Iranian War Is Not The Same As Iraq

[HappyFace2025]

Some people seem to think the current war equates to the one in Iraq in the 2000s. It manifestly is not the same.
While Saddam treated Iraqis appallingly as the Islamic Republic has done to Iranians, Iran has been exporting terror throughout the Middle East via its proxies Hamas, Hezbollah and Houtis, as well as elsewhere including the UK, where 20 terrorist attacks were foiled last year (announced yesterday.)

As far as I know it hasn’t been confirmed yet.

Apparently it's a crusade.

A combat-unit commander told non-commissioned officers at a briefing Monday that the Iran war is part of God's plan and that Pres. Donald Trump was "anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth," according to a complaint by a non-commissioned officer.

From Saturday morning through Monday night, more than 110 similar complaints about commanders in every branch of the military had been logged by the Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF).

www.theregister.com/2026/03/02/iran_prayer_app_propaganda_hack_israel/

Agree. I’ve seen people repeat it on X, “the first thing Israel and the US did was attack a primary school”, but why on earth would they do it? Purposefully attack a school in a place where they seem to have the support of large swaths of the population. Why would they want to alienate all those people?

Sorry but this is another example of USA and Israel starting an illegal war on a false pretext.

They have not provided one shred of credible evidence that Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon or about to strike Israel/USA. Rubio pretty much admitted last night that the only reason USA chose to act was due to fact they knew Israel were about to attack and that it was likely that Iran would target US interests.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/rubio-iran-israel-war-attack-trump-b2930752.html

Also, we know that Trump is in terrible trouble back home and is desperate for a distraction from his poor poll ratings and the Epstein scandal, as the DOJ and himself, appear to be protecting the perpetrators and obstructing justice for all the victims.

Trump, is doing exactly what he said Obama would do to boost his popularity and win an election, with midterms coming up fast.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-obama-iran-war-tweets-b2929535.html

If he had real interest in saving Iranian people, he would have done so about 5 weeks ago, when they were getting mowed down and executed by Iran's regime. However, he did nothing and thousands died after he had urged them to protest.

This was is all about Israel and USA' s own self interests and of course Trump's ego. I am glad Starmer did not fall into trap that Blair did in 2003.

Trump has no clear plan for what future looks like with regime change, which has all the hallmarks of Iraq 2003. We all know the consequences of that, as for past 20 years the west has faced increased terrorist attacks and mass immigration from all displaced refugees.

Islamic regime spokesman holding a press conference in a school:

https://x.com/emilykschrader/status/2028783084431081597

The main reason being given by Trump is to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons (weapons of mass destruction) and regime change. Pretty much identical to the reasons to attack Iraq, I do think Iran is more dangerous than Iraq, I always thought the war in Iraq was an unnecessary mistake (and the weapons of mass destruction a load of lies). And since Trump boldly announced they had totally destroyed all of Iran's nuclear facilities very recently that hardly sounds like a good reason either, or Trump was lying. If they manage to get a satisfactory outcome in Iran in a short timescale it will be OK, if it leads to a huge messy long lasting conflict in the middle east that's a different thing. Iran may well be behind a lot of terrorism but that has not been cited as a reason for the attack.

100% it seems many on here and indeed a huge number of people who slaughtered Blair for Iraq involvement, have forgotten of the dire consequences and evets that followed. Just about every time we have gotten involved with Middle East and USA's wars, it has not ended well for us or the local civilians.

We're not - we just don't think that this will help either promote peace in the region or globally, or a better life for the Iranian people. And lets not forfet the current regime was born out of Western (mostly US) intervention. If the US had not helped bring down the democratically elected, secular Mossadegh government and supported the repressive Shah's regime (in order to secure oil) it's unlikely there would have been the 1979 revolution that brought this appalling and dangerous regime to power. I'm sure you'll say that's all ancient history and not relevant, but surely if we need yet another reminder of the long-term negative impacts of gung-ho Western intervention in the Middle East on both its people and world peace we need to acknowledge this.

What do you think would lead to a better life for the Iranian people? They’ve been protesting for years, they rose up once again couple of months ago and were brutally attacked by their own regime.
Tens of thousands killed within days.
What do you think they could realistically do without outside help?

Yup. Likely because Trump tore it up.

It's a circular argument, but there are 2 big blobs on that circle both labeled "Trump" .

If we break from the circle we enter the world of speculation and "what ifs". And while it is Iran who are now saying they will develop nukes and not Trump the fact that Trump did tear up that 2015 deal should be taken into consideration. Iran were adhering to the 2015 deal, so far as we are aware, when Trump tore it up.

