He's not just some guy, he's the rightful king of Iran. He doesn't want to be the supreme ruler like Khamenei is, he wants Iran to become what it was destined to be until the mullahs hijacked the revolution: A constitutional monarchy.
Well, I certainly did not intend to foment a tangential discourse on the legitimacy of the self-proclaimed "royal" Pahlavi family in this thread. Nor did I seek to debate the efficacy of whether or not the mullahs "hijacked the revolution" (which I recall they were heavily invested in). My apologies to all, so I will gracefully bow out. However, if Vorph or someone else is that interested in the debate and starts up another thread, LMK . . .
Killed today, I think.
I wasn't trying to be confrontational, apologies if it came across like that.
I'd suggest Iran would need to have a vote on that, and even though I live in a constitutional monarchy, if you were setting one up now, you would include the ability to remove the monarch, at least on the passing of the previous one.
Surrender by 5pm then....
He isn't his father, he recognises how bad the Shah was. He's highly liked by Irainians who oppose the regime of which there are many. His position is that it's up to the people to decide what direction the country goes in.
There should be so incredibly much to gain from such a move to make it worthwhile, that it seems pretty unlikely that anyone would care of the mullahs so much. The usual suspects must have seen the writing on the wall and pretty much have their plates full at the moment or are in such of a happy place that backing a failing regime with more than thoughts and positive vibes would yield any concrete benefits.
