The article says basically nothing besides, "people are protesting in Iran". I found this survey, no endorsement because I have no idea about the source, but it gives a better picture of where the Iranian people stand:
https://gamaan.org/2025/08/20/analytical-report-on-iranians-...
From the last Iran thread it seems like the pro-Gaza people are really upset at the potential loss of a theocratic Iranian benefactor. It was the wildest thread I've seen on HN.
I'm well aware that the Iranian regime is genuinely disliked and in many ways very bad, but it gives me the heebie-jeebies that it happens just after Venezuela.
Will a protector come and save the Iranians, again?
Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, Venezuela, Iran. All Russian allies. All in trouble/falling within a year. Probably a sign Russia's failing and/or the US actively working against them.
Other unconfirmed rumors currently circulating is that last night under the cover of the internet blackouts there has been a major massacre of protestors
That would unfortunately repeat the playbook of their 2019 internet blackout, which was likewise a cover to the government massacring "as many as 1,500 protestors".
> "To block the sharing of information regarding the protests and the deaths of hundreds of protesters on social media platforms, the government shut down the Internet nationwide, resulting in a near-total internet blackout of around six days.[25][26][27] In an effort to crush the protests, the Iranian government (according to Amnesty International) shot protesters dead from rooftops, helicopters, and at close range with machine gun fire. In an effort to mask the scale and casualty count of the protests, it hauled away large numbers of bodies of the dead protesters,[24] and threatened families of slain protesters not to speak to the media or hold funerals.[28]"
Other unconfirmed rumors currently circulating is that last night under the cover of the internet blackouts there has been a major massacre of protestors
> "Even Starlink, which has been the main line of communication for some activists in different parts of the country, has been jammed," Bahari said, referring to the satellite communication system run by Elon Musk.
It's right there in the article. Just click the link!
These type of issues always bring me back to the phenomenal essay "I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup"[1]. People can cheer on the worst despots as long as their local "outgroup" is aligning with the other side.
Trump/Israel bad > Trump/Israel is anti Iranian regime > Iranian regime must not be so bad (or actually be good!)
And the heads of the rest of the world's developed but militarily impotent countries who are so eager to weigh in on the various foreign policy issues du jour are painfully silent. Why aren't they standing with Trump in supporting the Iranian people? Pathetic.
> The crackdown on protesters in Iran has prompted an outcry among European leaders, with High Representative Kaja Kallas denouncing Tehran for its "disproportionate" and "heavy-handed" response.
> The European Union has sharply condemned the crackdown on protesters in Iran who have taken to the streets to show their discontent over the Islamic Republic.
The Telegraph (aka Torygraph) is a well known source of misinformation - they're approaching the Daily Mail (aka Daily Heil) in terms of just making up shit.
However, I certainly don't want to be seen as supporting Starmer - he does seem to have remained silent on Iran or the MSM is not interested in reporting it.
Because of the results in Libya and Syria are shining examples of the benefits of covert intervention? Because the people running these policies are not as smart as the Cold War era leaders?
If that’s the case, good. Let’s hope it is successful. Iran is solely responsible for a lot, perhaps most, of the geopolitical problems in the Middle East.
The US isn’t trying to restrict Venezuela’s oil sales. It is restricting those sales and part of that work, remember Russia invaded Ukraine and aids Iran in destabilizing the Middle East, is the seizure of ships flying under false flags in violation of international maritime law and in violation of US and European Union sanctions on Russian oil sales.
This is true if you ignore that the US has destabilized relations with Iran at every turn. There have been various times in modern history when relations could have been normalized and every time the US has instead just decided to keep them as a “Bad Guy” to posture against - well one party at least. Yet when they work against the interests of the US everyone is surprised.
Nah, Iran isn't innocent here. Nobody forces them to try and build nuclear bombs, chant death to Jews, or fund literal terrorist groups who do crazy things.
It's fair to be critical of the United States (which was also largely cleaning up European colonial messes in the Middle East), but it's not fair to take away Iran's agency and blame all of its ills on the United States.
I don't recall Israel threatening Arabs in the context of committing genocide or wiping, say, Iraq and Saudi Arabia off the map. Instead it's about getting Iran specifically to stop funding Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, and other groups never mind ISIS/ISIL &c.
Israel isn't innocent either. Their actions in Gaza went beyond what was necessary, in my opinion, but I will never accept or entertain a discussion where all the blame just goes to Israel or just goes to the United States.
