Because Iran is a developed country and the Iranian population actually has a future if they take their government back from the clerics?

Hell, in the next 30 or so years oil will disappear from the middle east, and Iran is just about the only country that has a realistic shot at still having an economy after that.

Libya was pretty developed with an educated population, decent economy etc too, more developed then Iran I'd say.. look how that turned out. State collapse is no joke.

there are private banks and operations similar to BlackWater, like Osherbrand and many others that steal, murder and take capital from the public by re-enforcing external threats and then providing "rescue" via their private fleet to extract the corrupt politicians for 30% to 70% commissions and murder away anyone hindering them. Collapse my ass, it's foreign influence and internal corruption. Like always.

Be neutral and objective, but America, Ukraine and Israel are currently the most agresively operating forces salivating over WW3. Yes, Russia is also quite brutal, but it's not going to profit from WW3 on the stock market!

Who are the PROFITEERS of this?

How can WE fight this war mongering?

Do we need to get active on the Battlefield? Do we need to sabotage Sattelite Networks, disarm financial incentives etc. etc. to combat those who want a WW3?

Only billionaires are going to become richer from a war. Everyone else will eat radioactive food and their DNA will be wiped out forever from the human gene pool. Seem like an Eugenic goal

Ukraine is being invaded in a genocidal war to try to annex them and delete them from the map, by Russia. Russia signed the Budapest Memorandum with Ukraine for them to surrender their nukes.

All while Russia is threatning with nuclear destruction of Ukraine and Western countries.

So, how the hell is Ukraine salivating over WW3 and Russia isn't LMAO

aggressive and loaded comment you made here.

Actions provoking WW3 are as I commented. You've not made a valid counter argument and have only chose PARTISANSHIP. Which I have not.

I suggest etiquette and neutral speech before spitting hate in internet forums.

> aggressive and loaded comment you made here.

I disagree, but in light of your previous comment, it doesn't shock me.

> Actions provoking WW3 are as I commented.

You're wrong, they're not. You have pretty clearly chosen PARTISANSHIP by stating a country being invaded and fighting for their lives and sovereignty as the ones salivating for WW3.

It's a remarkable backward-thinking exercise. Russia is clearly:

- violating International Law, the UN Charter, and many other agreements and memoranda;

- all while threatening nuclear annihilation of Ukraine, UK, USA and other European countries;

- Attacking and destroying third countries' civilian infrastructures;

Among other atrocities and crimes.

But somehow, through magical thinking, you deem them as the victims here who have nothing to gain from this.

You are not OK with stock market gains, but you're OK with Russia stealing Ukrainian natural resources, their population, including kidnapped children?

Let me ask you this: according to your logic, were Hitler and Stalin the victims, and was Poland salivating for starting WW2?

Nothing in their comment was aggressive, nor was it partisan. I think what's happening is you didn't like what they said, and you didn't really know how to approach that so you just decided to resort to ad hominem, much like a small child would.

Libya was also tribal in its core. Nation building takes decades if not centuries and cannot be substituted by quick oil money.

Iran is not tribal, it is a fairly ancient empire with strong continuity over 2500 years. Approximately as old as Rome, but with no collapse.

Iran will almost certainly hold together if the current batch of rulers disappears. It survived even the Mongols.

> if they take their government back from the clerics?

They took back their government and they “gave” it to the clerics back in C20

The Iranians by and large have the state they want. Strong parallel with Irish history where independence brought about a theocratic Junta. That only went away with deeper integration into the European economy.

Are we forgetting the pushback against nationalisation of their oil industry, operations involving both CIA and MI6, the propaganda campaign to get rid of their elected president, and other such fun? It's not like the west didn't have some rather significant involvement and incentive here. They have what they have because the west (as is common) messed with another nation.

No, nobody is ever forgetting that. It gets shoved into everyone's faces at EVERY opportunity. This is strange, because when it comes to moral failings, oil profits and corruption aren't on any serious person's radar.

Because what does get forgotten is that socialists worldwide strongly supported the revolution, from Moscow to Brazil, Berlin to New York, including supporting khomeini. With the UK's campaign "khomeini doesn't seek power, just wants to free Iran" message (spread by the BBC), and France's asylum and help. Protest marches in support of what turned out to be murderous islamists in every capital.

As for tactics: Khomeini (let's be honest here: it was Khomeini) organized snipers to shoot into the security services during a protest, provoking a battle where 89 people died ... at which point Khomeini declared that "4,000 innocent protesters were massacred by Zionists".

The protestors, whipped up by leftists did not take khomeini at his word, organized a general country-wide strike ... Khomeini organized further attacks on both his allies and the government, each time blaming zionists, never losing socialist support ... and 2 years later, now in power, Khomeini organized a massacre to "purify" Iranian society of his socialist allies, at least 3800 brutally executed, including high school students, one at most 7 years old. He has kept killing, and khamenei has continued the killings, some years 300, in the last decade more like 1000 every year.

Famously khamenei declared that "executing minors is illegal, if they're virgins". By which he meant that female prisoners are to be raped multiple times before execution. [1]

But I guess that's better than vague oil corruption and evil western influence, isn't it? Never mind that of course the revolution has totally failed Iran. They did not bring jobs, did not bring housing, did not ... in the 50 years they have in power.

Needless to say, more people died in Khomeini's purification than in every other part of the revolution combined. Hell, more people died in the last 5 years of "islamic" peace, than died in the 5 years of the revolution.

[1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/12/iran-security...

Maybe we're missing one another here but it appears you're arguing for me. Khomeini is in place _because_ of western influence/involvement, if it weren't for operation Ajax/Boot (depending on whether we're talking CIA or MI-6 naming) and the various aspects of the associated propaganda then Mosaddegh may have remained in power (I say maybe because it was quite unstable times in the early 50s Iran) and Khomeini may never have gained power.

> Because Iran is a developed country and the Iranian population actually has a future if they take their government back from the clerics

They're talking about the current regime, from which it isn't clear the population will ever successfully take back their country.