"Support in text" is not irrelevant lol, political support is important, there's a reason they changed the name of French fries to "freedom fries" when France didn't give it to em for the Iraq invasion.

those videos of iran citizens being forced to march outside is wild

Fellas, practice this daily: "من می خواهم به ایران کمک کنم"

I still do not believe Corbyn can make a good decision regarding any middle eastern policy because of his sources of funding. If you want to say the same thing regarding Johnson and his supposed eastern-european connections, sure, go ahead. It still doesn't change anything. If Johnson makes a bad decision with this then that's what it is ultimately - a bad decision. I will call it a bad decision if it happens. My ideal policy is for no interaction or intervention here at all by any countries, which unfortunately isn't going to happen. I understand there's multiple factors and nuance, like how the UK already has troops in Iraq. I support or don't support individual policy in their own contexts. If he does something rash and stupid here, then I'll call it out as being rash and stupid.

What funding?

You're delusional if you think Corbyn would go along with America's aggression against Iran like your guy Boris is. He already condemned the assasination.

Corbyn has received funding from Iranian state media multiple times now. Let me make this clear - I do not support ANY involvement. I don't care if it's positive or negative to the Iranian regime. His involvement is disqualifying to be a mediator on the situation.

Jesus Christ you're such a hack, he worked for Press TV, which is funded by the Iranian govt. Corbyn was never "funded by Iranian state media"

twitter.com/michaelcoudrey/status/1213518322525863936?s=21

But they hate America so it’s ok right

I’m just pointing out the regression.

I’m fine with American interference in terms of booting out Islamic theocracy, whether that means exiling or straight up obliterating the regime, keep it a democratic presidency, and replace Rouhani with Pahlavi. Pahlavi then reinstates Iran as to how it was before the Islamic Regime, which is an economic powerhouse funding education, infrastructure, and resources instead of mosques and the regime’s needs.

In fact, they owe it to us for kicking Mossadegh out.

As to how it can be “democratic” if Pahlavi comes back? Simple, the people want him back. That’s democracy.

I was pointing out the hypocrisy of people supporting an authoritarian oppressive regime because it resists America, as if that’s the main prerequisite behind being a good government. That being said America kinda started the whole problem in the first place by installing the Shah in the first place

And they fix it with bringing his heir back!

you can support their resistance against imperialism, and also criticize their government and support the Iranian people's struggles.

Is this guy actually arguing to turn Iran back into a monarchy?

twitter.com/thenewthinkerr/status/1213536316731691008?s=21

You think this man is crying about Soleimani or crying about how the people he ran away from are haunting him?

You can’t argue with them. The regime killed several of their “comrades” and they turn their head because they hate imperialism so much. It’s basically being so extremely left you’re no different than being extremely right. Your moral compass is the same. You only care about your country’s image instead of the very people you claim you’re helping by not being imperialistic. They don’t have Persian friends or relatives in Iran, so they don’t understand. All they care about is how they have it so bad in America that they need some outdated, flawed, and foolish ideology that will never be instilled in America.

So you're saying if Boris Johnson worked for an organization funded by the CIA to spread American propaganda he'd be wise to trust to be unbiased towards America

" reinstates Iran as to how it was before the Islamic Regime, which is an economic powerhouse funding education, infrastructure, and resources instead of mosques and the regime’s needs."

You forgot to include the part where it was ruled by one of the most ruthless, vicious and violent ruler in the world and that the Iranian people lived in constant fear under that US supported regime. There's a reason why Iran revolted and became so confrontational towards the US.

Prince Pahlavi promises better relations with Israel and a secular democracy in Iran. Both of which are strong desires for non radical and non brainwashed citizens of Iran.

Yeah but I’ve seen barely any leftists here criticize the government that gives a death penalty for having s***the wrong way. And it’s not even like the country is socialist either lol

You’re the one who said that girl who said we should stand with oppressed people and not oppressive regimes is a trash take

because this is a thread an US terror attack on Iran and Iraq. bringin up social and political issues inside Iran would be off-topic.

No? All he did was ban communism lmao. He literally went in exile because he refused to order to shoot his own people. The Ayatollah does the exact opposite.

We go off topic on every nearly thread in this site. Also, it’s one thing to criticize America, but these guys are outright praising the Iranian government and calling Soleimani the guy who defeated isis, as if Iranian forces (including iranian backed militias) were even the main sources of total isis casualties