Neither Israel or the United States are doing what Iran is doing. Iran actively chooses to be belligerent because their authoritarian leaders, who also like to help Russia invade and bomb Ukraine mind you, need an enemy to try and maintain appearances.
I don't know but I don't doubt that Israel has a nuclear bomb. I also don't have a problem with it, because unlike Iran they don't go around threatening their neighbors with nuclear holocaust and destruction, like Iran does.
What does that have to do with Iran? Well, of course besides funding and equipping Hamas to go do dumb things like attack Israel.
Are the Palestinians Iranian citizens? They weren't the last I checked. So no need for Iran to be involved there.
If you want to argue that Israel is "doing things right now" in this broad context against Arabs well, so did Hamas, Hezbollah, and others against Israelis. Iran threatens nuclear holocaust on Israel, Iran also launched ballistic missiles at Israel, funds ISIS/ISIL, Hezbollah, destabilized Syria and tried to destabilize Iraq. Maybe everyone just deserves what is happening to them?
I agree. The United States specifically should get involved and secure Gaza and institute peace, kick out Hamas, and ensure that no weapons from Iran are flowing to the area and causing a humanitarian disaster by encouraging and facilitating continuing bloodshed.
Iran has conflicting values and has never stopped funding groups that violently support their view even when Obama was president so this is a very myopic view to take.
Didn't take long for the US conspiracy theorists to get involved. It's not the 50s anymore. People have access to far more information and start and stop a revolution of their own. Given everything we've seen over the last 20 years the CIA hasn't even been very good at the fomenting revolution specialty.
I will. For example, it is a nasty group of medieval characters, extremely corrupt even by contemporary standards, and willing to kill and maim their opponents at every opportunity. Hanging people from cranes, bloody hell.
"most obvious CIA-sponsored color revolution"
Yeah, because millions of people are just stupid remote-controlled robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets against Basij thugs who are willing to shoot at them.
Do people outside the West have any personal agency themselves in your view, or are they all just mindless puppets of the Big White Man in the White House?
This is not to deny that the US has some interest in getting the ayatollahs overthrown. But I find the opinion that everyone in the world just obediently dances by someone's flute quite dehumanizing.
For people whose Maslow's hierarchy of needs is almost fully satisfied, yes.
In Iran of 2026, neither food nor even water is secure. That is very low on the same hierarchy. I would say that this is a much stronger motivation for discontent than anything on the heavily censored local Internet.
> Yeah, because millions of people are just stupid remote-controlled robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets against Basij thugs who are willing to shoot at them.
Not the CIA anymore. Today, it's done by "semi-governmental" organizations such as the NED[1, 2] or RFE/RL[3] or in this case, its persian-language incarnation Radio Farda[4].
You can agree with their overt goal of strengthening pro-democratic forces in authoritarian countries, (though the question remain: with what authority and who sets the objectives they are promoting?)
Even then, the list of countries in which they don't operate should raise some questions: No activity in Israel, Argentina or the Gulf states, even though those countries are also generally regarded as autocracies (Gulf states) or are currently experiencing a massive slide towards authoritarianism (Israel, Argentina). It just happens that those countries are all allies of the US...
We did listen to the RFE, as well as London, during the Communist years.
Yeah, the West is not a bunch of angels. But among people who view the world as one big conspirational system, there is a visible lack of understanding that many of the domestic regimes are worse than that.
If any country maintains a massive secret police against internal dissent, it is a good indication that the Dear Leader is hated by the population.
As of 2025, most European countries do not maintain a massive secret police against internal dissent, though some particular events are worrying. But prior to 1989, there were massive secret police systems all over the former Eastern Bloc.
"with what authority and who sets the objectives they are promoting?"
Does it matter? Why?
The Iranian system in particular derives its authority from Allah, and? Did Allah actually confirm their authority? Nope.
Still better than having western corporations loot the hell out of your country, like they did to Russia in the 90s, or what AICO did after it got Mossadegh out of the way.
> robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets...
Money goes a long way, even in countries that aren't poor. For a country as heavily sanctioned as Iran, the CIA could buy out all of their politicians and all of their journalists several times over. We already saw this with "arab spring" in Egypt. Five-eyes and company con terminally online city kids into thinking the country is behind them, city kids protest and weaken the government, the peasants take notice and realize, "Hey, if these spoiled kids can topple the government, just imagine what we can do!", so instead of getting gay rights and feminism, they get the Muslim Brotherhood.
