to improve service delivery and governance. Check on Foreign Influence: As a senior cleric based in Najaf, he acts as a counterweight to Iranian influence, emphasizing a nationalist, independent Iraqi trajectory. Sistani maintains a "quietist" approach, avoiding daily governance, but acts decisively to prevent national collapse or major injustice. So unlike Khamanei he is not involved in the day to day running of the country and cannot be described as slaughtering people. Indeed he has had a polite but public disagreement with Iran on this very matter, preferring a quietist role as described above. Somebody like him would be a distinct improvement in Iran, not ideal but moving in the right direction. In this way Iran might avoid a civil war along Libyan lines, terrorism along Iraqi lines etc. and perhaps the break-up of the state. I'll congratulate for taking the time to become knowledgeable about this, but theocratic rule is not a legitimate goal, and even Russia, NoKO and China have elections. The title of Ayatollah comes with too much power, and has been too thoroughly evil for too long. Quote If the Cultist Narrative Network/Cultist Broadcasting Corporation gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. "I don't hate American's, I pointed out the literacy rate to Uncle Sam." - LinkSoul "It's just a parable about rocks and trees talking to muslims to help them kill Jews who are trying to hide. It's open to interpretation." - robobigot
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 27 Report Posted January 27 17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said: I'll congratulate for taking the time to become knowledgeable about this, but theocratic rule is not a legitimate goal, and even Russia, NoKO and China have elections. The title of Ayatollah comes with too much power, and has been too thoroughly evil for too long. I agree a secular democracy would be far better. Iranians have suffered enough. Their wishes are pretty clear at this point. 1 Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
SpankyMcFarland Posted January 28 Report Posted January 28 (edited) The Arab states don’t want to be involved in a strike on Iran: Quote The United Arab Emirates’ Foreign Ministry has reaffirmed that the country will not permit its airspace, territory, or waters to be used in any military action against Iran. In a statement on Monday, the ministry said the UAE remains committed to “not allowing its airspace, territory, or waters to be used in any hostile military actions against Iran, and to not providing any logistical support in this regard.” https://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2026/01/26/762978/UAE-will-not--allow--airspace-territory-used-anti-Iran-attacks Iran could retaliate against them with missile strikes. Also many have restive Shia populations. I’d say they prefer a weak theocracy to a vibrant democracy next door. That freedom message could spread and who would want that? Edited January 28 by SpankyMcFarland Quote ‘How small we make our worlds. Gather them in, tighten them up into little castles of fear.’
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 29 Author Report Posted January 29 On 1/27/2026 at 12:27 PM, WestCanMan said: WTF are you talking about? " If a person with genuinely religious ambitions is chosen, like Iraq’s Sistani, the country could begin to heal. " You think that a different ayatollah will make things better? How about: That position is gone and will never be filled again. If successive popes were slaughtering people and trampling their human rightsfor generations would we be looking for a better one or just call it a day? Iranians are done with any f*cking religious leader or religion. They want a secular government. A majority of Iranians hate it. Why do you think over 500 mosques were set on fire in 48 hours. 1 Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 29 Author Report Posted January 29 (edited) On 1/27/2026 at 1:46 PM, SpankyMcFarland said: As in the US, many Iranians are deeply religious. I think you live in 50 years ago. The majority of Iranians today hate this religion and are aware of the history that Arabs invaded what used to be Persian empire, imposed Islam by sword and destroyed their rich culture. Why do you think over 500 mosques were attacked and set on fire in 48 hours. The only reason the rest of the mosques not being set on fire is because a brutal security force is guarding them. Edited January 29 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 29 Author Report Posted January 29 (edited) On 1/27/2026 at 2:04 PM, SpankyMcFarland said: In 1979, a terminally ill ruler lost control against a united opposition. Khomeini was a brilliant tactician, up there with Lenin, and was able to keep the socialists and liberals, whom he hated with a passion, on board until he longer needed them. The subsequent government was exquisitely aware of these events and has spent decades ensuring there would be no repeat. Indeed, maintaining power has been its outstanding achievement among a litany of failures. One key advance has been in control of the Internet which must have involved assistance from China. Expect a level of surveillance in the future that will rival that seen in China or Palestine. One hope would be that the regime’s own leaders reject a future as an impoverished Chinese satellite and move to a more secular state. This may well be authoritarian, however. There is no chance of reform. Brutality is in their DNA. This religion is violent by nature. Just read its history as how it was spread. There is no chance of reform or democracy. Iranians need US military help as President Trump promised and sent them on streets for which they got killed to level off the playing fields for them to take over. If Trump does not keep his promise and acts like a coward and deal with the devil, the only way out is armed revolution in which hundreds of thousand will die. Edited January 29 by CITIZEN_2015 Quote
CITIZEN_2015 Posted January 29 Author Report Posted January 29 On 1/27/2026 at 3:10 PM, SpankyMcFarland said: I agree a secular democracy would be far better. Iranians have suffered enough. Their wishes are pretty clear at this point. Iranians are shouting the name of Prince Reza Pahlavi in millions. Among the diaspora, over 90%. Among Iranians inside, no precise figure but estimates between 60 to 85%. Look at the videos of uprising. They all call his name inside Iran and out. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.