Originally Posted by
furloughfuntime
There is also a political spectrum within Iran; they have their own version of liberals, moderates, and conservatives within their context. Speaking of them as a political monolith ignores the extent to which US actions have given strength to their most fiery fundamentalists at the expense of their more reasonable moderates. Pulling out of the JCPOA undermined the "moderates" over there and has lent credence to their most hard line leaders; if the US won't even uphold it's own end of the bargain, why bargain at all? We have contributed to that "monster" significantly by our own bad-faith actions.
Sure. But due to the very deep (and very deliberate) integration of IRGC into all aspects of government and economy, it's hard for moderates/liberals to gain any real traction.
I don't think that waiting for the moderates to take over was ever a viable strategy (we were actually kind of waiting and hoping back in the day when I was involved, but nothing has really changed over the years).
For the same reason I think that shooting for or talking about regime change in this conflict is a fool's errand.
Originally Posted by
furloughfuntime
As far as the religious difference between IR and NK, I don't think that point has much salience. The NK leader is viewed as divine as well, and just because Islam has it's own eschatology doesn't make it any different from Christianity.
It is very different and very salient. The entire DPRK system revolves around the boss, including the divinity aspect.
In IR, the system revolves around a doctrine that is somewhat open to interpretation, and the leaders are consider stewards of the cause. They are not prophets or divine, and thus need to keep the fanatics happy with their diligence and stewardship. The IRGC et al is a monster that the regime created and now needs to keep fed.
Originally Posted by
furloughfuntime
Christianity is equally concerned with bringing about the apocalypse as Islam is from a theological perspective.
Not that I've ever see. If there are fringe sects (probably safe to assume), they are not running the military or government. Religion was never really present in my decades of military service (well maybe at the USAFA, heard that was a thing at one point).
Originally Posted by
furloughfuntime
Are the generals who purportedly referred to the book of Revelations and the Sec of War constantly referencing scripture in press conferences really that much different than the IRGC spewing their version of fire and brimstone?
Yes. They are not advocating for apocalypse or genocide. Of course I'd rather they not even go there but I suspect they're just playing to part of the base. Again I didn't vote for any of this.