I don’t see any involvement of evil western forces. Local clever guys took their chances. Happened in every part of broken Soviet Union. So many amazing stories about smart guys taking material possessions of disappeared KGB.
The story of Eastern Germany is much more interesting. Capital from West Germany was directly steering the process.
> Still better than having western corporations loot the hell out of your country, like they did to Russia in the 90s, or what AICO did after it got Mossadegh out of the way.
Really? By what measure? Just look at how many people fled the Islamic Republic vs. Shah's old regime. The diaspora has absolutely exploded since Khomeini's revolution, and the people fleeing are mostly the best educated ones. Iran has the highest brain drain in the world.
Don't want to exonerate the regime - they are an Islamist dictatorship. Though, so is Saudi Arabia and I'm not hearing about mass flight from there. Maybe just a little bit because one is sanctioned and the other is not?
Of course they were the best educated. Their parents could afford the best educations money can buy after selling their country out to western corporations. The Shah was a puppet. His entourage, puppets.
> Yeah, because millions of people are just stupid remote-controlled robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets against Basij thugs who are willing to shoot at them.
What a lazy and ignorant attempt of spinning this. That's on the same level as the "so many people would know, no one could keep it a secret" fact check drivel. You don't need people to be stupid, "remote-controlled" nor robotic zombies. You just need to keep on funding assets, recruit new people and the seeds will form a groundwork sooner or later.
> But I find the opinion that everyone in the world just obediently dances by someone's flute quite dehumanizing.
Basically no one means this when they speak of regime change operations and people participating in it.
I know a few activists who were involved in sending dialup numbers to fax machines during the Arab Spring during the Internet blackout in Egypt and most of them are pretty much aware that they were mostly pawns for Western governments.
> Basically no one means this when they speak of regime change operations and people participating in it.
They do though. Spinning the 2014 Maidan Revolution as a fully illegitimate CIA-backed coup (with the implicit conclusion that it's against the will of the people) is one of the main rhetorical pillars used to justify Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
Iranian economy is absolutely terrible, their government hangs people like there is no tomorrow, the ayatollahs dip their beaks into every viable business and steal like crows, the official ideology of the system is a primitive medieval theocracy pushed on educated and modern people. Plus the very same government, after spending a lot of money on arming itself, proved incapable of beating back an aerial assault of the "Little Satan" back in June.
If I lived in Iran, I would need no CIA to be angry about the status quo.
Sure, but better for who? Most likely for the West I'd say. It's pretty bad for Persians as well but who knows what other leader would have done to them. If the regime falls I'd say good riddance but it's no guarantee for a better life or stability in the region.
There is no going "back" to absolutist monarchism because it was actually a highly evolved (over centuries) form of government that eventually became the political norms of Europe today. There are a lot of ways to go forward to an isolated dictator driven by a terrible fear of his own citizens however.
I meant an absolutist monarchy. This is really a dying form, though not yet totally dead.
Paradoxically, republics of today seem more vulnerable to authoritarian turns than the monarchies which survived the 20th century.
Probably because an elected leader has more legitimacy and thus can demand more political power, sometimes too much power. In a constitutional monarchy, there is always a psychological split between the sovereign and the prime minister or whoever gets elected to executive power, and one-man-shows are less likely to succeed.
It’s classic: the government killing protesters in the streets, and Western government-backed opposition groups trying to hijack the protests to seize power. Western governments support a person whose published plan for a 24-to-36-month (extendable) “transitional period” puts himself in charge as the absolute leader, with some advisory institutions whose members he personally “appoints.” Then, after 24 to 36 months, they promise elections—just like what the former al-Qaeda–linked Sharia is doing in Syria.
The US only supported jawlani in the last year after he took control and shown himself as relatively pragmatic so I don't think this take aligns with reality.
Up until 2024 he had a 10 million reward on his head and it would be very plausible he will end up assassinated by a US UAV
Edit: can't reply to your flagged post, Turkey may be a NATO ally but does not qualify as western. Its interests were not aligned with US interests in Syria.
US supported the Kurds which are Turkey's long time enemies, while Turkey supported an Al Qaeda offshoot, which the US was not enthusiastic about
The article says basically nothing besides, "people are protesting in Iran". I found this survey, no endorsement because I have no idea about the source, but it gives a better picture of where the Iranian people stand: https://gamaan.org/2025/08/20/analytical-report-on-iranians-...
