Shah Welcomed by Kennedy

Washington DC, 1961 state visit


Recently by mehrdadmCommentsDate
Omid Djalili: The Baha'i Faith in Words and Images
Dec 05, 2012
Dimmed Lanterns
Dec 05, 2012
Iranian TV shows off 'captured US ScanEagle drone'
Dec 04, 2012
more from mehrdadm
Darius Kadivar

kazem0574 Jaan It's OK

by Darius Kadivar on

NO Hard Feelings it was just a misunderstanding between the two of us ...

We'll leave it there.  

take care,




by kazem0574 on

I don't think republics in their current form existed in the past, especially as far as you have pointed out. And "most" systems were based on a single ruler and some by forms of committee.

In know that in today's Iran there is no guarantee that one system may work against another. What I said was that it "worries me" and that having a permanent figurehead at this stage "could"  get some of our masses  going back to parastesh of the one as they have been used to. 

By the way I actually respect Rezah shah and how he got us out of the Islamic Ghajar that sold our country and one of the major reasons why we are here today (Ghajar that is, best be clear).

I just hope for a secular Iran, one in which people rule and not individuals, one $ spent is accounted for and people look forward to the future.






maziar 58


by maziar 58 on

kaash dashte moghaan was a better place for all of us to live in........

there is no payroll on any front for any one that I know of for the betterment of Iran & Iranians  exept and you know some thing say ..............              




by kazem0574 on

Don’t feel too bad, I understand.

What I wonder is why out of the two types of people you opted for the second in relation to yourself!!! 

Guess to be fair should have made myself more clear about “Here” meaning on I.C in general and had not realised you did the blog. but I mean what I say to who ever it actually applies.

About the hiding thing, the avatar is a beautiful spot in Iran that I tend to visit a lot and love, my name is my own and I.C know my real surname.



Iran and monarchy

by Simorgh5555 on

There is no evidence  that Iran will fare better under a republic instead of a monarchy. If you observe most of the republics in the eastern hemisphere, in particular, the former soviet republics they are rife with corruption. Even in the Middle East, the most stabe and prosperous countries are monarchies. A wicked regime may manifest itself in the form of a republic as much as in a monarchy. There is no proof that republics can prevent a tyranical leader from exercising absolute power and trampelling on the rights of its citizens. Infact, experience has shown that republics have created the most tyranical leaders the world has ever known even when there was semblance of civility, a codified constitution, and a declaration of human rights of sorts. Just look at the Soviet Union. Even Saddam Hussein's Baathist republic regime professed basic principles, rights and freedoms and a developed legal system. Hell, even the Mullah regime has a constitution which repsects human  rights! This perhaps is going too much into the realms of jurisprudence but there republics do not offer more effective checks and balances to protect citizens against a coercive state. 

Reza Pahlavi could not be more different from his father even though I respect both of them.  Shahzadeh is humble enough to realise admit past mistakes and talks about them openly. This is true of most new generation of Iranians who sopport the monarchy.

Monarchy has bene part of our history and national identity for the last 3,000 years. It creates deference and attracts international  pretige  a republic can never be able to do . Let's face it if there was no monarchy - there would have been no Cyrus and Iran never been created. If there was no monarchy Persian would not have been united under Reza Shah. Every great achievement from Persepolis to the building of railways and civil infrastructure in Iran has been owing to a monarch. 

Javid Shah. God Bless Iran. Death to the Islamic Republic. 

Darius Kadivar

kazem0574 Jaan Mon Oeil !

by Darius Kadivar on

Oh Yeah Sure So Now it was an INDIRECT Insult ?

And you defintively were not thinking of me when you speaking of monarchists on the payroll of RP.

Comme On Dit En France Mon Oeil :



Sorry to disappoint you but I have no patience for recurrent Anonymous Rumor spreaders.

If you have an Opinion you genuinely Believe in then Come and express them with your FULL Identity. Such INDIRECT techniques to Character Assassinate people while hiding under the Bold Stance of an ANONYMOUS Identity is So Convenient.

I Rest My Case too ! 


Sargord Pirouz


by Sargord Pirouz on

Well if you voted, and you live in a country other than Iran, just what is the problem?

Is it because your candidate lost? Hey, I voted Green. My candidate lost. But I have the political maturity to live with the loss. That comes with the territory of having a republic, and in this case an Islamic form of democracy.

