[reliabilityguy]

> look like what happened in Libya: A failed state that falls in anarchy.

This comment just shows that you have no idea what Iran is, and how it differs from Libya.

Libya is a loose conglomerate of tribes. Iran majorly Persian that see themselves as one nation. Completely different dynamics.

[thisislife2]

It doesn't matter - when a strong and stable political structures suddenly collapse, the state fails and disintegrates due to the political infighting. While I agree with you that the chances of Iran becoming a completely failed state is unlikely, I do see an imminent civil war in Iran's future if a regime collapse happens, and the Americans and Israelis install their Shahi (royal) puppet there. A regime collapse will of course mean Iran will lose its sovereignty (probably for a decade or more), till a truly independent stable polity emerges form the ashes.

[littlexsparkee]

I could see the water crisis, notably absent here, being what tips it. Iran is facing water bankruptcy and acquifers / groundwater recharge takes decades to centuries.

[enraged_camel]

Iranian regime is neither strong nor stable though. Or did you miss the recent round of nationwide protests that led to a desperate brutal crackdown?

[thisislife2]

That's just simplistic western propaganda. Sporadic protests, nationwide or otherwise, don't mean anything unless they are backed by long-term-opposition with strong grass-roots and singular political goals. Iran's regime remains strong and stable - it controls all the political institutions, it controls the civilian government at the local level, it controls the religious / cultural institutions, it controls the military and it has substantial support from the people. Why do you think Israel or the US isn't sending boots to the ground? Apart from the official military, the IRGC has a voluntary civil force, that can be armed by the Iranian military, in every district - if Israel or US send their soldiers to Iran, they will face a very brutal urban warfare with a high death toll.

[reliabilityguy]

> Iran's regime remains strong and stable - it controls all the political institutions, it controls the civilian government at the local level, it controls the religious / cultural institutions, it controls the military and it has substantial support from the people.

I see two issues with this assessment. First, I am not sure how substantial is the support from the people. And second, Assad also had all this control over the military, the local governments, etc., etc., and then his rule collapsed in a week.

While Islamic Republic's repressive machine in the form of IRCG and Basij are in much better shape than Assad's, it is not that great if they had to bus in Iraqi militias to help with the suppression of protests.

I do agree that it is not clear if there are viable opposition figures inside Iran, on the other hand it is naive to expect it to be the case given the tight grip IR had on the country.

I guess we can hope that all this war is not for nothing.

[Jensson]

All of that was true for Japan as well but it went very well there, so your analysis is flawed. The more organized a country is the easier it is to change it, the more primitive the harder it is.

[root_axis]

> Iran majorly Persian that see themselves as one nation

This reductionist narrative is absolutely ridiculous and does not at all reflect reality.

[sudo-umar]

You dont understand Iran either then