No, not at all, snow. Iran is, and this isn't arguable, more democratic now than pre revolution. Shah Reza Pahlavi ruled as an absolute monarch from 1953 to 1979. Iran now has a parliament and President that are elected by popular vote. Western critics claim that they have limited power but this is a biased mis-representation. Even if true, however, it is still more democratic than pre 1979. Actual absolute dictatorships in the Middle East are not an issue for Western countries, as long as they allow western companies to exploit their wealth, trade in the dollar and buy US arms. This is demonstrably true and shown by US/UK relationships with such beacons of democracy as Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Jordan, Kuwait (you get the picture) All of those regimes are self evidently less democratic than Iran. The difference is that they bend the knee to western interests and allow their resources to be exploited by western interests in their "pact with the devil".
Iran, as previously mentioned, fully re-nationalised their oil and gas industries after the 1979 revolution. The reason why the West is comfortable with the above listed regimes but apparently feels a need to defend "human rights" in Iran should be obvious even to a child.
So, you dont think Iran is any more threat in the middle east than any other country, gringo?
You think its just all about control of oil as usual with the USA?
Maybe thats so, but there is no doubt that every US president in recent years have expressed concern about Iran, it didn't start with Trump.
I suppose the main concern is that being a Theocratic country making decisions based on scriptures from the Koran and such, Iran is seen as a very radical religius country and as such may use any nuclear weapons in the name of Allah or whatever.
Iran is certainly the only fully Theocratic country in the middle east where criticism of religion is seen as a crime, the Cleric is absolute head of the country and the laws are based on religius text, religion and government are one and the same!
It is the rule of God, and thats that!
It is supposed to be a democratic country, and women can indeed vote, but they are shunned from any important jobs within the government, probably due to Sharia law?
So, basically what the USA are claiming is that a country run by a cleric who has final authority over the country is not safe with nuclear weapons.
And indeed, if Irans head cleric, priests and religius officials freely fund Hezbolla, isis, Hamas etc,. then they are very, very clearly a fanatical religius regime and this cannot be denied.
When you think its justified to send out suicide bombers and such to kill in the name of Allah, clearly you have to be seen as a very dangerous and quite frankly insane, and such a regime may not use nuclear capabilities simply as a deterrent?
Oh well, just a few thoughts, gringo!