So grow up, Marhoum. Okay, you lost- on many fronts over the years. Get over it, already. Go about your day as a semi-accepted foreigner in a foreign land. That is your destiny. 


Now you see what I mean about not all people being ready.

by kazem0574 on

I say "some people here", someone takes it meannig them and I am Immediately called to "beram ghomsham and called an olagh".

 Well I guess I rest my case. 

Darius Kadivar

kazem0574 Jaan Don't Try So Hard ...

by Darius Kadivar on

I stopped reading you the minute I read your accusatory Tone " You are on their payroll" or "well off and selfish people"...

If you want to debate on my ideas you disagree with or on the pros and cons of what I believe in Fine ... I am all ears ... but Aghar Meekhay Tohmat Bezany ?... Go Fill Your Hate Elsewhere !

I have No time for Your likes ... Specifically an Anonymous Coward boasting under a pseudo and an unidentifiable Avatar.

Shab Khosh Olagh ! 


For the very reasons you have given

by kazem0574 on

 A post  Reesho Pashm Iran, hopefully democratic  and free  Iran, should not start its fledgling democracy again under  some fixed king (character), irrespective of having a Prime Minster.    Our people have some way to go before they can all learn that the man/woman running the show is simply their allocated servant , (CEO) of the country and nothing more. For us to be like those countries you mention  Spain, Belgium, UK etc,  we need to have reached a certain socio-political  awareness and maturity.    I for one would be very worried if in the current Iran with 3000 years of Kings and now 31 years of  2 Akhoond kings,  again we end up with a King or Queen. We need to be a republic and learn that people running the show come and go. No one is above the law,  everyone is answerable to the people of Iran.  Iranian nation needs time to learn about  democracy,  taste  freedom of speech and all those other democratic rights that the free nations of this world enjoy. THEN  if in the future,  they (people )decide to have a monarchy with a ceremonial king/queen and a answerable prime minster , so be it.  I know that some people here are mainly pushing the Monarchy agenda in order to make Reza Pahlavi a king.  That to me is the most stupid idea because your reason can only be : 
1 ) you are one of the many well off and selfish people who think you can go back to having the old Pahlavi days by bringing in RP. (don't get me wrong. I come from one of those very happy families during the Shah's time)
2) you are on a payroll and have to keep being seen to fight for this idea,  just like many of the IRI Basijies or I.C members who are there to receive money from their masters. 


Darius Kadivar

Yes We Can Aziz ;0)

by Darius Kadivar on

On this as our common denominator:

two major objectives in mind: social and economic progress and civil peace both of which are guaranteed thanks to Free and democratic elections in order to elect a given people's representatives ( i.e. in Parliament) and in Government." 

As for the rest we can agree to disagree while respecting our differences !




Hoshang Targol

Agha Jan, ostad man, aziz man, call it whatever you like,

by Hoshang Targol on

as long as, [as you yourself correctly point out] we have:

" two major objectives in mind: social and economic progress and civil peace both of which are guaranteed thanks to Free and democratic elections in order to elect a given people's representatives ( i.e. in Parliament) and in Government." 

Frankly all these years I had never seriously thought of Sweden as a model: a Monarchy with one of the highest living standards in the world, ( probably the highest ratio of Kurdish refugees in the world as well) strong unions, relatively healthy economy, and as I 'm about to announce to the world my new found social science discovery, a bunch of Nazi win the election in that country!

It goes to show , real life, and real world is to complex to fit any dogma, ( again, as you correctly point out). So, what is to be done: stick to the principals, be as open-minded, and creative as possible in implementing them, and keep in mind that at the end, and ultimatey its up to the people to decide. Not the King, not The Party, not anything else.

And for a truly healthy society we do need as much diversity as possible, hence all of us just need to be ourselves, with as much tolerance and respect for others as possible that's all.

Can we agree on that?

Darius Kadivar

Nope we can't agree ... Why should it be a Republic ?

by Darius Kadivar on

One could equally argue that the Republic lost it's legitimacy last Summer and in much more dramatic not to say tragic comic proportions.


FED UP WITH POLITICAL CORRECTNESS: Ahmadinejad is NOT my Prime Minister !

What you fail to understand is the very basic concepts of Statesmanship, constitutional law and nation building.

I should say it is quite amazing to observe ourselves as a people and a nation specifically for the past 100 years and the number of times we have failed to get our priorities right.


THE PAST IS A FOREIGN COUNTRY: How Would You Evaluate Iran's Democracy Index in 1953 ?

