QuickTidal, on 03 March 2026 - 12:22 PM, said:
Grief, on 02 March 2026 - 11:46 PM, said:
I'm not a Shah apologist by any stretch but the last Shah is not especially comparable to the current regime. The current regime has most likely executed more of its opponents since the start of this year than the Shah did over his entire tenure.
Is he Mosaddegh?
Then he's worse than what they had democratically elected prior to that. A US puppet king is still puppet.
Mosaddegh dared to suggest that BP be audited to make sure they weren't stealing oil profits from the people of Iran...and the USA on behalf of BP was like "Nah, here have this king that's into our pocket instead"...like most other things in this world, the current strife can be traced back DIRECTLY to the United States action in the past (usually on behalf of oil interest).
I'm well aware, but the point was about the current regime and the Shah rather than Mossadegh. I personally disagree with the (common online) attempts to draw everything back to Mossadegh firstly because he held democratic power briefly, precariously, and imperfectly and secondly because there are 70 years of intervening history driven primarily by actual Iranians rather than the West. But that's getting besides the point: the Shah can be bad without being as bad as the current regime.
Onto some other points:
1. The whataboutism that comes up constantly around Trump is tiring. We're talking about unilateral aggression in breach of international law. It turns out that people are more likely to criticize the aggressor in these situations. Who knew I guess. People do not need to caveat everything they say with "obviously theocratic dictatorships suck". I'd hope we can take that as a given.
2. We only really know when a World War starts in hindsight. It isn't something we can really say
has or
has not started until the dust settles. If linked conflicts continue to ripple out, it's quite possible that future historians will pinpoint WW3s start date as Feburary 2022.
3. The talking point about "Death to America" chants is based on a deliberately dodggy translation. Farsi uses the literal word death in a ton of idioms. For example, if you want to tell someone to shut up you tell them to go die. Protestors chant "Death to the Islamic Republic" and there have been chants of "Death to Russia" now and then too. (These are rarely reported of course). There are also less serious uses of the idiom itself. Proper Farsi sources generally translate the phase as "Down with America". It's obviously an anti-American slogan but it's not really calling for the wanton destruction of the American people or nation. The trope in American media about crowds of people chanting for American blood is essentially propaganda. The situation is somewhere closer to people chanting "fuck Russia" than it is to say... "bomb Iran". If you're basing your own views on that sort of thing, then I might re-examine them and where you got them. (English uses similar idioms. If you've ever groaned "kill me now" because of your boss, said that you could "murder some french fries", or boasted about how you're going to "destroy" your friend's sports team, then you have something in common with this phrase).
4. This feels like a catastrophe for America's global standing and for nuclear proliferation more generally. America is proving it cannot negotiate predictably and or behave within a reliable set of norms. Other countries are going to be eyeing up their options and the most obvious ones look like cozying up to someone that can intervene to protect you (like China) or getting nuclear weapons yourself.
5. Markets are taking a beating but largely seem to be assuming this will be short and sweet, so there could be worse to come if they are wrong. I'm seeing more and more questions about the strength of US debt as a safe haven asset.
Normally, when a big sell off hits riskier assets (=stocks go down) you would expect the safe havens to do better (=US treasury prices go up / yields go down). People sell the risky assets to buy the safe ones. What is happening now is that stocks are going down and US treasury prices are... also going down (/ yields up). That implies people are not buying up US debt as a safe haven the same way they have in the past. This is the same thing that spooked the US early last year, during its standoff with China. Speculation that the safe haven effect is basically being offset by uncertainty and the looming threat of more inflation. The dollar is outperforming other currencies that are even more exposed to the conflict, which makes more sense. It's not only US bonds that seem to be struggling to hold their safe asset position either.
Help