Flagging on HN has taken a new level.
From the last Iran thread it seems like the pro-Gaza people are really upset at the potential loss of a theocratic Iranian benefactor. It was the wildest thread I've seen on HN.
Which thread is that?
I'm well aware that the Iranian regime is genuinely disliked and in many ways very bad, but it gives me the heebie-jeebies that it happens just after Venezuela.
Will a protector come and save the Iranians, again?
Seems like a different enough situation to be a coincidence and/or a delayed result of the Israeli strikes. And immediate result of a water shortage.
A theocracy masquerading as a democracy can't really expect to not have uprisings now and again.
Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah, Venezuela, Iran. All Russian allies. All in trouble/falling within a year. Probably a sign Russia's failing and/or the US actively working against them.
But their Foreign Minister took his entire family and flew to Beirut. Doesn't look like a routine visit.
If things calm down back home, he can say this was a routine work trip. If not, it doesn’t matter.
Source?
That story is based on rumors and denied by the minister himself.
However, French media reports the Iranian elites are trying to get french visas
https://www.iranintl.com/en/202601089494
Other unconfirmed rumors currently circulating is that last night under the cover of the internet blackouts there has been a major massacre of protestors
https://x.com/IliaHashemicom/status/2009594128284205077
That would unfortunately repeat the playbook of their 2019 internet blackout, which was likewise a cover to the government massacring "as many as 1,500 protestors".
> "To block the sharing of information regarding the protests and the deaths of hundreds of protesters on social media platforms, the government shut down the Internet nationwide, resulting in a near-total internet blackout of around six days.[25][26][27] In an effort to crush the protests, the Iranian government (according to Amnesty International) shot protesters dead from rooftops, helicopters, and at close range with machine gun fire. In an effort to mask the scale and casualty count of the protests, it hauled away large numbers of bodies of the dead protesters,[24] and threatened families of slain protesters not to speak to the media or hold funerals.[28]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019–2020_Iranian_protests
Other unconfirmed rumors currently circulating is that last night under the cover of the internet blackouts there has been a major massacre of protestors
Really, really hope it's a rumor.
This video indicates that there were some dead last night:
https://www.reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/1q7x4vv/caution_di...
This is what I found.
https://x.com/Osint613/status/2009405639869526236
Maybe someone in Lebanon can chime in.
Is Musk's Starlink capable of filling the gap for this large population?
Iran cracked down on personal satellite internet ownership because it had been used to bypass censorship attempts.
So right now there is almost no starlink hardware in the country.
> "Even Starlink, which has been the main line of communication for some activists in different parts of the country, has been jammed," Bahari said, referring to the satellite communication system run by Elon Musk.
It's right there in the article. Just click the link!
These type of issues always bring me back to the phenomenal essay "I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup"[1]. People can cheer on the worst despots as long as their local "outgroup" is aligning with the other side.
Trump/Israel bad > Trump/Israel is anti Iranian regime > Iranian regime must not be so bad (or actually be good!)
[1] https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/I-Can-Tolerate-Anythi...
Applicable to Hamas/houthis as well.
And the heads of the rest of the world's developed but militarily impotent countries who are so eager to weigh in on the various foreign policy issues du jour are painfully silent. Why aren't they standing with Trump in supporting the Iranian people? Pathetic.
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/01/09/eu-rejects-vio...
> The crackdown on protesters in Iran has prompted an outcry among European leaders, with High Representative Kaja Kallas denouncing Tehran for its "disproportionate" and "heavy-handed" response.
> The European Union has sharply condemned the crackdown on protesters in Iran who have taken to the streets to show their discontent over the Islamic Republic.
So a tepid EU sound bite? What have Starmer, Macron or Martin said?
Starmer: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/01/03/keir-starmer-sil...
The Telegraph (aka Torygraph) is a well known source of misinformation - they're approaching the Daily Mail (aka Daily Heil) in terms of just making up shit.
However, I certainly don't want to be seen as supporting Starmer - he does seem to have remained silent on Iran or the MSM is not interested in reporting it.
Because of the results in Libya and Syria are shining examples of the benefits of covert intervention? Because the people running these policies are not as smart as the Cold War era leaders?
It's kind of funny to see some people downplaying the US-Shah connection while others use it as a fulcrum.