I don't think the problems we have faced as a nation is merely due to the lack of democracy or democratic culture but rather a nearly pathological stubborness which excludes Flexibility and imagination in nearly ALL things related to our understanding of political discourse and political action which in nearly all other societies specifically democratic nations be them Secular Republics or Constitutional Monarchies operate (or at least try to operate based on their constitutional laws) with two major objectives in mind: social and economic progress and civil peace both of which are guaranteed thanks to Free and democratic elections in order to elect a given people's representatives ( i.e. in Parliament) and in Government:  


YES, PRIME MINISTER: A Step By Step Guide To Mossadegh's Premiership and the Coup of '53 ... 

If you still Don't Get it then go and do your Homework in political theory:


HISTORY FORUM: Machiavelli's "The Prince" and the "Art" of Governing

History is not about Good Guys Vs Bad Guys ... It's about our collective experience as a people and how we cope with our shortcomings and strengths.

The First Step towards learning from History in a bid of not repeating past mistakes is to Get One's Priorities straight.

But Have we ?

When I see some of the comments here I tend to think Not !

Mageh Tarikh Faghat dar bareyeh Enghelabo Coup D'Etat Hast ?

There are So many democratic nations amongst which the most progressive which are Not Republics and Yet Fully Democratic. But more importantly overcame their historical scars and bitterness by Restoring their original political systems after a process known as a Restoration.

HISTORY FORUM: Franco's Ghost- Spain's Painful Road Towards National Reconciliation

RESTORATION: Belgium King Baudouin takes Oath Amidst Republican Animosity (31st July ,1950)

By Restoration one does not necessarily have to be a Monarchy by the way. France Restored it's Republic with De Gaulle after WWII when they toppled the Vichy Republic deemed Illegitimate.

And guess What ? Holland ... You know ... that country from which our Iranian Left Wing beam their Radio Zamaneh Programs used to be a Republic ... They too Restored Their Monarchy because they realized that the Republican experience had been a Failure. The outcome was that Holland is one of the most transparent Parliamentary democracies in Europe not to say the world and even their Royal Family unlike in Great Britain is even transparent about it's Fortune. All this was only possible once the Dutch decided to Restore their Monarchy and today their Royal Family is amongst the most popular and accepted royal families amongst their compatriots. 

Spain, Britain, Belgium restored their Monarchy at different stages in their more or less long history and in a bid to Restore their Rights in addition to doting their nation with a Democratic Constitution and Accountable Government.


What does it mean to be royal? Charlie Rose interviews Jeremy Paxman on the British Monarchy

HISTORY FORUM: How Truly Democratic is The British Monarchy ? 

And Besides You are confusing two different things including when you speak about Iran's current situation and that is the Government and the Regime.

Have you noticed how much so called "Green" Enthusiasts like Dabashi or the Sadri Brothers keep insisiting on the Illegitimate Government and Not Illegitimate Regime ? Why is that so ? Because they want to safeguarde the current Republic they deem legitimate to this day. They don't see that the problem is beyond the government but with the Regime and the Constitution which it was founded upon.

A Constitution and Regime which I should remind you was Firmly Rejected by the Late Constitutionalist Shapour Bakhtiar:

pictory: Bakhtiar Denounces Bazargan's Provisionary Government in exile (1979)

The Same Bakhtiar who Called for REGIME CHANGE based on the RESTORATION of the 1906 Constitution:

LESSONS IN DEMOCRACY: Shapour Bakhtiar Interview with LA TV (1987)

including in his very last public appearance two years prior to his cold blooded assassination:


the Trouble with most of your folks is that you have turned Republicanism aka Jomhurykhahy into a dogma. Now if you had a pragmatic and constructive solution to get our country out of this Nihilistic path to oblivion, I would be the first to applaude. But Do You ? ...

Even Your Presidential wannabees come across as nothing more than romantic megalomaniacs:

Amir Jahanchahi: Iranian Idiot of the Day |



Why President ? Why Not Prime Minister ? 

PREMIERSHIP: Historian Simon Schama's Tour of 10 Downing Street (BBC)

You can't compare an Ancient Land like Iran with a Young nation like America. Dunno maybe it's just you IRANICANS who are so insular and given that America is such a Huge country you think that everyone has to imitate you as a Universal Model.

Wel I have news for You. The World is Not limited to America and history is Not Rocket Science. Nations evolve on very different models based on their own historical experience.

