>You will understand nothing about world events since mid-70s until you wrap your head around US's decision to throw the Shah under the bus and prop up the Ayatollah regime.

Yes, the United States replaced a friendly regime with a hostile one, that makes sense. The Shah was doing so well, much beloved by the Iranian people, so believed that his secret police force SAVAK in some ways compares unfavorably to the SS and the NKVD in terms of forms of elaborateness and systemization of torture.

The narrative you're suggesting doesn't have internal coherence, unless you're saying that Jimmy Carter conspired with Ronald Reagan to lose the election and that when the western powers did arms deals with Iraq in the 1980s they didn't really sell them any weapons, somehow...it just doesn't make any sense to anyone in possession of even a few facts that a neutral party would consider undisputed.

The Shah was a brutal, incompetent, and out-of-touch dictator who paid lip-service to western values while committing countless crimes, going agains the wishes of the overwhelming majority, and failing to invest in even the most basic infrastructure.

And this game looks great, precisely because it deals with the complexities involved in being an average person having to balance two very different forms of dictatorship, neither of which believes in free association, free speech, or free elections, and is willing to commit mass murder to get it's way.