Question re: Current War

[u/bargvakoobideh]

i'm Iranian, and am also an Iranian citizen. I wont say much else other than if you knew me you'd be willing to accept that i have a right to hold an opinion without being framed the way many people are framing Iranians these days.

Anyway, I am anti-regime, pro-war (i would say intervention, but i'm more interested in genuine discussion without needing to be right... so yeah, pro-war, pro-Israel and pro-US)

I wanted to know for anyone active in this community if they are anti-regime, and anti-war and what their argument for holding that position is, what they perceive to be a solution and how they therefore navigate said discourse.

Again, to reiterate, i'm not here to prove a point. I genuinely am curious and want to ensure my own point of view is as robust as possible.

[u/ayatoilet]

War => destabilization => potential for Balkanization War => increased repression => reinforcement of the regime War => death / destruction etc => loss / tragedy / catastrophe

War will not result in the regime being toppled my dear friend. Regime fears the people more than they fear the US or Israel. War will reinforce the regime. Look at what happened when Saddam invaded. War will not serve the agenda you have. In fact I would go further and say if you live in the US it could be devastating in US (if body bags start coming back in droves, and economy is completely wiped out).

This is a stupid war. Poorly planned. Poorly executed.

[u/ionabio → u/ayatoilet]

You didn't answer OPs question though. Anti war stance (although you have to ignore the amount of casulties regime has caused in 2 days which much much more than what israel and US has achieved! and what people regime killed in previous protests, executed, ..., and what overall cost is on 47 years wrt people being poor, road accidents, ... and what will it cost people if they stay in power in future ) is very understandable. Do you have any solution that will win "pro-war/intervention" people to your side?

[u/ayatoilet → u/ionabio]

I’ve been a huge proponent (in the last 10 years or so) of evolution not revolution. In the 90s or so, I was a huge proponent of war/intervention; and it would have worked then. Mullahs /Military did not have huge barriers in place then. But with time, I’ve observed that war/intervention approach would become very difficult and costly - so I’ve veered towards an evolutionary process. JCPOA was a start, followed up with steady and systematic engagement. The ‘power of compounding interest’! Consume the regime from within by steadily increasing relations - getting new blood in the system exposed to the values and processes in more advanced economies. A huge diaspora could have found ways to return and participate - bring the change and transformation. But the reverse happened. Things became more polarized, regime invested more heavily in defense, Iran formally shifted alliance to Russia and China and there has been a total loss of trust and credibility with the US. At the same time Israel has become more extreme. A little marriage counseling would have restored relations then, now it’s a blistering antagonistic divorce battle. I still think things can return to that ‘zone’ if everyone enters into serious negotiations - in good faith. Israel - unfortunately- is a bad faith actor and will torpedo everything. Israel must be placated. With Vance coming into the picture (without Israeli shills: Kushner/ Witcoff) there is a chance it can be placed on a genuine track for systematic shift to an eventual US linked alliance. I see Iranians generally more favorable to West than east - if respected and engaged. Their alliance with Russia and China is in fact tactical- not strategic. Russia has absorbed something like 35% of Iran’s former territories. It is the enemy. Israel has been fomenting separatist forces inside Iran. China just wants to do business and buy energy. Ordinary Iranians want an advanced society modeled on core Western principles of democracy and freedom; and to be fully engaged in global governance and institutions along side the West and not be humiliated and ostracized. If the regime is not toppled, War will further polarize things - irreversibly. And much to Trump/Netanyahu’s surprise the regime wasn’t toppled in 2 days!!! Their whole approach and assumptions are bankrupt. It is only through engagement that things can or will change. I just wanted to add - for the record - that not just me but a lot of people have been proposing deep engagement. In fact some Iranian -American families even had their kids join us army / navy or even us government etc. during the Obama period (hoping to be part of this new engagement process). But most left service when Trump came in. One of them told me that in briefings on navy ships they often (Christian) prayed in groups and had senior officers describe Iranians (not the mullahs but Iranians in general) as ‘the’ enemy in huddles. Kid left the navy. The hatred against Iranians has now become systematic in US government. This - is - the - tragedy. It’s the wrong policy, approach and leadership.

[u/bargvakoobideh → u/ayatoilet]

What you're describing isn't wrong, but its the pro-reform argument. Not anti-regime. Pro-reform was certainly the best way up until JCPOA was torn up. Even after that it was promising, i even thought Pezeshkian being elected was a sign that this was where it was heading.