I remember when Boris was foreign minister. He flew to DC to beg Trump not to tear it up because the evidence was it was working. Trump refused to see him, and Boris went on Fox to plead with him not to tear it up. But tear it up he did, and here we are.

Their motto is death to america, death to israel. And you want Israel and America to wait until they literally have a nuke before trying to remove them? This is after they have consistently attacked and destabilised with the use of proxies throughout the middle east. It’s not just that they may be a threat in the future they are a threat now, they have been defacto at war with Israel and the USA for decades, there is no clear reason why they should be allowed to continue with that war un-opposed. Make it make sense.

Also there are bunch of legally sound justifications for intervention, Lord Wolfson has outlined the legal justifications. So the use of “illegal” here is doing a lot of heavy lifting. But people regularly claim stuff is illegal if they don’t like it.

Also if international law only protects authoritarians, tyrants and terrorists then it’s time to fucking ignore it don’t you think.

I look forward to the broadcasts of Iranians dancing in the streets, women with their hair out and people released from the dungeons in Iran. Trump owns the deaths of protesters who went out on bis encouragement but I don’t understand how you can say “if you really cared you would have acted earlier, best not to do anything now though because actually I don’t really care about Iranians either”.

A blunt but accurate post.

But this isn't outside help. The US has made it quite clear that there is no interest in what happens to the Iranian people. "“No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy-building exercise, no politically-correct wars. We fight to win,”" Hesgeth

Yep. Friedrich Merz spoke well on this too. If the law is protecting the Iranian state over the oppressed and brutalised citizens then it’s not doing a great job.

So the fall of a regime which funded and trained hezbollah, Hamas, Houthis, Iraqi militia, assad (500’000 deaths there alone) is involved in the drugs trade (captagon manufactured in syria flooded arab markets, venuzuela was used as a drugs, money laundering and drone manufacturing hub, not to mention that hezbollah are heavily involved in the drugs trade) sold drones to russians (something like 50’000 shaheed drones have been used in Ukraine) will not lead to more peace? Seriously?

This is what I meant by people not really understanding the Iranian web of influence.

The most likely outcome for Iran is a power vacuum followed by a civil war to establish the next dictator. The ex-shah has some US support and some support in Iran, but there are other powerful factions as well. It's not looking good for the ordinary people.

Which powerful factions?

I agree. In any case nobody could just go in without preparation or getting aircraft carriers and pilots etc near enough to begin a war. The naivety of some people beggars belief.

Monarchists, MEK, IRGC, Regular army, Hardline Islamists, followers of Khomenei who would want his descendents to take power, there are also moderates and reformers. Any of which or others who may want to seize power. Who do you think will end up in charge?

It will depend who can garner the most support. The IRGC are probably best armed and resourced if they survive the war. And it's possible the US will arm the monarchists. Or could even be the continuation of the current regime if the IRGC stays loyal. Some of the factions are illegal under the current regime so we won't know until it happens how much support they actually have. Could even be something out of left field that no one sees coming currently

The shah's son would be DOA if he set foot in Iran and he will be more aware of this fact than anyone else.
I agree with your first point. I think killing the supreme leader will have unleashed an even worse outcome for the Iranian people. As an American and child of the 70s, I can say, hand on heart, that US led regime changes NEVER end well. We have a solid history of making shit worse.

Not without a viable alternative, sadly no. I really wish I believed it would. But the supporters of the current regime will not go away (they have too much to lose), and as with most dictatorships there is no strong leader with widespread support to step into the vacuum. It's not exactly the same as Iraq but there are certainly similarities - including the risk of the rise (or strengthening) of terrorist groups and civil war. The US have just cut the head off the Hydra.

Trump is a grade A wanker but the amount of airlifts into GCC countries and Jordan make sense now when you look at the number of drone and ballistic missile attacks launched.

Im 3 days they launched 871 drones/missiles at dubai, 871! I’m sure they are glad they probably got stocked up on THAAD missiles.

Given that no GCC country actually wanted the americans on their soil (which I think was fair enough given whats happened to them even though they weren’t actually involved) they needed to be well prepared. I’m still furious at Trump for getting people killed. I suspect a lot of Iranians will forgive him if it means the regime dies.

Their government IS the terrorist group.

There are also the Kurds in the west, and the Ballochistan separatists in the east. The latter overlap with Pakistan. It was the ballochistans who done a big bombing in Iran last year I think. And they do attacks in Pakistan too, especially against Chinese belt and road stuff.

How do you know how much support there would be? The main barrier is the regime killing any opposition to their brutal control.