• PotatoLibre@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    And that’s good for Iran.

    Just cause Bibi’s Isreal is shit it doesn’t mean getting rid of Ayatollah is a good move. It’s good for Isreal, for Iran and everybody else except fucking Russia and those terrorists like Hamas or Hezbollah.

    • Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Not necessarily, depends on what replaces it. If it’s replaced by a functional secular democracy then yeah that would be better for Iran, but thats probably the least likely scenario. Most likely it will either be replaced by:

      1. A new dictatorship after a civil war, tons of Iranians die and not much improvement is made to the quality of life in the end. Maybe the new dictatorship is more secular but it could also get rid of some of the democratic elements in the current regime.
      2. Iran turns into a factionalized failed state like Libya or Syria, kept in a perpetual civil war by greater powers using it as a playground to test their newest military equipment.

      2 is the scenario Israel wants, as whatever regime takes power will probably be anti-israel after this latest attack so itd be better for them if that regime doesnt have any power. Its also the most likely to happen if the ayatollah regime falls during this war as the mossad has shown they have a lot of capacity in iran to engineer this result. It’s also the worst scenario for the Iranian people.

      • PotatoLibre@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        It’s fun when people likes the status quo of a brutal dictatorship cause “it can happen bad things without it”.

        It’s a possibility of course, but keeping the already weak Ayatollah regime up is nothing anybody would prefer.