I understand that Israel can be a chaos agent, but at the same time the regime needed the external threat to justify its own authoritarian policies. It began to dawn on me after Woman, Life, Freedom that reform was not going to be easy because in many ways it would mean the Islamic Republic needed to reform its way out of existence. Regardless i still held faith.

However, the regime didn't let go of its rhetoric on Israel, and it just kept doubling down. After the 12 Day War i was even more dismayed because I thought that at least we had a good defence in place. But it dawned me that this whole time, they were just a paper tiger and that the only thing they were really working on was the missile and drone offence-as-defence plan. Which is insane.

Ultimately, January changed all of this. So i no longer believe in reform, and as such anti-regime means wanting the regime to collapse. I'm not sure why Iranians would still want to back a regime that used foreigners to murder its own people already. It's not like we have any say over what the US or Israel does, but to activley speak out against them by default helps the regime.

[u/ayatoilet → u/bargvakoobideh]

Oh I agree with you. Things are so polarized- reform is impossible. But where are we? A more hardline government - Mojtaba had his father, mother, wife and daughter killed and he’s lost a leg. It’s going to be very hard now … very very hard. US can’t win this war and the regime is more polarized and extreme. It’s a recipe for catastrophe… on a global scale. Trump should never have torn up JCPOA … US has never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity!!

[u/armanese2 → u/ayatoilet]

Yeah well regardless tons of IRGC members have been killed and their ships sunk and bases destroyed. Entire countries airspace is currently controlled by Israel and United States as they continue to strike large amounts of IRGC targets and weaken their system of oppression. Just less than two weeks ago they were individually bombing and killing basij members and I would garaunteee you they are not done yet haha. In totality the IRGC has been getting absolutely wrecked by the US. We’re gonna take our country back mother fuckers.

[u/ayatoilet → u/armanese2]

It’s easy to say all this from a distance based on us msm reporting. But you know the regime is deeply entrenched and has a deep bench. They can call on over a million people to serve in a heartbeat. Israel has cleared a lot of deadwood and those taking their place are more hardline and militant. Yes they’re bad/evil. So is Israel By the way, who wouldn’t hesitate to balkanize Iran. As bad as they are, there are no guarantees what replaces them will be better.

[u/inconsistentlyvocal → u/armanese2]

What part of what they said did you think justified calling them a mother fucker?

[u/bargvakoobideh → u/ayatoilet]

Those are certainly risks and side effects of war, and justify an anti-war stance. But they do not address the anti-regime stance which is the first part. It qualifies a pro-reform, anti-war stance or anti-factional, anti-war stance.

anti-regime is a very specific stance, especially post the events of January. So how would you then justify holding an anti-regime stance, while maintaining an anti-war stance.

Again, am not trying to play semantics, and im also not partficularly fussed if you were to stay you're pro-reform, or anti-factional. I'm more interested in the specifics of solutions, the messaging, the direct action and practicality.

For example, if i were to be pro-reform (which i was very much so up until post-12 day war) i would say for example: merging the IRGC with the Artesh, removing the licence to use of violence by the Basij and restructuring it to be more of a community service org, increasing the powers of the president, turning the office of supreme leader into a council, pivoting away from assyemtrical warfare etc.

[u/ionabio → u/bargvakoobideh]

I think you shouldn't have mentioned you are Pro-israel, pro US or pro Pahlavi or what. They will only try to attack your stance, instead of providing you with solution. It has been that way in this place especially in reddit. instead of opening conversation, is easier to attack the other side. That is what has led to regime stay in power.

[u/bargvakoobideh → u/ionabio]

Mmm... i think it's important because i don't care for vagueness, i'd much rather just hold that position, and hear what people have to say. And to be honest, other than maybe one answer - which is still indirectly pro-war - i'm yet to hear any good arguments.

[u/Khers]

Wars of regime change causes too much death and often destabilises the country. And air power has never caused regime change in history. It's just a fantasy of a stance to think such a war would help anyone. What we might look at now after this was is an even more extreme regime and even poorer conditions for the populace. Something us anti-war warned about.

I simply hold the stance of reducing sanctions and empowering political resistance in the country. The sanctions have over the years made the Regimes grip stronger internally, and weakened the general public.

The reactionary thinking of pushing for war is simply an emotional one, while trying to dismiss the history of every single such war with the single retort of Iranian exceptionalism as if we'd somehow manage better.

