Thank you for your thorough reply. In any case we can agree to disagree on this. I still believe that Iran's stringent and unrelenting support for the Palestinian cause is the driving force behinds Iran's current disputes with the west and the Zionists.
If Iran's government was more laser focused on achieving economic prosperity for the average Iranian as opposed to being pre-occupied with the Palestinians, who by the way who couldn't care less about Iran, then I highly doubt if the Zionists would be as pre-occupied with harming Iran. I also believe that Iran's support for the Palestinian cause is an outright inconsistent foreign policy when considering the plight of other Muslims throughout the world (Uighurs/Kashmir/Rohinga)
As you can see with recent polls conducted, the majority of Iranians are not happy with the current status quo / foreign policy. You can talk about self sufficiency, independence, etc but all of this is mere rhetoric in my eyes. The average Iranian is poor and Iran will never live up to its economic potential with the current policies in place, that's obvious.
Yes after looking around a bit,
Iran's current minimum wage is $185 / month
Turkey's current minimum wage is $245 / month
Iraq current minimum wage is $171 / month
Just to put this in perspective,
Thailand's current minimum wage is $288 / month
If Iran's government was more laser focused on achieving economic prosperity for the average Iranian as opposed to being pre-occupied with the Palestinians, who by the way who couldn't care less about Iran, then I highly doubt if the Zionists would be as pre-occupied with harming Iran. I also believe that Iran's support for the Palestinian cause is an outright inconsistent foreign policy when considering the plight of other Muslims throughout the world (Uighurs/Kashmir/Rohinga)
As you can see with recent polls conducted, the majority of Iranians are not happy with the current status quo / foreign policy. You can talk about self sufficiency, independence, etc but all of this is mere rhetoric in my eyes. The average Iranian is poor and Iran will never live up to its economic potential with the current policies in place, that's obvious.
No, that isn't the reason. At the end of the day, the zionists won't tolerate any potentially powerful nation-state in their neighborhood capable of challenging their hegemony. Heck, they don't have tolerance for any historically rooted nation and religious faith system outside the region either, hence why so many zionists can be found among the main influential advocates of pro-immigration policies in the west. And this is related to zionist messianism, which supposes the dissolution of all existing nation-states into a unitary one world regime as well as the replacement of every religion by ecumenical Noahidism.
When it comes more specifically to West Asia and North Africa, in fact the Islamic Revolution in Iran strongly cemented the already held belief among zionist decision makers that a local government (dictator back in the days) beholden to the zionists will not offer enough of a guarantee for continued loyalty, because such a regime may be overthrown and replaced by an adversarial one - which is exactly what happened in Iran in 1979.
That's why zionist pundits and think tanks firmly opted for a policy of methodical balkanization of regional nation-states, one by one. Hence why Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan and Somalia were split into separate parts. It's no accident that Oden Yinon published his infamous paper in that vein in the early 1980's, although Bernard Lewis had expressed similar views in the 1970's already (if I'm not mistaken).
"Greater Israel": The Zionist Plan for the Middle East - Global Research
When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing wars on Syria and Iraq, the war on Yemen, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle Eastwww.globalresearch.ca
Also here's a simple question: in fixing their strategic objectives vis à vis Iran, why would they not settle for so-called "regime" change, to have someone like the shah back in power? Where does this blatantly obsessive focus on empowering "ethno"-separatist grouplets stem from, in addition to the massive cultural aggression and psy-ops taking aim at the foundations of the Iranian nation, as well as at Iran's societal cohesion (attempting to undermine the nuclear family structure, to turn generations against each other, females against males, etc)?
So I'd recommend parting with the erroneous notion that if Iran ended her support for the Palestinian cause, zionists would stop their plots against Iranian nationhood. They definitely wouldn't, and in fact they'd have it easier since a friendly regime can be infiltrated and made to implement their agenda more readily.
But this hardly disproves my point now, does it.
I'm perfectly confident that the Supreme Leader has laid down the rails for ensuring that after him Islamic Iran will stay the revolutionary, anti-imperial, anti-zionist and staunchly independence-oriented and self-sufficient course characteristic of her foreign policy to date.
No, that isn't the reason. At the end of the day, the zionists won't tolerate any potentially powerful nation-state in their neighborhood capable of challenging their hegemony. Heck, they don't have tolerance for any historically rooted nation and religious faith system outside the region either, hence why so many zionists can be found among the main influential advocates of pro-immigration policies in the west. And this is related to zionist messianism, which supposes the dissolution of all existing nation-states into a unitary one world regime as well as the replacement of every religion by ecumenical Noahidism.
When it comes more specifically to West Asia and North Africa, in fact the Islamic Revolution in Iran strongly cemented the already held belief among zionist decision makers that a local government (dictator back in the days) beholden to the zionists will not offer enough of a guarantee for continued loyalty, because such a regime may be overthrown and replaced by an adversarial one - which is exactly what happened in Iran in 1979.
That's why zionist pundits and think tanks firmly opted for a policy of methodical balkanization of regional nation-states, one by one. Hence why Syria, Iraq, Libya, Sudan and Somalia were split into separate parts. It's no accident that Oden Yinon published his infamous paper in that vein in the early 1980's, although Bernard Lewis had expressed similar views in the 1970's already (if I'm not mistaken).
"Greater Israel": The Zionist Plan for the Middle East - Global Research
When viewed in the current context, the war on Iraq, the 2006 war on Lebanon, the 2011 war on Libya, the ongoing wars on Syria and Iraq, the war on Yemen, must be understood in relation to the Zionist Plan for the Middle Eastwww.globalresearch.ca
Also here's a simple question: in fixing their strategic objectives vis à vis Iran, why would they not settle for so-called "regime" change, to have someone like the shah back in power? Where does this blatantly obsessive focus on empowering "ethno"-separatist grouplets stem from, in addition to the massive cultural aggression and psy-ops taking aim at the foundations of the Iranian nation, as well as at Iran's societal cohesion (attempting to undermine the nuclear family structure, to turn generations against each other, females against males, etc)?
So I'd recommend parting with the erroneous notion that if Iran ended her support for the Palestinian cause, zionists would stop their plots against Iranian nationhood. They definitely wouldn't, and in fact they'd have it easier since a friendly regime can be infiltrated and made to implement their agenda more readily.
But this hardly disproves my point now, does it.
I'm perfectly confident that the Supreme Leader has laid down the rails for ensuring that after him Islamic Iran will stay the revolutionary, anti-imperial, anti-zionist and staunchly independence-oriented and self-sufficient course characteristic of her foreign policy to date.
Yes after looking around a bit,
Iran's current minimum wage is $185 / month
Turkey's current minimum wage is $245 / month
Iraq current minimum wage is $171 / month
Just to put this in perspective,
Thailand's current minimum wage is $288 / month
Can you read and understand Farsi ?
View attachment 854358
For those who don't understand Farsi,last line is minimum wage 56,797,500 Rial for current year (1401).
View attachment 854361
320,220 Rial for 1 USD.
I'm glad you know Mr Khomeini and encourage you to know more about him.
Last edited: