DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Iran's Islamic Regime is Falling

I'm surprised there isn't a thread on this already (or if there is, it somehow isn't on Page 1).

This is seriously one of the biggest event of the last 50+ years happening right now, right in front of us. The people of Iran are in full revolt against the Islamic regime, there are reports of Khamenei having a full-blown exit plan to Moscow, people attacking their security forces, women are publicly removing hijabs, people are standing up against Sharia Law... and it is spreading across the entire nation with protests or outright revolts happening in 220+ cities/towns. People are literally putting up signs renaming streets "Trump Street". Please reserve your commentary on their choice of name for another thread, the point is they are openly doing this in a dictatorship that monitors their every movement.

This isn't just huge for the people of Iran, this is a world changer. To quote one Iranian-born woman on the 'gram, "this might end up being bigger than the fall of the Berlin Wall", and I agree.

From my understanding it's mainly over the huge, runaway inflation they are suffering.



No matter the main motivation behind this, nothing would make me happier than to see Iran become a democracy. I don't know about it being bigger than the fall of the Berlin wall but it rates pretty high on the list.

As long as we don't get involved militarily I'm all for it and support they overthrow their government. It would be one less huge headache for us and our national security. Of course then again we never know who would be taking over and in control. sometimes things can go from "worse to worser."

Well, the prevailing thoughts seem to be that the Pahlavi's will return (crown prince from before the islamic revolution). I, too, would love to see it become a true republic/democracy, but I will gladly settle for nearly anything other than what is there now.

As for the impact, I'm not sure it can be overstated. The single largest source of instigation of unrest in the Middle East suddenly becomes friendly to the West? That same nation which is a strategic partner of China, Russia, and N. Korea and another major oil supplier to China suddenly becoming friendly to the West? This, combined with Venezuela, is MASSIVE. Iran is also a major (the primary?) supplier of drones for Russia... if that suddenly ends, how does Ukraine look in six months??

Oh Venezuela is massive alright but I think we have a different opinion of what that means.

Iran is one of the founding members of OPEC. As you know it's an oil collective who works together to establish global oil prices and sells its oil as a collective.

Regardless of opinion on how Venezuela happened, and I don't want to steer this thread into that because it has its own thread already, the net result is that it is going to become West-friendly. Additionally, it is the world's largest source of Heavy Crude, which means the U.S. is no longer reliant on Canadian/Albertan Heavy Crude so we have political capital to negotiate with there.... but the bigger/biggest aspect is that they fed that Heavy Crude to Russia, China, and N. Korea, and that will be stopping.

Now, we add in what is happening in Iran - which, by the way, the original Islamic Revolution was indirectly backed by the Soviet Union's support for Iranian Marxists, so this is a full-on coming-full-circle Cold War leftover - and you can see there are MAJOR dominoes falling on the world stage. This will dry up lots of funding for state-sponsored terrorism globally because most of it flowed from Iran via their oil sales to China. No longer will there be people running Iran's purse strings that are friendly to those groups. BUT wait, there's more! Anywhere from 15%-25% of China's crude imports come from Iran.... and when this regime falls and Iran becomes friendly to the West and Europe, you can expect that to be shut off. But wait, there's MORE! Russia frequently uses Iranian tankers to export its oil... and THAT will likely dry up now, too.

Basically, the ramifications of this is simply massive.

If by this you intended to suggest that this means who they sell to, you're mistaken. It's a cartel that sets the prices, but not a "warehouse" that determines where it all gets sold. Iran has been selling their sanctioned oil to China and others for years, and like Venezuela, they often sold at cheap prices to offset favors/support from China.
They actually sell very little oil to Russia, but they do sell drones to them. They also, oddly, sold oil to Venezuela.

I'm not the one who brought up Venezuela into this thread but I get it. There is a portion of our society who thinks the ends justifies the means at all costs.

To stay on track, to what extent, or what measures do you think would be justified for the U.S. to carry out or be involved with moving forward to bring about a change in Iran's government if they felt the need to?

I only brought up Venezuela in the context of how its ramifications dovetail globally with the ramifications of what is happening here and I didn't want to derail this Iranian thread with that.


I think the U.S. stays out of it unless/until Khameini's people begins slaughtering its people, then it's gloves off.... and then we merely lend all the support we can to hold the uprising together.

I just saw a report that Khameini is bringing in 800 Iraqi "gunmen" to begin squashing things, so the gloves may come off sooner rather than later. I don't know how much truth is behind that headline, but I wouldn't bet against it. Hopefully, their game plan is more of a stand-up fight against the protestors and not a repeat of an Iraqi IED-fest. I hope the Iranian people - and parts of the Iranian military - stand up and prevent us from feeling any need to act. I think the U.S. just needs to hold girlfriend's hair while she vomits up what she drank; we don't need to go punishing the bartender or do any sympathy puking.


I think a big part of things is what happens with the people over the next 24 and 48 hours. Pahlavi has asked them all to act at 8pm tonight and 8pm tomorrow night to let him know if they want him to return and that this will largely impact what happens next. I think the people are fully ready for this and I just hope that Pahlavi has the stones to step into the role he inherited, even if it is in a transitional nature; e.g. step in and restore the pre-Islamist Iran, then step aside for proper elections, etc..

By no means, even if everything goes perfectly, will this be an instantaneous "Kumbaya". The Islamists (and when I say that, I do not simply mean Muslims, but specifically those who support Islam as a political thing with Sharia Law and all that garbage) will not simply give up and walk away. They will fight, they may go underground, they may pull a Hamas and become a "legitimate" political party for elections... they will have to be rooted out and any interim government that comes in will have to take steps to outlaw them immediately, to make Sharia unacceptable and illegal. They have to recognize that they are an enemy that will use any new system against the people to get back to what they've had. You can't shoot an ideology, you have to smother & suffocate it until it dies off over time.

Nobody seems to care about this, which is silly, but it doesn't offer an avenue to argue about Trump so I get it..... BUT, to continue the thread, it seems that last night the Iranian government cut their country off from the internet and international phone networks.

The more important thing is the people heard Pahlavi and they came out in force. Demonstrations have included cries in support of the shah (Pahlavi), who is the son of the last shah who left the country ahead of the 1979 revolution, something that could bring a death sentence in the past.

What to Know

• Trump called Pahlavi a “nice person” but said it would not be appropriate to meet with him.
• Pahlavi, son of Iran’s last shah, leads the monarchist faction of the fragmented Iranian opposition.
• Trump told The Hugh Hewitt Show podcast the U.S. should “let everybody go out there and see who emerges.”
• His comments indicate Washington has not backed Pahlavi’s offer to lead a transition if Iran’s government collapses.
• Protests in Iran have escalated amid economic crisis and a plunging currency, prompting authorities to impose an internet blackout.
• Trump renewed warnings that the U.S. would respond “very hard” if Iranian forces target demonstrators.
• Pahlavi thanked Trump for his support and urged European leaders to act more decisively.
• Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei dismissed U.S. threats, vowing to “bring the enemy to its knees.”
• The unrest comes as Iran faces shrinking alliances abroad and mounting domestic challenges, including water shortages.

I suspect that Trump and the U.S. have thoughts on a democratic government going in, but while I like that idea in the long term, I think that getting Pahlavi in as the bridge to that makes the most sense.

I think history should be a solid guideline for what it costs and how it turns out when the U.S. gets involved in trying to help install regime changes. The track record is dismal.