An Iranian’s perspective

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:honest question for the OP - if the Iranian regime is somehow overthrown or dislodged as part of this action, what type of government do you envision taking its place?

My hope is for free elections/democracy and beyond that I don’t think anyone can say. Maybe it will be much better, maybe only slightly better. But it certainly can’t be worse. I genuinely don’t see how it could get worse unless something like the Taliban takes over, and I just don’t see that happening for a variety of reasons (pretty much zero Iranians want that and there is really no precedent for it in Iran).

No precedent? No precedent?

What do you call the past 45 years???

Certainly there is precedent for Islamism/theocracy. What I meant was that there is no precedent for a Taliban-style government. There is a lot of daylight between the current Iranian regime (as terrible as they are) and the Taliban.

The Taliban started as an American proxy that turned against us. The Islamic republic of Iran also started as an American proxy that turned against us. There is definitely precedent here for another Taliban if not worse.

We will have a new proxy in town to take out the old proxy in Iran and 20 years from now when they scream hell with Israel or USA because they also “never forget”, we will have to take out that proxy with a new proxy. Proxy proxy proxy

[Anonymous]

Maybe if we leave people alone, they won’t hate us.

Let’s try that for a change

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:honest question for the OP - if the Iranian regime is somehow overthrown or dislodged as part of this action, what type of government do you envision taking its place?

My hope is for free elections/democracy and beyond that I don’t think anyone can say. Maybe it will be much better, maybe only slightly better. But it certainly can’t be worse. I genuinely don’t see how it could get worse unless something like the Taliban takes over, and I just don’t see that happening for a variety of reasons (pretty much zero Iranians want that and there is really no precedent for it in Iran).

No precedent? No precedent?

What do you call the past 45 years???

Certainly there is precedent for Islamism/theocracy. What I meant was that there is no precedent for a Taliban-style government. There is a lot of daylight between the current Iranian regime (as terrible as they are) and the Taliban.

The Taliban started as an American proxy that turned against us. The Islamic republic of Iran also started as an American proxy that turned against us. There is definitely precedent here for another Taliban if not worse.

We will have a new proxy in town to take out the old proxy in Iran and 20 years from now when they scream hell with Israel or USA because they also “never forget”, we will have to take out that proxy with a new proxy. Proxy proxy proxy

+1. Maybe we should stop interfering in other countries affairs, creating factions within them for our own selfish reasons and then abandoning these very countries. Let’s focus on fixing our own plethora of domestic problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank you OP for sharing your perspective. I was speaking with a friend of mine whose family left years ago when the Shah was overthrown. Her perspective was nearly word for word the same as yours. The progressive talking points du jour is to be vehemently anti-Isreal without regard for the larger context of the threat of a nuclear capable Iran being horrific for the whole world. The Iranian regime only understands strength and view diplomacy as weak and, history has shown, led by those who are easily fooled. [/quotethats becausec’thr shah’ was an American friendly dictator installed by the cia & mi6 after the democratically elected leader was ousted. Your friend and her family were skimming off the top and allowing BP to leave the rest of Iran impoverished. Your friend was happy to leave the rest of her country men poor while she partied.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:honest question for the OP - if the Iranian regime is somehow overthrown or dislodged as part of this action, what type of government do you envision taking its place?

My hope is for free elections/democracy and beyond that I don’t think anyone can say. Maybe it will be much better, maybe only slightly better. But it certainly can’t be worse. I genuinely don’t see how it could get worse unless something like the Taliban takes over, and I just don’t see that happening for a variety of reasons (pretty much zero Iranians want that and there is really no precedent for it in Iran).

No precedent? No precedent?

What do you call the past 45 years???

Certainly there is precedent for Islamism/theocracy. What I meant was that there is no precedent for a Taliban-style government. There is a lot of daylight between the current Iranian regime (as terrible as they are) and the Taliban.

The Taliban started as an American proxy that turned against us. The Islamic republic of Iran also started as an American proxy that turned against us. There is definitely precedent here for another Taliban if not worse.

We will have a new proxy in town to take out the old proxy in Iran and 20 years from now when they scream hell with Israel or USA because they also “never forget”, we will have to take out that proxy with a new proxy. Proxy proxy proxy

+1. Maybe we should stop interfering in other countries affairs, creating factions within them for our own selfish reasons and then abandoning these very countries. Let’s focus on fixing our own plethora of domestic problems.

Can someone please explain what beef Iran has with the USA? Threatening the most powerful nation in the world doesn’t seem like a good idea?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe if we leave people alone, they won’t hate us.

Let’s try that for a change

This.

If Iran's government is so weak, let it's own people work directly with Israel to enact regime change. Once a new Iranian government is in power they can dismantle their own nuclear capabilities.

The US needs to stop fomenting endless coups and bringing death and destruction everywhere we go.

[Anonymous]

I work with Iranians, and I have never heard a single one call themselves Persian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am Iranian. My parents, their parents, and their parents’ parents were born and raised in Iran. If you wish to test my Farsi, feel free - I will respond. I also consider myself to be politically progressive, to the extent that seems relevant to anyone reading.