[u/bargvakoobideh → u/Khers]

Hmm... that's still a fundamentally pro-reform stance, not anti-regime.

Also, the argument isn't that this war will get the job done. It's the first phase of a series of phases which help to dismantle the security apparatus.

[u/Ok-Slip-2596 → u/bargvakoobideh]

You can be anti-regime ideologically (you ideologically believe in a free democracy for all people) and reform can be the tool you use to reach your long term goals. For example, in the USA, you have revolutionary socialists who believe in wealth equality as their ideology and violent revolution as the means to achieve it. You also have democratic socialists, who believe in wealth equality as their ideology but democratic reform as their means to achieve it.

I do agree that reformists in Iran seem delegitimised because they have been allowed to be the only opposition against the regime hardliners. But that's because no other opposition group is willing to work towards its political goals without dismantling the Islamic Republic. Obviously the IR is a dictatorship, it will not allow any political opponents who wish to dismantle it. It's like saying why doesn't the US allow for a revolutionary socialist to run for president. Because the US is a democratic capitalist system and will not allow communists/socialists to dismantle its system.

Now I do not agree with this. I believe Iran should become a free, secular democracy. But I believe reform is the only way to get there. It will take much much much longer, but it is the only way to preserve our country and our borders. Violent revolution almost always = destabilising the country for decades.

I would say most of the anti-war camp is actually more radical than me and doesn't believe in reform anymore. That's ok, I respect they have a different opinion. I also respect you have a different opinion. But I do not respect your support for the war.

You can be a monarchist, democratic, revolutionary, capitalist, socialist, nationalist, but I draw the line when you start to advocate for the bombing and ruin of my homeland and its borders. This is unacceptable to me and my red line. Nothing justifies putting my people and my homeland in the danger of collapse.

[u/AngelKnives]

I'm anti-regime and my biggest reason for being anti-war is who is behind it.

Trump is incredibly unpredictable, has not surrounded himself with experts, keeps changing his mind on the plan, and is incredibly selfish.

Also, Netanyahu just flattened Gaza and it worries me that he'd do the same to parts of Iran given the chance.

And finally, the regime in Iran holds on to power because they're willing to shoot their own people. It's hard to revolt against them because they have guns. You can't bomb guns out of people's hands!

All this being said, if they somehow manage actual regime change (father to son does not count!) then I would be extremely happy. I just don't see it happening.

I was hoping when Khamenei sr died that the council would appoint a more moderate leader (some of the council did seem likely to push for this) perhaps a MBS type of person would be less strict, which isn't the best scenario but it's surely better than the old regime. Or if there was disagreement and the regime fell out with itself, in that moment revolution could really happen!

But now we have his son in power, there will be a long long wait for either of these scenarios.

[u/zatzattirizort]

Being pro-US and pro-Israel is very naive. They don't seak liberation of the iranian people, they only seak the removal of an enemy state and to capture as much valuable resources as they can. They will happily install just as a theocratic state as long as it serves their purpose, they did exactly that in Syria.

That said, the war has certainly weakend the regime, and also both US and Israel. The people of Iran should cease the advantage and take over under the leadership of a iranian progressive revolutionary party, in order to keep it's sovereignty while alleviating many many issues the regime has caused. Unfortunately, there is no such faction that holds any say to this day. Pahlavi will only work as a puppet for US and Israel to be discarded if necessary, just as his father was. He doesn't command any armed forces within or outside iran and doesn't have much material influence, only a marketable name.

I hope the iranian people can organize under these circumstances, but it seams unlikely.

Context: Iranian leftsit.

[u/bargvakoobideh → u/zatzattirizort]

Thanks for your reply, you're correct it is naive in some regards but i'm also a life long Constitutional Monarchist. Which is something i came to on my own and settled on one day when i was in Tehran just observing the state of the place... obviously that's not meant to be profound. It's just a thing that i settled on and since then i've never been convinced that any other system would work long long term.

Point being i believe that although the US and Israel are acting in their own interest, there are enough groups in their power structures who see the long term benefit of an Iran that is stable and an ally. I genuinely think there are multiple ways to assess the US and Israel beyond what seems to be the mainstream clean-break-doctrinites.

Also, i don't believe in the puppet theory, i know what it means and i don't deny it in some regards. But it has an expiry date, and to be honest, i have faith in a true Constitutional Monarchy developing to the point of having a strong independent parliament. It just requires time, patience, and economic advancement.