If they support these demonstrations they certainly should not stand with Trump.
[flagged]
If that’s the case, good. Let’s hope it is successful. Iran is solely responsible for a lot, perhaps most, of the geopolitical problems in the Middle East.
The US isn’t trying to restrict Venezuela’s oil sales. It is restricting those sales and part of that work, remember Russia invaded Ukraine and aids Iran in destabilizing the Middle East, is the seizure of ships flying under false flags in violation of international maritime law and in violation of US and European Union sanctions on Russian oil sales.
This is true if you ignore that the US has destabilized relations with Iran at every turn. There have been various times in modern history when relations could have been normalized and every time the US has instead just decided to keep them as a “Bad Guy” to posture against - well one party at least. Yet when they work against the interests of the US everyone is surprised.
Nah, Iran isn't innocent here. Nobody forces them to try and build nuclear bombs, chant death to Jews, or fund literal terrorist groups who do crazy things.
It's fair to be critical of the United States (which was also largely cleaning up European colonial messes in the Middle East), but it's not fair to take away Iran's agency and blame all of its ills on the United States.
> Nobody forces them to try and build nuclear bombs, chant death to Jews, or fund literal terrorist groups who do crazy things.
Swap “Jews” with “Arabs” and you’d be describing Israel, except they don’t just chant and already have nuclear bombs
Link me a video I want to be informed if this is actually the case.
This guy's story covers both (the crazy illegal actions and the nuclear weapons program.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordechai_Vanunu
Apologies, I meant the chanting, the nuclear thing is well documented but yes thanks for the link to that.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/thousands-of-israeli-nati... (May 2025)
I don't recall Israel threatening Arabs in the context of committing genocide or wiping, say, Iraq and Saudi Arabia off the map. Instead it's about getting Iran specifically to stop funding Hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, and other groups never mind ISIS/ISIL &c.
Israel isn't innocent either. Their actions in Gaza went beyond what was necessary, in my opinion, but I will never accept or entertain a discussion where all the blame just goes to Israel or just goes to the United States.
Neither Israel or the United States are doing what Iran is doing. Iran actively chooses to be belligerent because their authoritarian leaders, who also like to help Russia invade and bomb Ukraine mind you, need an enemy to try and maintain appearances.
I don't know but I don't doubt that Israel has a nuclear bomb. I also don't have a problem with it, because unlike Iran they don't go around threatening their neighbors with nuclear holocaust and destruction, like Iran does.
Israel is creating starvation conditions in Gaza right now, that's worse than a threat.
What does that have to do with Iran? Well, of course besides funding and equipping Hamas to go do dumb things like attack Israel.
Are the Palestinians Iranian citizens? They weren't the last I checked. So no need for Iran to be involved there.
If you want to argue that Israel is "doing things right now" in this broad context against Arabs well, so did Hamas, Hezbollah, and others against Israelis. Iran threatens nuclear holocaust on Israel, Iran also launched ballistic missiles at Israel, funds ISIS/ISIL, Hezbollah, destabilized Syria and tried to destabilize Iraq. Maybe everyone just deserves what is happening to them?
>Are the Palestinians Iranian citizens? They weren't the last I checked. So no need for Iran to be involved there.
I don't think it should be possible to kill two million people in a well planned and organised fashion without getting everyone involved...
I agree. The United States specifically should get involved and secure Gaza and institute peace, kick out Hamas, and ensure that no weapons from Iran are flowing to the area and causing a humanitarian disaster by encouraging and facilitating continuing bloodshed.
Iran has conflicting values and has never stopped funding groups that violently support their view even when Obama was president so this is a very myopic view to take.
While the US is not guiltless, there is still plenty of blame that Iran needs to take itself.
[flagged]
love the casual "solely", truly unhinged
Didn't take long for the US conspiracy theorists to get involved. It's not the 50s anymore. People have access to far more information and start and stop a revolution of their own. Given everything we've seen over the last 20 years the CIA hasn't even been very good at the fomenting revolution specialty.
"Say what you want about the Iranian government"
I will. For example, it is a nasty group of medieval characters, extremely corrupt even by contemporary standards, and willing to kill and maim their opponents at every opportunity. Hanging people from cranes, bloody hell.
"most obvious CIA-sponsored color revolution"
Yeah, because millions of people are just stupid remote-controlled robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets against Basij thugs who are willing to shoot at them.