I for one am a Constitutionalist NOT a Republican ! 

I don't claim I am Right, I simply claim it is My RIGHT to be One and I won't Apologize for being one.


My Humble Opinion,



Veiled Prophet of Khorasan


by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on


You make good points. I am not saying we should have the Shah. It is all past and will never return. I want a decent reasonably democratic and sane system. With Mollahs out of power and people mostly left alone to live as they wish.

Question is: who paved the way for mullahs to come to power?

The Shah by destroying all other opposition. Yes I agree.

and this time establish a true participatory democracy worthy of human beings ( guaranteeing basic economic and political rights for all its citizens regardless of gender, race, religion,...) in our beloved Iran? That's all.

Can we at least agree on that?

Yes; I agree with this idea. I am not dogmatic. If you say "harfe hesab" I will agree. Thank you.

Hoshang Targol

Sar Goh, at what age did your parents abandon you?

by Hoshang Targol on

Can't you find another website to be insulted 20 times a day? Just how many times you have to be told you simply don't belong in here? Just go and find a lake, or a cliff, I'm sure you know the rest.

Hoshang Targol

VPK, Agha Jan if my Auntie had mustache she would be my Uncle!

by Hoshang Targol on

when analyzing history ifs and buts don't count!

Question is: who paved the way for mullahs to come to power?

A: SAVAK with its systematic destruction of Iranian civil society and democracy. By crushing all nationalist and leftist opposition groups and giving mullahs a free hand with thier extensive networks of mosques, mahdeih, hosaineh,... is it any surprise they were in a position to fill in the vacume and void created by a structural crisis of the state?

And you're 100% right and correct about the difference between Shah & mullahs: the former didn't bother you if you didn't mess with politics, the latter needs to control every aspect of your life from classroom to your bedroom and...

 Bygones are bygones and so on and so on.

What is to be done: Could we as a nation once and for all try to build democracy in Iran from below (meaning relying on Iranian people, our own resources and strength, and not other nation's air force, or $500,000 gifts from Kyoto Institute and such), could we practice tolreance of different opposing views without resorting to violence, and carry on a civilized political struggle to overthrow these murdering theives, and can we make sure this time with IR facing a structural crisis of the state, we ( as a nation) don't phuck it up one more time, and this time establish a true participatory democracy worthy of human beings ( guaranteeing basic economic and political rights for all its citizens regardless of gender, race, religion,...) in our beloved Iran? That's all.

Can we at least agree on that?



marhoum Kharmagas

you don't get it Sargard-aan!

by marhoum Kharmagas on

Sargard-aan says:  " You left. You don't vote. You don't count!"

Sargard-aan, I don't agree with Shahis, I regard Monarchists as a totally US/AIPAC controlled, anti Iranian group (that does not include every individual- e.g. VPK is a decent guy), however that does not mean that like you I rewrite history. Your statement that during Shah's time "for the mass majority of Iranians they were not good days by any measure." is a BIG lie.

BTW, I voted! Ey Sargard_aan (*)!

(*) Sargard-aan means lost, clueless

Veiled Prophet of Khorasan

Kharmagas Jan

by Veiled Prophet of Khorasan on

Not sure how old you were when Shah was replaced, but for whatever reason Shah/his regime had no true/determined supporters when people such as yours truly took the opposition to the heart of the citie

I was in my late teens. At that time I was one of the few not very political people. I was what they called "khar khoon". My time was spent studying for "concoor" and not much else. 

You are 100% right the Shah had destroyed his own base. My family was divided between pro and anti Shah. But the pro Shah people remained quiet.  I never took part in the revolution and did not side with Khomeini. But I did not like the Shah and could not get myself to come out and support what I considered an arrogant bastard. It was a mistake and I admit it. I did know that the Mollahs were no good. It has taken me over 20 years to realize that the Shah with all his faults was a hell of a lot better than the revolution.


A nation of "should's" & "would's"

by comrade on


The Shah could've survived the Democrats and their so-called human rights agenda. However, His age permitting, He could have never politically outlived the neocons.

Some speculate that the global outlook would have been totally different had His Majesty survived 79, including the Soviet's invasion of Afghanistan and even the rise of  the ultra right in the Capitol Hill. All retro-speculative opinions which can't help us solve our today's problems at hand. 

Never increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything.


Sargord Pirouz


by Sargord Pirouz on

Thanks for taking the time to respond with an intelligent comment. (A refreshing change from the silly YouTube links.)