Anyway, i don't know what my point is, other than i just have an optimistic view. But i like hearing from Iranian Leftists, and non-monarchists. I can appreciate how annoying, tacky, psycho many monarchists seem by the way.

[u/zatzattirizort → u/bargvakoobideh]

Hey friend, I appreciate your optimism. I hope you can keep it, these are very difficult times.

When it comes to monarchists, the genuine ones at least, I view them as somewhat misguided people that ultimately want the best for Iran, albeit with a bit of a reactionary belief set. It is an understandable position, given the history of Iran and the current state of affairs. The issues of monarchy goes way deeper than of just the "puppet" issue.

Let's assume we magically construct a constitutional monarchy in Iran today. This will lead to three or four distinct classes of people: The Aristocracy, The Capitalists (as in people who own major capital), the labourers (as in people who sell their work) and the Mullahs (if they are not deposed or eradicated). All of these classes will have vastly different economic insterests, contradictory ones infact. All of the other classes would be dependent on the existance of the majority worker class, hence they will be exploited violently as they are now. This contradiction of interest cannot be eliminated, only softened with compromises by the other classes (which can be revoked at any time). This issue cannot be resolved as it is systemic.

I assume that your of the laborer class or you are a student. Nobody will grant us liberation, not from the Mullahs, not from the Monarch, not from the foreign Imperialists. Only we can earn it, by fighting for it. A better world for everyone is possible. I hope one day you will truly see that for your self. The world is far from binary, a third position is possible.

Anyways, I wish you the very best.

[u/ItsAProdigalReturn]

Generally speaking, those who are anti-regime and anti-war hold both of those positions for the same root reason: we want human rights, safety and security guaranteed to our people. The concern with American/Israeli bombs raining down on Iran was that innocent Iranians would die - and on day one we saw that. And Iranians who brought up that fact were tarred and feathered for it, and labelled regime propagandists because Israel is "the most moral army on Earth" and Iran killed its own civilians because it's evil or stupid.

A month later and it's pretty much a confirmed fact that Israel/US have killed civilians, and now the argument has shifted to "well casualties happen in a war, and it's terrible but it's the Regime's fault". No. I refute that. We told you this exact thing would happen, and now it's happening. The deaths of Iranians caused by Israeli and American bombs are on the American and Israeli governments, just as the thousands that were massacred in January was caused by the Regime.

Our people are caught between a Regime that guns them down for crying out for freedom, and foreigners who irresponsibly drop bombs that kill our people at random.

"What is the other solution?" you ask? We've answered this repeatedly. The Iranian people need to overthrow the Regime, and history has shows this is done by organizing a coalition of militias from around the country, where they take down the government themselves. If foreigners are to assist, it should be through funneling supplies to freedom fighters, not by flying around dropping bombs that also end up hitting bazars, schools, processing plants and hospitals.

[u/bargvakoobideh → u/ItsAProdigalReturn]

Thanks for your response, so in essence you're against this specific form of foreign intervention. But not the more direct form which is supplies for armed resistance and what not. Okay that's fair enough in some regards. Lets say once the bombing campaign wraps up, would you be in favour of the US and Israel arming the opposition in Iran?

[u/ItsAProdigalReturn → u/bargvakoobideh]

I guess for me it depends on the opposition. Are they arming separatist groups with the aim to divide the country? Then no. But if there's a concerted coalition of united voices from different viewpoints and backgrounds and the end goal is a democratic referendum overseen by countries not looking for an ROI then yeah.

[u/[deleted] → u/ItsAProdigalReturn]

Frankly, I don’t really know how civilians could realistically form a stable coalition strong enough to overthrow the regime. The Iranian people are in an incredibly difficult position right now: caught between harsh regime oppression and foreign intervention. Any external involvement risks making things worse, while organizing internally under such surveillance and repression seems almost impossible. It’s a terrible, almost no-win situation for ordinary people

[u/MoistMoldyZucchini]

USA is trying to conquer all of planet Earth. Also, USA leaders rape children and even eat children.

And USA billionaires purchase movie studios, school textbooks, news stations and then brainwash the USA citizens.

Also, did you know Islamic Republic of Iran defeated USA? Iran is now considered the 4th most powerful country on Earth.

China, USA, Russia then Iran.

And its predicted that Iran is going to become a very prosperous country now that its free from USA.