Do people outside the West have any personal agency themselves in your view, or are they all just mindless puppets of the Big White Man in the White House?
This is not to deny that the US has some interest in getting the ayatollahs overthrown. But I find the opinion that everyone in the world just obediently dances by someone's flute quite dehumanizing.
In a world we prefer algorithmic newsfeeds to editorialized news? It is quite possible.
Not saying it is what's happening.
But pretending our brain isn't subject to manipulation isn't the way to our own betterment.
For people whose Maslow's hierarchy of needs is almost fully satisfied, yes.
In Iran of 2026, neither food nor even water is secure. That is very low on the same hierarchy. I would say that this is a much stronger motivation for discontent than anything on the heavily censored local Internet.
> Yeah, because millions of people are just stupid remote-controlled robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets against Basij thugs who are willing to shoot at them.
Not the CIA anymore. Today, it's done by "semi-governmental" organizations such as the NED[1, 2] or RFE/RL[3] or in this case, its persian-language incarnation Radio Farda[4].
You can agree with their overt goal of strengthening pro-democratic forces in authoritarian countries, (though the question remain: with what authority and who sets the objectives they are promoting?)
Even then, the list of countries in which they don't operate should raise some questions: No activity in Israel, Argentina or the Gulf states, even though those countries are also generally regarded as autocracies (Gulf states) or are currently experiencing a massive slide towards authoritarianism (Israel, Argentina). It just happens that those countries are all allies of the US...
[1] https://www.ned.org
[2] https://socialism.com/fs-article/betrayal-from-venezuela-to-...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Europe/Radio_Libert...
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Farda
We did listen to the RFE, as well as London, during the Communist years.
Yeah, the West is not a bunch of angels. But among people who view the world as one big conspirational system, there is a visible lack of understanding that many of the domestic regimes are worse than that.
If any country maintains a massive secret police against internal dissent, it is a good indication that the Dear Leader is hated by the population.
As of 2025, most European countries do not maintain a massive secret police against internal dissent, though some particular events are worrying. But prior to 1989, there were massive secret police systems all over the former Eastern Bloc.
"with what authority and who sets the objectives they are promoting?"
Does it matter? Why?
The Iranian system in particular derives its authority from Allah, and? Did Allah actually confirm their authority? Nope.
> it is a nasty group of medieval characters,
Still better than having western corporations loot the hell out of your country, like they did to Russia in the 90s, or what AICO did after it got Mossadegh out of the way.
> robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets...
Money goes a long way, even in countries that aren't poor. For a country as heavily sanctioned as Iran, the CIA could buy out all of their politicians and all of their journalists several times over. We already saw this with "arab spring" in Egypt. Five-eyes and company con terminally online city kids into thinking the country is behind them, city kids protest and weaken the government, the peasants take notice and realize, "Hey, if these spoiled kids can topple the government, just imagine what we can do!", so instead of getting gay rights and feminism, they get the Muslim Brotherhood.
Can you please write more about Russia in the 90s and western corporations? What happened there?
This happened: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2022/03/22/1087654279/how...
I don’t see any involvement of evil western forces. Local clever guys took their chances. Happened in every part of broken Soviet Union. So many amazing stories about smart guys taking material possessions of disappeared KGB.
The story of Eastern Germany is much more interesting. Capital from West Germany was directly steering the process.
>> it is a nasty group of medieval characters,
> Still better than having western corporations loot the hell out of your country, like they did to Russia in the 90s, or what AICO did after it got Mossadegh out of the way.
Really? By what measure? Just look at how many people fled the Islamic Republic vs. Shah's old regime. The diaspora has absolutely exploded since Khomeini's revolution, and the people fleeing are mostly the best educated ones. Iran has the highest brain drain in the world.
Don't want to exonerate the regime - they are an Islamist dictatorship. Though, so is Saudi Arabia and I'm not hearing about mass flight from there. Maybe just a little bit because one is sanctioned and the other is not?
Of course they were the best educated. Their parents could afford the best educations money can buy after selling their country out to western corporations. The Shah was a puppet. His entourage, puppets.
> Yeah, because millions of people are just stupid remote-controlled robotic zombies who will, upon a command of the CIA, go into the streets against Basij thugs who are willing to shoot at them.
