What if the Islamic Revolution never happened

[-Astoria]

Also: El Amin's "Join Islam and get your own Sex Slave: Here's how"

lmao he got banned right

DEATed repeatedly, he was.

[Novus America]

Was there any chance of a Tudeh Iran?

Honestly? No. Tudeh was popular, but not as a "Government" option. It's far more likely you'd see a Mujahideen government than a Tudeh government in Iran.

They never got more than 7% in any election and in 1947 only got 1%. Tudeh was not that popular.
But yes, there is very little chance of them governing. If not for the coup there would be a civil war, with many other more likely to win. Like Kashani, Khomeini‘a mentor and leader of the Islamist faction. Kashani probably would have tried to seize power in 1953 or 1954 and do what Khomeini did in 1979.

[Jinwoy]

This is a terrible starting point, because across the gulf, you have a nation that went through something of a revolution/reformation of its own embracing the most draconian form of islam.
I am, of course, talking about the house of Saud, their magnificently somehow stable kingdom, and the rise of wahhabism.
The better question is to ask what if wahhabism never came into existence, or at the very least, not didn't become religiously legitimate as it did.

[Sildorian Empire]

Honestly? No. Tudeh was popular, but not as a "Government" option. It's far more likely you'd see a Mujahideen government than a Tudeh government in Iran.

They never got more than 7% in any election and in 1947 only got 1%. Tudeh was not that popular.
But yes, there is very little chance of them governing. If not for the coup there would be a civil war, with many other more likely to win. Like Kashani, Khomeini‘a mentor and leader of the Islamist faction. Kashani probably would have tried to seize power in 1953 or 1954 and do what Khomeini did in 1979.

Kashani would definitely have formed the Islamic Republic if Mossadeq was allowed to keep power in Iran. And eh, Tudeh was popular in that a lot of the academia (and more importantly, cultural icons such as famous poets, writers, song-writers, et al) were either Tudeh or had heavy pro-Tudeh leanings.

[Sildorian Empire]

This is a terrible starting point, because across the gulf, you have a nation that went through something of a revolution/reformation of its own embracing the most draconian form of islam.
I am, of course, talking about the house of Saud, their magnificently somehow stable kingdom, and the rise of wahhabism.
The better question is to ask what if wahhabism never came into existence, or at the very least, not didn't become religiously legitimate as it did.

You'd have to go back around 2 centuries earlier. Wahhabism was -and has always been- more "legitimate" than the Shia, because the Wahhabis were in power in large swathes of Arabia for centuries while the Shia were fighting the guy holding the two mosques over the fact the Arabs didn't choose an absolute moron as their next leader a millennia earlier.

[Novus America]

They never got more than 7% in any election and in 1947 only got 1%. Tudeh was not that popular.
But yes, there is very little chance of them governing. If not for the coup there would be a civil war, with many other more likely to win. Like Kashani, Khomeini‘a mentor and leader of the Islamist faction. Kashani probably would have tried to seize power in 1953 or 1954 and do what Khomeini did in 1979.

Kashani would definitely have formed the Islamic Republic if Mossadeq was allowed to keep power in Iran. And eh, Tudeh was popular in that a lot of the academia (and more importantly, cultural icons such as famous poets, writers, song-writers, et al) were either Tudeh or had heavy pro-Tudeh leanings.

Well true Tudeh had significant support amongst segments of society, but given their fairly poor electoral performance it does not seem they had broad enough support across society as a whole.
Not enough to take power at least.

Iran a at the time was a mess of different factions, each with support of different segments. Mossadeq in the cities (although his attempt to become a dictator cost him support), Kashani in the less educated countryside, Tudeh amongst the urban intellectuals, and meanwhile conservative secular nationalists amongst the military, security forces and businesses elite.

Of course the last won out in 1953.

[Sildorian Empire]

Kashani would definitely have formed the Islamic Republic if Mossadeq was allowed to keep power in Iran. And eh, Tudeh was popular in that a lot of the academia (and more importantly, cultural icons such as famous poets, writers, song-writers, et al) were either Tudeh or had heavy pro-Tudeh leanings.