A nuclear armed Iran would place the entire world in peril and enable the current regime to retain its stranglehold on power indefinitely. No one wants an Iran with nukes - not Israel, not the US, not Europe, not the surrounding Arab countries, not even the Iranian people. But only Israel has been willing to do anything about it (in an extremely targeted and largely bloodless way thus far, I might add). And instead of praise, it has received nothing but moral opprobrium. I can only attribute this to a myopic form of anti-Zionism that has become popular in left-wing circles recently and seems to subsume all else, including patriotism and self-interest.

To back off now would be to relinquish a historic opportunity (not likely to repeat itself) to hobble this regime permanently. Nothing else has worked in nearly five decades, and many things have been tried - popular protest movements, sanctions, negotiations. Of course I am terrified for the people of Iran. Whatever happens, the road ahead will be a scary and difficult one for them. But IMO, intervention is far preferable to the alternative.

Many people expressing opposition to Israel’s actions or the idea of any kind of US intervention are doing so from a place of genuine concern for the Iranian people/US troops. Their perception is colored by US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. I will tell you that this is an entirely different scenario. The Iranian regime is extremely weak and unpopular. Its military power structure has already been largely decimated by Israel, and Khamenei is 86 years old. The people of Iran are increasingly young, educated, secular, and eager for political openness and contact with the rest of the world. This regime has been holding them hostage for 47 years, and if it obtains nukes, will do the same to the rest of the region and the world.

I’ve seen many posts claiming that Israel is dragging the US into a war to protect its own interests. No doubt, Israel will benefit greatly if Iran is de-fanged. But so will the rest of the world, including the United States and the Iranian people. Whatever one’s feelings are towards Israel/Netanyahu, I think it’s important to set those aside and look at objective reality. The choice here is not between intervention and the status quo. The choice is between intervention and a nuclear armed Iran. To the extent Israel prevents the latter, it will have done us ALL a great service.

If the Iranian people want a new regime maybe they need to revolt and overthrow their own government. The USA does not need to be a participant in their civil war. Why should American men and women fight for something they are not willing to do for themselves. Also, when your parents and grandparents were a part of the ruling class under the USA installed dictator Shah of Iran, your party had no problem with the killings and repression of the people. Maybe yall need to find a balance between the refugees such as your parents who benefited under the late Shah and the current Iranian regime. Either way, the US needs to stay the heck out. Fix your own crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone really wants to prove they’re Iranian

Exactly. Except ALL the Iranians I know call themselves Persian.

You think if OP started with “I am Persian” that the majority of Americans would know what that meant? People here are incredibly ignorant. I just watched a clip of Whoopi Goldberg claiming that in 2025 it’s somehow worse to be black in America than it is to be a woman in Iran, where you can be killed for going out in public with your hair uncovered. The ignorance of people is mind-boggling. I don’t doubt that op is from Iran and speaking the truth.

Tomatoes/Tomatoes. In America a Black man jogging in public can be killed for jogging in the wrong neighborhood; a young Black teenage boy can be shot for holding an Arizona Ice tea; a Black man can be pulled over for DWB and shot with his seat belt on and his toddler child in the backseat. My point is there is no reason to play in this Olympic sandbox or be dismissive of other's traumas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why can’t the people of Iran move for a regime change? Why is it on the rest of the world?

BOOM!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, do you think the US government should get involved in regime change in another country? It’s going to be one of those “if you break it, you buy it” situations again, like with Iraq.

What people don’t understand about Iran is that there is no succession plan for Khamenei. There are no tribal or ethnic or religious factions waiting in the wings. The Iranian people are largely united in their hatred of the regime and their desire for freedom and democracy. None of these things were true of Iraq or Afghanistan. I believe that if the US or Israel clears the way, the Iranian people will take care of regime change all on their own. They are an incredibly brave and resilient people.

You should go back to Iran and start a resistance. Not our country, not our problem

My point is that it is your problem, as an American. A nuclear armed Iran does not benefit you. Iran is an unpredictable rogue state that sowed chaos and exported terror for decades, and that’s without nukes. Americans should not let a preference for isolationism, distaste for Israel, etc. blind them to this reality.

A nuclear armed any country does not benefit America, yet NK, Pakistan, India, Israel, China, Russia, USA, France, and the UK all have nuclear weapons. They are deterrents. Ukraine was foolish for giving theirs up. Look how that has turned out for them. Iran is no more predictable than any other country listed above. The USA and Russia has sowed chaos over the world for more than a century, yet they have never used their nukes. I mean we the US have sowed chaos and funded wars throughout Central America, Africa, and Asia pre and post nuclear acquisition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Iranian. My parents, their parents, and their parents’ parents were born and raised in Iran. If you wish to test my Farsi, feel free - I will respond. I also consider myself to be politically progressive, to the extent that seems relevant to anyone reading.