What a lazy and ignorant attempt of spinning this. That's on the same level as the "so many people would know, no one could keep it a secret" fact check drivel. You don't need people to be stupid, "remote-controlled" nor robotic zombies. You just need to keep on funding assets, recruit new people and the seeds will form a groundwork sooner or later.
I recommend picking up a book on this some time: https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/cia-intervention
Some of these operations werde decades long.
> But I find the opinion that everyone in the world just obediently dances by someone's flute quite dehumanizing.
Basically no one means this when they speak of regime change operations and people participating in it.
I know a few activists who were involved in sending dialup numbers to fax machines during the Arab Spring during the Internet blackout in Egypt and most of them are pretty much aware that they were mostly pawns for Western governments.
> Basically no one means this when they speak of regime change operations and people participating in it.
They do though. Spinning the 2014 Maidan Revolution as a fully illegitimate CIA-backed coup (with the implicit conclusion that it's against the will of the people) is one of the main rhetorical pillars used to justify Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
Well, can't argue with facts, unless you believe the fact checkers.
Iranian economy is absolutely terrible, their government hangs people like there is no tomorrow, the ayatollahs dip their beaks into every viable business and steal like crows, the official ideology of the system is a primitive medieval theocracy pushed on educated and modern people. Plus the very same government, after spending a lot of money on arming itself, proved incapable of beating back an aerial assault of the "Little Satan" back in June.
If I lived in Iran, I would need no CIA to be angry about the status quo.
Not at all what I was saying and I know all that. The Iranians have all reasons to be angry at their government. No one disputes that.
Maybe. But if the people are free at the end of this, it doesn't really matter who or why it began. It's long overdue.
Iran was not free under the Shah, just UK-aligned. It depends on what they're doing.
Still better than turbo islamists on virtually all fronts
Sure, but better for who? Most likely for the West I'd say. It's pretty bad for Persians as well but who knows what other leader would have done to them. If the regime falls I'd say good riddance but it's no guarantee for a better life or stability in the region.
> Sure, but better for who? Most likely for the West I'd say.
Do you think people go fight their armed government known for heavily repressing any kind of protest for fun after work ?
The people of iran will decide who it's better for, as is their right.
I hope to wake up to see a free iran any day now.
better for these guys:
https://www.gettyimages.com/search/2/image?phrase=public+han...
Saddam did stuff like that and he was secular. The original Shah also did things like that. It's not wise to downplay the value of democracy.
There is no going back to absolutist rule anywhere in the world, much less in a country which just tasted blood for freedom.
If Iran turns into a monarchy, it will be a very formal constitutional one, like Spain.
There is no going "back" to absolutist monarchism because it was actually a highly evolved (over centuries) form of government that eventually became the political norms of Europe today. There are a lot of ways to go forward to an isolated dictator driven by a terrible fear of his own citizens however.
El Salvador seems to be a counterexample, at least to this casual observer.
The United States may well become one.
I meant an absolutist monarchy. This is really a dying form, though not yet totally dead.
Paradoxically, republics of today seem more vulnerable to authoritarian turns than the monarchies which survived the 20th century.
Probably because an elected leader has more legitimacy and thus can demand more political power, sometimes too much power. In a constitutional monarchy, there is always a psychological split between the sovereign and the prime minister or whoever gets elected to executive power, and one-man-shows are less likely to succeed.
[flagged]
[flagged]
You agree with forcing woman to cover their hair?
Plus beating her to death if she does not comply? That is what started the unrest back in 2022.
That is a heavy price to "get back at the Yankees".
It’s classic: the government killing protesters in the streets, and Western government-backed opposition groups trying to hijack the protests to seize power. Western governments support a person whose published plan for a 24-to-36-month (extendable) “transitional period” puts himself in charge as the absolute leader, with some advisory institutions whose members he personally “appoints.” Then, after 24 to 36 months, they promise elections—just like what the former al-Qaeda–linked Sharia is doing in Syria.
The US only supported jawlani in the last year after he took control and shown himself as relatively pragmatic so I don't think this take aligns with reality.
Up until 2024 he had a 10 million reward on his head and it would be very plausible he will end up assassinated by a US UAV
https://2017-2021.state.gov/rewards-for-justice-reward-offer...
Edit: can't reply to your flagged post, Turkey may be a NATO ally but does not qualify as western. Its interests were not aligned with US interests in Syria.
US supported the Kurds which are Turkey's long time enemies, while Turkey supported an Al Qaeda offshoot, which the US was not enthusiastic about
[dead]