Exclusive War with Iran starting this week? (7 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Just want to pick up this point about who leads Iran if this regime is removed. It's been said that the Shah's son, Reza Pahlavi, could be emplaced.

But why? What has Pahlavi done to qualify to even lead a school board, let alone a country?

He hasn't been in Iran since he was 19. His education record was spotty, as he dropped out of school, went to another school where he seldom attended class, bounced around and eventually got a degree.

His father's closest allies wanted the Shah to pass over Reza in favor of his younger son, Ali-Reza, to succeed him. They thought Ali-Reza would be a more capable governor. The Shah declined. Ali-Reza is no longer an option, having committed suicide in 2011.

Oh, and elections? Well, there wouldn't be a need for them, because Reza Pahlavi already has named his eldest daughter his successor. Primogeniture and all that.
 
"People trust me only."

I've heard that line before, and I can't remember it ever working out well.

 
Pahlavi's sole qualification is his father was installed as shah (emperor) following a bloody coup organized by the CIA in 1956, which overthrew the democratic popular government. Their "crime" was nationalizing the oil industry and establishing diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union. The coup was one of many that overthrew democratic governments as part of cold war and for business profits.
 
Iran needs to hold elections and elect their own leader. Simple. What we think just doesn't apply to their country. So far we have failed to keep our own leaders accountable. The US does not have the right to install a sovereign nations leader.
 

WW3 fears explode as Putin crony makes 'insane' Trump claim - 'Any event could trigger it'​

Russia's former Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev has issued yet another horror warning.​


A top ally of Vladimir Putin has launched a scathing attack against Donald Trump after issuing yet another chilling World War 3 warning. Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s former president, cautioned that the world is nearing a major confrontation, claiming that US actions could trigger WW3 and that a "global catastrophe" may be imminent.

He said: "Has the Third World War already begun, or is the world still not entering it, are we balancing? Formally, no, but if Trump continues his insane course of criminal regime change, it will undoubtedly begin. And any event could trigger it. Any event. This is a war by the US and its allies to maintain global dominance. The pigs don't want to give up their trough.

"Trump made a grave mistake. With his decision, he put all Americans under potential attack, even though the Iranian regime is not well-liked in neighboring Arab countries. The main thing is that the late Ayatollah was the spiritual father of nearly 300 million Shiites. And now he's also a martyr. You can fill in the rest yourself. And now there's no doubt that Iran will redouble its efforts to develop nuclear weapons."

...

Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, offered condolences on Sunday following the death of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and condemned the killing in unusually forceful terms. He described the act as “a murder committed in cynical violation of all norms of human morality and international law,” signalling Moscow’s sharp disapproval and underscoring the deepening geopolitical shockwaves triggered by the incident.

On Saturday, Mr Medvedev said: "The peacekeeper is at it again. The talks with Iran were just a cover. Everyone knew that," Medvedev wrote on social media. "So who has more patience to wait for the enemy’s sorry end now? The US is just 249 years old. The Persian Empire was founded over 2,500 years ago. Let’s see what happens in 100 years or so…"


Recently, Russian propagandists threatened to carry out a horror strike on Europe in response to Iran’s missile attack, as the experts blamed Donald Trump for "unwittingly creating political and psychological opportunities."

 
Question for mods: Are we okay with threads being flooded with Twitter posts? I believe this has come up before — can we revisit that discussion?

This space should be for debate and discussion, not a dumping ground for our Twitter feeds. The problem is that Twitter posts can "prove" anything:
  • Trump is terrible? There's a tweet for that. ✓
  • Trump is a saviour? There's a tweet for that. ✓
  • Israel is corrupt and powerful? There's a tweet for that. ✓
  • Israel is a moral exemplar? There's a tweet for that. ✓

If contradictory narratives can all be "supported" by cherry-picked tweets, what's the actual value? Can we agree on some ground rules for sourcing?
 
Question for mods: Are we okay with threads being flooded with Twitter posts? I believe this has come up before — can we revisit that discussion?

This space should be for debate and discussion, not a dumping ground for our Twitter feeds. The problem is that Twitter posts can "prove" anything:
  • Trump is terrible? There's a tweet for that. ✓
  • Trump is a saviour? There's a tweet for that. ✓
  • Israel is corrupt and powerful? There's a tweet for that. ✓
  • Israel is a moral exemplar? There's a tweet for that. ✓

If contradictory narratives can all be "supported" by cherry-picked tweets, what's the actual value? Can we agree on some ground rules for sourcing?

Yes, there is no problem with Twitter/X posts.

This is an open discussion.

The only thing not allowed is personal insults.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top