I'm the first one to point out the limitations of such a perspective. That is why I qualify my opinions by stating "I accept Iran for what it is, politically and socially. I vote in Iranian elections. That's it."

That's it, Darius.

But realize that while I'm aware of such limitations, nonetheless I will not countenance the out-of-touch or treasonous opinions of exiles that cannot recognize such a reality.

For them: they left, they don't vote and they do not count. That's their reality, Darius, whether you or they like it or not. 

Darius Kadivar

SPink Jaan do you pay taxes in Iran ? Or actually work there ?

by Darius Kadivar on

Voting while living safely outside Iran, drinking your beer and enjoying other koofteh zahremars due to the privileged luxury of having a dual nationality is not the slightest comparable to an Iranian living and working in Iran like was the case like for let's say marhoum Kharmagas.

Or This poor fellow with or without a job he is entitled to to make a living ( if he is lucky enough to have one that is ... ):




I too vote both in American Elections and in France, and even if my vote matters in both countries I do not consider that my vote "counts" in the same way as an American Living in the US.  That is a LUXURY and Not a genuine RIGHT and quite frankly I think that unless someone lives and works in a country and participates to the economic life of that nation, only then should they be given that Right to Vote. That is something which is deemed obsolete in today's interconnected world where there are mixed marriages and therefore children like you or me born to parents of different nationalities can benefit from the rights they inherit. But quite honestly that is boloney cause if at some point the two countries in question God Forbid were at War, you would have to chose. 

You remind me of those Germans or Japanese Americans who couldn't quite get their loyalties straight during WWII and which eventually ended up in Camps temprorarily because they were suspected of collaborating with the enemy. Sure many were innocent of those accusations and unlike you had no sympathy for the totalitarian regimes of their native country. But they were said that they did Not count ... Very much like you claim we don't because we refused to follow what the leading majority ( or deemed leading majority) had to say and which was the accepted law of the land. 

It's not because a land has laws or that a majority votes for those laws and making them legal that those laws are Just ? ...

Stoning For example ! ... 

As Such if we were to apply your very own logic to yourself you don't count much either as an American and even less as an Iranian. For as an American you are participating in undermining your country by pushing the agenda and survival of a regime which has declared America a Great Satan and has in the past taken American Hostages without ever apologizing for it. Something which shocked most of your fellow American compatriots at the time. So as such you represent not even a minority but a traitor at best to your land. Based on the same logic You don't count as an Iranian either given that you don't live in Iran and don't share the daily life and struggles of an ordinary Iranian and your one sided vote only matters to the regime in that it is in their favor, otherwise given the dictatorial nature of the regime your can replace your ballot with any toilet paper you scrubbed you ass with and dropped it in the ballot box it would not change the results of the elections.

So you see SPink Jaan ... You Truly Don't matter to any of the two countries to which you claim to belong. But more sadly for you neither nation would truly care about your whereabouts unless you could be useful to their governments as a source of inside information like let's say a Spy:




I am certain that you would make an excellent recruit given your technical competence as a cyber jihadist.


Oh and Lastly We did Not Leave ... We Were Forced Out ! 

But I grant you that is something which as a Triple Cross lost soul you may find difficult to comprehend given your treacherous pedigree ...

But No Hard Feeling keep on enjoying Your Beer and other LUXURIES you deny to your very own other half compatriots who have to put up with hell.

You don't count in their minds or hearts and sooner or later you will live to hear them shouting it back in your face as they did to us back in 1979 for totally opposite reasons.

Hopefully this time they will Get it Right and will also end up drinking that same beer and I guess if kind and considerate enough they may even Burp it in your Treacherous Face For Translation:






Sorry, I guess truth hurts

by Q on


first of all, all Shah supporters, "shahi" and non shahi need to make up their mind. Either you continue to whine about "democracy" or you want Shah back. You can't have both!

Everyone knows, as many of us witnessed first hand, how important having McDonalds and discos was to you, or how "good" you had it during the shah depends strongly on who you were. For a great number of people (I admit I don't know if the majority, but definitly won't accept any estimates from biased loudmouths), all the saw was the "gracious chance" of washing dishes and selling cigarettes to a bunch of corrupt moftkhors. The fact, is that even bassiji handouts now have more dignity than that situation. But that doesn't matter because none of you are in a position to judge this from the perspective of the millions who kicked out Shah and supported Khomeini.

