US kills Iran's General Soleimani

I think the Women of 1978 Iran would disagree entirely. When the revolution happened and self proclaimed "Allah’s own messenger", Ayatollah Khomeini began his dictatorship, the first actions were to strip them of every right they had gained over the previous 70 years, removing all family protection laws and giving females no legal recourse at all, having all professional women fired from their jobs and forced into lives of solitude and basic slavery to their husbands in their homes.
The new laws were especially progressive and designed to enhance the lives of women across Iran, gems such as these:
  • The legal marrying age of a woman was lowered to the age of nine, in accordance with Islamic Law.
  • All nurseries were closed, decried as a Western conspiracy to “deprive children of motherly love and Islamic upbringing.”
  • A woman’s testimony was legally reduced to half that of a man’s.
  • The Islamic Law of Retribution was reinstated, allowing the crime of adultery to be punished by stoning to death.
  • Women appearing in public were to be accompanied by a male relative at all times and be able to provide proof of the relationship. Any contact with non-related men could result in legal punishment.
  • Segregation of the sexes. In public transportation, women were required by law to sit in the back of the bus as the front seats were reserved for male passengers only.
  • Family planning was cast by the new regime as a Western conspiracy to weaken Iran, and women lost all access to these vital health services.
LOL, all sounds amazing right, lets go one step further and change the word Women to Black/Jew/Muslim/Christian/Asian/White/Whatever, how does all that play out to your sensibilities then? The current Government is a disgustingly oppressive regime, that is now engaging in straight up Murder against anyone who speaks out against it, that I hope the people rise up and free themselves from these turds.

Women don't make a country, the Shah's reforms massively embittered religious conservatives, eventually they had had enough.

One law was literally that women were only allowed to wear western clothes, anything else was banned, that's not very liberal, that's forced cultural death. How would you feel as a resident of the UK if Western clothes were banned and you had to wear someone else's cultural clothing? That was undoubtedly just going to unreasonably annoy a large sector of the country for little gain, there is literally no point in fundamental changes over gradual ones when it can be instantly reverted upon.

You can't just instantly change a country, it will always fight back eventually, especially when the economic reforms that came at the same time don't actually resolve the issues they were intended to. The discontent was eaten up by the clergy unfortunately and that's how it ended up taking the reins completely. I'm not defending the way it went, but i understand why it occurred and why all that social freedom was so temporary. Discontented people don't typically go for the best option.
 
Last edited:
This man wasn't exactly a nice guy. The only people who will miss him are the Iranian dictatorship themselves.
Don't fool yourself, this guy was a hero in Iran/Iraq, the guy who beat ISIS, some even called him a rock star general his popularity was so high. The US have made themselves a very dangerous martyr.

Regardless of anything, why do people seem put out by this ? I doubt the leaders of any European nation were told. Nor was the leader of Brazil, India or anywhere else i'm sure.
The assassination took place at an international airport, the chances of collateral damage were high. They could have at least warned us not to send any diplomats in/out of Iraq that day.
 
Women don't make a country, the Shah's reforms massively embittered religious conservatives, eventually they had had enough.

One law was literally that women were only allowed to wear western clothes, anything else was banned, that's not very liberal, that's forced cultural death. How would you feel as a resident of the UK if Western clothes were banned and you had to wear someone else's cultural clothing? That was undoubtedly just going to unreasonably annoy a large sector of the country for little gain, there is literally no point in fundamental changes over gradual ones when it can be instantly reverted upon.

You can't just instantly change a country, it will always fight back eventually, especially when the economic reforms that came at the same time don't actually resolve the issues they were intended to. The discontent was eaten up by the clergy unfortunately and that's how it ended up taking the reins completely.

Ask the women who are oppressed and told what to wear under Sharia law in the UK and the government let it carry on. Because they don't want be to called "Islamophobes" by the SJW.
 
Again, arm-chair Generals with very little to zero idea about anything related to carrying out Military operations saying "well why didn't they just....................." makes for some hilarious posts to me :D
 
Ask the women who are oppressed under Sharia law in the UK and the government let it carry on. Because they don't want be to called "Islamophobes" by the SJWs.

How very irrelevant, i wont even bother dissecting that. All I will say is why did the Islamic fundamentalists win in '79 if women were being treated so well?
 
How very irrelevant.

Did they really win, or did they just stuff the ballet boxes like the other dictators? Or not actually give the people any alternative choices?

Just this month there were protests in Iran over fuel price hikes and the police managed to kill 200 people. I really can't see the Iranian government being as popular as they claim.
 
How very irrelevant, i wont even bother dissecting that. All I will say is why did the Islamic fundamentalists win in '79 if women were being treated so well?

Because they don't give a crap what the women think? They literally had zero impact.
 
Because they don't give a crap what the women think? They literally had zero impact.

So why bring up women's suffrage in a thread about a country where it plainly doesn't matter?

It really doesn't seem relevant to me beyond maybe being a reason it might end the Islamic state eventually, I don't think Iran is there yet, it seems to just be annoyed at economic pain more than anything else. There's no need to look morally superior to a state run under fundamentalist Islamic law, I would have thought that was self evident.
 
So why bring up women's suffrage in a thread about a country where it plainly doesn't matter?

It really doesn't seem relevant to me beyond maybe being a reason it might end the Islamic state eventually, I don't think Iran is there yet, it seems to just be annoyed at economic pain more than anything else.

Because they don't likely share much love for the regime...
 
No, 1979 too.
In that case you're wrong, no the US were not in favour of the overthrow if their puppet dictator, hence why they immediately set about trying to bribe/coerce officials/troops in order to overthrow the new government and get him straight back into power (this is the exact reason the US embassy in Iran was stormed, as they were trying to run a coup out of it).
 
Because they don't likely share much love for the regime...

Well not sure what that's meant to achieve, either way i'll just defer to Abrahamian and Milani for their analysis of the White Revolution and it's disastrous consequences. Seems it's actually relevant somewhat for the UK and US right now with the failed 'trickle down' policy.
 
I worked with an Iranian refugee and I'm sure he's probably dancing right now.

He also delivers pizza. Dunno if he likes it. He likes not living in Iran though.
 
I worked with an Iranian refugee and I'm sure he's probably dancing right now.

He also delivers pizza. Dunno if he likes it. He likes not living in Iran though.

I've worked with a few. All loved their homeland but hated the regime with a passion.
 
Back
Top Bottom