> The truth is that Iran’s regime is indeed a very shitty one

Relative to their last, America-backed regime? I don't think you're looking at this from an Iranian perspective at all.

The regime is spectacularly unpopular with the majority of Iranians.

I get this a lot from a guy I do trust, and his old man is an Iranian immigrant, but I also recognize my sources are very biased against the regime.

Is there any good reporting out there or sentiment analysis that can show this? Or is it all word of mouth on the Internet? It's okay if there is nothing, but I'd feel a lot better if there was something substantial to back this up too.

Look up the demonstrations in Iran within the last ten years and/or since 2022.

How many of them are in favour of having their cities leveled by a rogue state?

I would be very interested in hearing an Iranian perspective on how daily life changed for people when the Islamic Republic deposed Pahlavi.

You can tell its a shitty one when a resource rich nation don’t prosper.

The number of resource rich nations that do prosper are few and far between. It’s more the exception than the rule.

> some proper bombings

and a war that killed 400,000 Americans.

You want to repeat that history?

Here's some history I don't want to repeat:

1939, Nazi Germany starts fucking around and nobody does anything about it and then we have WWII on our hands.

You've totally missed the point. It's precisely because we didn't "properly" bomb Germany to stop that first invasion of Poland, that WWII happened and we lost 400,000 Americans, 6 million Jews etc.

The only thing this parent got wrong is the dates. Historians seem to generally think that Hitler's regime would have collapsed if the West had stood up to:

* The militarization of the Rhineland in 1936

* The Anschluss with Austria in March 1938

* The annexation of the Sudetenland (and the rest of Czechoslovakia) in October 1938

The German army was weak in the 1930s and his generals very hesitant. Hitler's "reckless" successes gave him credibility and power.

Apparently Hitler was genuinely surprised when the west declared war after the invasion of Poland. He expected the cowardly West to roll over again.

I recommend Childers' "World War II: A Military and Social History" if you're into this kind of thing.

Historians seem to generally think that Hitler's regime never would have existed if the West had not bent Germany over a barrel in 1918 and immediately after.

I mean, if we're going to ruminate over alternate timelines why fast forward to the 1930s..?

Correct. The western Allies took that lesson to heart at the end of WW2 and rebuilt Germany and Japan. It's almost like we can learn from history!

Not exactly, it was rather that the Treaty of Versailles was painful enough to cause resentment but wasn't harsh enough to cripple Germany. Even so, Weimar Germany managed to stabilize the situation for a decade or so, it's only with the Great Depression that finally broke the Republic's back (and even then, there were all sorts of political shenanigans that could have been manuvered better).

Furthermore, the foreign policy of the Nazis was informed more by their ideological myths than external events. After all, the Nazis admired the Great Imperialist Powers like the British Empire as part of the "Aryan Race". Their enmity was directed at Eastern Europe and the Communists, which had little to do with the enactment of post-war reparations on Germany.

There is alot of paralllels between the mindset of the populace then and today, especially in this thread that enabled Hitler's confidence. The famous Oxford Union "King and Country Debate" in 1933 declared with 275 for and 153 against that "This House under no circumstances would fight for King and Country". It was stated to have a tremendous impression of Hitler's decision-making when generals pushed back against his aggresive actions, and his bluff was rewarded well.

Well, skip forward in 2023 and here we are again...

https://cherwell.org/2023/05/28/oxford-union-votes-not-to-fi...

I don't think the issue is whether the history in the comparison is correct, but rather whether or not it is an apt comparison at all.

So we should bomb Israel now as they're fucking around?

I think the post war political movement in America that produced the Martial Plan was exceptional. The situation now in terms of institutions, leadership and doctrine is nothing like that. It is difficult to believe that America of today could help a country in that way. Accountability is too fractured. Profiteering has become a way of life. And fundamentalism is too strong.