Of course, there is protestations to this message, there has been for 30 years. The reason is simple. The people who like to pretend that "everything was fine" were the class that was getting rich thanks to the Shah and main beneficiary of the corruption: directly and indirectly.

You think the poor miserables from "halabi-abad" packed up their gold jewlery and bought Pan Am tickets to Hollywood, like some "patriots" on IC? Of course on IC, as most Iranians, people will -- and always have -- represent their social class, and say FU to everyone else.

Whatever happened to people in the next 30 years is not to be excused. But really, nostalgic out of touch losers "reminiscing" about the life their families once had and fantacizing about how happy their "kolfat and nokar" must have been really are beyond delusional.

MK is right on one thing. There was nobody willing to stick up for his puppetness in 1979 so it was the will of the Iranian nation. No amount of crying will change this.

I'm being kind by calling that corrupt puppet a "pet". The time for pets is over.

Sargord Pirouz

Marhoum, what are you trying

by Sargord Pirouz on

Marhoum, what are you trying to say? You're all over the place.

It's like you want to disagree with me just for the sake of disagreeing.

Look, I accept Iran today for what it is, politically and socially. I vote in Iranian elections. That's it.

You left. You don't vote. You don't count! So get over it, already.

marhoum Kharmagas

that is more than a lie Sargord!

by marhoum Kharmagas on

You say: "and for the mass majority of Iranians they were not good days by any measure."

Actually, the word 'chaakhaan' which I used as an adjective for you is very mild for your false statement. You don't even know that much Farsi, and you claim to remember how the heck life in Iran was then?
I worked and lived in Iran as a simple skill-less worker at the time of Shah and for several years during the IRI, throw your nonsense memorized phrases at someone else. When you were in ghondaagh I was saying marg bar Shah.. and you are preaching me!?

Looking at the past objectively does not mean one agrees with US/AIPAC policies towards Iran, it also does not mean one is in agreement with Shahis (e.g., in my case most of Shahis despise me!)

Sargord Pirouz

I'm no liar

by Sargord Pirouz on

Disagree with me, but I have not lied anywhere here on the IC.

You think it was a piece of cake living in Iran for most during the 1970s? Of course you don't.

Did you like having a stooge for a dictator? No self-respecting citizen did.

So you didn't like things when Iran regained its sovereignty. You left. Now you no longer count, unless that is you vote in Iranian elections. Do you vote? If not, you're nothing more than a windbag.

Artificial Intelligence

Hamshari Damet Garm

by Artificial Intelligence on

I appreciate your honesty about the Shah after all these years. I was to young to have an objective opinion about the Shah in 79. Now, knowing what I know,  I could care less about Monarchy and I would hate Monarchy; but as you stated replacing him was a mistake. Thank you for your honesty.

marhoum Kharmagas

Talking nonsense Sargord chaakhaan!?

by marhoum Kharmagas on

Sagord chaakhaan says: "Myself, I lived in Iran during those days, and for the mass majority of Iranians they were not good days by any measure."

Sargord,  you have no clue. I have never been a Shahi (far from it), but one has to be fair. Do you know what chaakhaan means BTW?


Sargord Pirouz

Hey, if you prefer the

by Sargord Pirouz on

Hey, if you prefer the government of a dictatorial stooge over a government of your own, that's up to you disgruntled exiles.

Speaking as a native son American with an American maternal lineage, I can tell you that NO WAY would we Americans ever consider submitting to a foreign imposed hegemony.

So yeah, you wanna go crying back to the days when you were subjected to rule by a dictatorial stooge, that's your problem. Myself, I lived in Iran during those days, and for the mass majority of Iranians they were not good days by any measure.


Marhom K. is right, Replacing the Shah regime was a mistake

by Bavafa on

Not because Shah regime was good, but because Iranians weren't ready or mature enough for a democratic and free system. Of course such system did not suit the outsiders and their influence/interference did not help either. 

However at the end of the day, the responsibility of that failure is ours and ours only.


marhoum Kharmagas

Prophet jaan

by marhoum Kharmagas on

Not sure how old you were when Shah was replaced, but for whatever reason Shah/his regime had no true/determined supporters when people such as yours truly took the opposition to the heart of the cities (in my case Esfahan) and stayed in the streets until the regime was gone. As Kharmagas as I am, I tell you bluntly, replacing Shah was a mistake,  ... but there were hardly any who were determined to stand for Shah, we had the cities.