Well true Tudeh had significant support amongst segments of society, but given their fairly poor electoral performance it does not seem they had broad enough support across society as a whole.
Not enough to take power at least.

Iran a at the time was a mess of different factions, each with support of different segments. Mossadeq in the cities (although his attempt to become a dictator cost him support), Kashani in the less educated countryside, Tudeh amongst the urban intellectuals, and meanwhile conservative secular nationalists amongst the military, security forces and businesses elite.

Of course the last won out in 1953.

I mean, you're forgetting the whole "authoritarian Capitalist Bloc regime" part. The Left had no chance of taking power. Electoral performance in late Imperial era is about as trustworthy as electoral performance in, well, early Interim-era Iran. And only barely more trustworthy than any point afterwards.

[Novus America]

Well true Tudeh had significant support amongst segments of society, but given their fairly poor electoral performance it does not seem they had broad enough support across society as a whole.
Not enough to take power at least.

Iran a at the time was a mess of different factions, each with support of different segments. Mossadeq in the cities (although his attempt to become a dictator cost him support), Kashani in the less educated countryside, Tudeh amongst the urban intellectuals, and meanwhile conservative secular nationalists amongst the military, security forces and businesses elite.

Of course the last won out in 1953.

I mean, you're forgetting the whole "authoritarian Capitalist Bloc regime" part. The Left had no chance of taking power. Electoral performance in late Imperial era is about as trustworthy as electoral performance in, well, early Interim-era Iran. And only barely more trustworthy than any point afterwards.

That would be the “conservative secular nationalists”.

And actually the election in 1947 was relatively free and fair, all things considered.

But true, the hard left had no chance of taking power.

[Slavakino]

The world would be a better place. Done, but then again no War on Terror so there's downside

[Sildorian Empire]

The world would be a better place. Done, but then again no War on Terror so there's downside

Why do you think a War on Terror wouldn't happen though? And why is "no War on Terror" a downside?

[Slavakino]

The world would be a better place. Done, but then again no War on Terror so there's downside

Why do you think a War on Terror wouldn't happen though? And why is "no War on Terror" a downside?

The war on terror wouldn't happen because if the Islamic revolution never happened no terrorist organisations would exist. Because the war on terror initiated significantly technological progress as well as to stop Islamist terrorists as well as a great cultural shift.

[Sildorian Empire]

Why do you think a War on Terror wouldn't happen though? And why is "no War on Terror" a downside?

The war on terror wouldn't happen because if the Islamic revolution never happened no terrorist organisations would exist. Because the war on terror initiated significantly technological progress as well as to stop Islamist terrorists as well as a great cultural shift.

Taliban, Al-Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, and pretty much every other group in Afghanistan and Pakistan have their history in the Afghan-Soviet War which was concurrent but largely irrelevant to the Islamic """Revolution""" in Iran. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front pretty much outdates all of them by at least a decade.

[Novus America]

The war on terror wouldn't happen because if the Islamic revolution never happened no terrorist organisations would exist. Because the war on terror initiated significantly technological progress as well as to stop Islamist terrorists as well as a great cultural shift.

Taliban, Al-Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, and pretty much every other group in Afghanistan and Pakistan have their history in the Afghan-Soviet War which was concurrent but largely irrelevant to the Islamic """Revolution""" in Iran. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front pretty much outdates all of them by at least a decade.

Although true, the ability of the US to continue to outsource much of maintaining security to a friendly Iranian regime would probably reduce our involvement. Without the Iranian Revolution probably no Gulf War part one and hence not Gulf War part 2.

Maybe Afghanistan still happens but probably not Iraq.

The US did not have a major military presence in the region before the Iranian Cleric coup.
Because we did not need to.

Central Command did not even exist before the revolution.

[Nakena]

Why do you think a War on Terror wouldn't happen though? And why is "no War on Terror" a downside?

The war on terror wouldn't happen because if the Islamic revolution never happened no terrorist organisations would exist. Because the war on terror initiated significantly technological progress as well as to stop Islamist terrorists as well as a great cultural shift.

Interesting. What kind of culture shift? Towards being more anti-islamist in the long run?

[Meremos Alloriumenion]

Iran would be far better off, there would be a lot less terrorism, and the Middle East would be a lot more stable.

