One side is responsible for the "pax Americana" (but everyone here was born into the time period and so doesn't realize how exceptionally peaceful it is)
One side is responsible for at least 20.000 but more likely 60.000 Iranian deaths, just this year (and everybody seems to be worried about the other side's "warcrimes")
Not having big issues to figure out between these 2 who is the good guy ...
And we haven’t even gotten to the impacts of fertilizer shortages during growing season.
And either way, how is replacing the leader of a terrible regime, with his even more hardline son, help with the killing in any ways?
The pro Democracy forces in Iran have been completely discredited and the one best opportunity they would have had to reclaim their country, during what was likely to be a contested transfer of power if the 80+ year old Ayatollah had passed naturally, has been lost. Instead the U.S. allowed the Iranian regime to transfer power without any challenges, transfer power to a guy who is the son of the old Ayatollah and even more close aligned with the IRGC, and has destroyed the pro-Democracy bases in Iran while strengthening the orthodoxy because the U.S. has been blowing up cities, where the anti-regime forces live, while the rural areas, where the regime’s supporters live, have been largely untouched.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp8621gnknjo
Calling in a massive airstrike on a prison where the opposition is being held isn't exactly the way to support the opposition.
Oh, AND they succeeded at that.
The Pax Americana is great, but given America was one of the countries to start this war, I don't know how much credit they can get for something they just ended.
I can see people attributing this to the US as well after reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta....
Oh and it was Britain that was supporting the Shah. The US was involved, mostly to counter the KGB, but not much at all. I totally don't understand why Britain gets a free pass.
And you'd think communists would stop supporting the mullahs, especially after the killings. You'd be wrong:
http://marxist.com/imperialists-and-pahlavis-hands-off-iran....
Sometimes one gets the impression the left now is reduced to ... well. Iran's government massacres protestors, tortures women, represses it's own people, has committed genocides and tries actively to commit more genocides, attacks and murders innocent people outside of Iran and makes weapons for Moscow.
Leftists, at least the ones on online fora, care about exactly 1 of those things.
1.5M dead Koreans
3M dead Vietnamese
500,000-1,000,000 dead or displaced Iraqis
Coups in Honduras, Chile, Haiti, Guatemala, Venezuela, Syria, Libya...
Pax Americana my ass. Tell that to the global south
Oh, and levels of taxation even Karl Marx would immediately agree are theft. In fact, ending the pre-pax-Americana period is what the manifesto is about. (the period stupidly referred to as "modern times", where the rich aren't fighting over who gets to mars first, but massacring poor people to gain a few square kilometers of land, which ironically Soviets know all about)
I get that that's hard to see for anyone born far enough away from the beginning of the pax Americana, ie. let's say 5-10 years after world war 2 but that's really how things work.
And that means that you just won't believe the consequences of any real victory against the US either: a return to the norm. If Iran wins, immediately, 50 genocides will start. Not just in Iran. Global trade will freeze 90%, not just oil. Inequality will explode worldwide. And that's just the start. In a way, that's what Iran is fighting for.
Ignore the genocide the US is engaged in right now, if it loses the war it started with Iran there will be 50 hypothetical genocides that I made up! Why stop at 50? Maybe there will be 500 or 5,000 genocides! If not for the benevolence of the US, we'd be having another world war every 2-3 years. It just stands to reason I suppose.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZT-wVnFn60
And how it affected normal people:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgyB6lwE8E0
My grandfather explained this in much harsher terms to me (he's dead now, even though he got past 100 years), with explicit mention of which of 2 options is the better one: killing 100 people in your own city or returning to this situation again. He was a baby at the end of WW1 and lived through (with kids of his own) WW2.
(but even that beats how Iran's islamic government treats it's own citizens. Did you know primary school children make excellent demining equipment, and on top of that make very cheap poison gas detectors? The islamic mullahs sure do: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_key_to_paradise )
They would compel them, by law, to be fed to the meat grinder. And not to defend their homeland, but to murder civilians in another hemisphere, and apparently i must remind you, TO THE TUNE OF 4,500,000 DEAD CIVILIANS IN KOREA AND VIETNAM ALONE.
Back in the day, during WWII, he was defusing bombs and mines while a young boy scout.
So, you know, not just Iran - the UK also.
Well having just checked the stats i think you're very much wrong, and taking a lot of credit for the US where it isn't due.
Oversee is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.
The situation can't improve while the USA are doing everything they can to antagonize these places, isolate them, alienate them from their neighbors. Seeing ruthless authoritarians prevail there is completely expected.
But Cuba and Venezuela govts deserved what they got, and it was plenty of our business being in our backyard.
"it's purely a reaction to the authoritarian regime of the Shah previously used to further American interests"
Seriously? THAT is what you think Khomeini wanted and his grandson or whoever wants now?
"And same goes for Cuba, Venezuela, etc."
Oh, you're a "communism really only ever wanted good things for it's people, and it's America's fault they started shooting their own citizens" ... got it.