A nuclear armed Iran would place the entire world in peril and enable the current regime to retain its stranglehold on power indefinitely. No one wants an Iran with nukes - not Israel, not the US, not Europe, not the surrounding Arab countries, not even the Iranian people. But only Israel has been willing to do anything about it (in an extremely targeted and largely bloodless way thus far, I might add). And instead of praise, it has received nothing but moral opprobrium. I can only attribute this to a myopic form of anti-Zionism that has become popular in left-wing circles recently and seems to subsume all else, including patriotism and self-interest.

To back off now would be to relinquish a historic opportunity (not likely to repeat itself) to hobble this regime permanently. Nothing else has worked in nearly five decades, and many things have been tried - popular protest movements, sanctions, negotiations. Of course I am terrified for the people of Iran. Whatever happens, the road ahead will be a scary and difficult one for them. But IMO, intervention is far preferable to the alternative.

Many people expressing opposition to Israel’s actions or the idea of any kind of US intervention are doing so from a place of genuine concern for the Iranian people/US troops. Their perception is colored by US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. I will tell you that this is an entirely different scenario. The Iranian regime is extremely weak and unpopular. Its military power structure has already been largely decimated by Israel, and Khamenei is 86 years old. The people of Iran are increasingly young, educated, secular, and eager for political openness and contact with the rest of the world. This regime has been holding them hostage for 47 years, and if it obtains nukes, will do the same to the rest of the region and the world.

I’ve seen many posts claiming that Israel is dragging the US into a war to protect its own interests. No doubt, Israel will benefit greatly if Iran is de-fanged. But so will the rest of the world, including the United States and the Iranian people. Whatever one’s feelings are towards Israel/Netanyahu, I think it’s important to set those aside and look at objective reality. The choice here is not between intervention and the status quo. The choice is between intervention and a nuclear armed Iran. To the extent Israel prevents the latter, it will have done us ALL a great service.

This is a very intelligent, sober analysis of the situation, and sadly it's being skewered by people so myopic in their hatred of Israel, Jews, and Iranian women that they would prefer the Iranian regime to continue torturing it's own citizens. American progressives have lost the thread; Iran needs regime change now and Israel should push ahead and finish the job. Aside from fundamentalist Shia still drunk on anti-Israel KoolAid in Lebanon, Yemen, and Qatar, the rest of the Middle East Sunni regimes will likely welcome a neutralized Iran. And to all the young Americans expressing righteous indignation about potential military involvement, you need to talk to people who lived thorugh the 1979 hostage crisis, the 1983 bombing in Lebanon, dozens of hostage situations, and all the other nonsense that Iran has sponsored since the 1970s.

Yeah. We've heard all about these possibilities and probabilities before with Iraq and Afghanistan. All the years, resources and life wasted on the hope that the population will be strong enough to bring about real change when we exit. How did that work out?

Perhaps this time, the population should go first and show us that they are ready to die for change before we commit the lives of our sons and daughters to back them up. Let them take the lead.

Again, my point is that it is in the clear interest of AMERICA to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. I’m not sure what’s with all the comparisons to Iraq other than both countries happen to be in the Middle East. This is a completely different scenario. I don’t think any credible expert on the region doubts that Iran is dangerously close to acquiring nukes. This isn’t a WMD-style deception being perpetrated by US war hawks. This is a real and urgent threat.

And re: whether we’ll be welcomed as liberators - again, I’m not advocating that the US occupy the country and install a western puppet government. I’m saying that, based on my knowledge of the region, the Iranian people will bring about regime change all on their own if they are given a fighting chance.

Okay Bibi. You have been playing this same tune since 1996. You are a liar and again fight your own battles. Always grifting and taking from the American people wile your people get free health care, housing, and education and Americans go without. Frack off!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Drop the bomb and take their oil. Their regime is despicable and if it was in power anywhere else in the world progressives would be in a full conniption fit. But Israel…

So you admit this is about benefiting Israel and not the US. Unsurprising.

[Anonymous]

Iran turned off its countries internet so unfortunately no Iranian living in Iran can reply.

But I seriously doubt most of them would care if their “supreme leader” was visited by a precision munition while having lunch with his son.

Those guys are pretty much total pricks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for sharing your perspective.

At the same time, do you really think a full-fledged US war on Iran will lead to a better outcome for the people who live there?

I think there’s a lot of doomerism going on and a “full-fledged war” is not going to go how people are imagining. A “full-fledged war” requires two sides and Israel has basically obliterated Iran’s capacity to fight back in like, a week. Without America’s help. They’ve also taken out all of Iran’s proxies is the region - Hamas, Hezbollah, the Assad regime. Russia is distracted and overextended. The Iranian people hate their government. No one is coming to save this regime. This is an easy win - Israel has already done all the dirty work. America should stop hand-wringing and worrying about another Iraq/Afghanistan/whatever other unrelated conflict and do what needs to be done to get this thing across finish line.

You know who else did not have any allies when we decided to go to war with them, Iraq. It took how many trillions of dollars, American and NATO lives before Iraq was bent to the USA will. I hope the US have enough idiot volunteers for the continuous, unending wars.