[Slavakino]

The war on terror wouldn't happen because if the Islamic revolution never happened no terrorist organisations would exist. Because the war on terror initiated significantly technological progress as well as to stop Islamist terrorists as well as a great cultural shift.

Interesting. What kind of culture shift? Towards being more anti-islamist in the long run?

Yes mainly

[Green October Z]

Iran would be far better off, there would be a lot less terrorism, and the Middle East would be a lot more stable.

Very much so

[Shanghai industrial complex]

Taliban, Al-Qaeda, the Haqqani Network, and pretty much every other group in Afghanistan and Pakistan have their history in the Afghan-Soviet War which was concurrent but largely irrelevant to the Islamic """Revolution""" in Iran. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front pretty much outdates all of them by at least a decade.

Although true, the ability of the US to continue to outsource much of maintaining security to a friendly Iranian regime would probably reduce our involvement. Without the Iranian Revolution probably no Gulf War part one and hence not Gulf War part 2.

Maybe Afghanistan still happens but probably not Iraq.

The US did not have a major military presence in the region before the Iranian Cleric coup.
Because we did not need to.

Central Command did not even exist before the revolution.

If I remember correctly, didn't NATO have a nuclear launch site in Turkey before?Are there no large military bases in Turkey or Saudi Arabia?There's no reason. This place can block the Soviet Union's way to the Indian Ocean.

[Novus America]

Although true, the ability of the US to continue to outsource much of maintaining security to a friendly Iranian regime would probably reduce our involvement. Without the Iranian Revolution probably no Gulf War part one and hence not Gulf War part 2.

Maybe Afghanistan still happens but probably not Iraq.

The US did not have a major military presence in the region before the Iranian Cleric coup.
Because we did not need to.

Central Command did not even exist before the revolution.

If I remember correctly, didn't NATO have a nuclear launch site in Turkey before?Are there no large military bases in Turkey or Saudi Arabia?There's no reason. This place can block the Soviet Union's way to the Indian Ocean.

We did have a nuclear missile base in Turkey but that was closed down in the early 60s.
So it was not related to the 1978 Coup.

But yes we did build large military bases in Saudi Arabia after the 1979 Iranian Coup, which we would not have needed if the coup never happened. (Although we closed those down, our bases are now in Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain).

We had very few bases in the Gulf when Iran was friendly. Because we did not need to.
Iran was a very useful ally that helped keep order in the region, its “Revolution” (1979 coup) plunged the region into chaos.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

If I remember correctly, didn't NATO have a nuclear launch site in Turkey before?Are there no large military bases in Turkey or Saudi Arabia?There's no reason. This place can block the Soviet Union's way to the Indian Ocean.

We did have a nuclear missile base in Turkey but that was closed down in the early 60s.
So it was not related to the 1978 Coup.

But yes we did build large military bases in Saudi Arabia after the 1979 Iranian Coup, which we would not have needed if the coup never happened. (Although we closed those down, our bases are now in Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain).

We had very few bases in the Gulf when Iran was friendly. Because we did not need to.
Iran was a very useful ally that helped keep order in the region, its “Revolution” (1979 coup) plunged the region into chaos.

Yep ,region into chaos.But not because of its revolution, but because it broke the balance of regional power.For the time being,In the Gulf, the balance of power has shifted to the Soviet side, so both sides need to do something

[Novus America]

We did have a nuclear missile base in Turkey but that was closed down in the early 60s.
So it was not related to the 1978 Coup.

But yes we did build large military bases in Saudi Arabia after the 1979 Iranian Coup, which we would not have needed if the coup never happened. (Although we closed those down, our bases are now in Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain).

We had very few bases in the Gulf when Iran was friendly. Because we did not need to.
Iran was a very useful ally that helped keep order in the region, its “Revolution” (1979 coup) plunged the region into chaos.

Yep ,region into chaos.But not because of its revolution, but because it broke the balance of regional power.For the time being,In the Gulf, the balance of power has shifted to the Soviet side, so both sides need to do something

Not really though, because the stability came from a lack of balance of power really. Iran backed the US being the dominant power was what kept stability.

It was not really a Soviet issue, as the new Iranian Islamist Regime did not get along very well with the Soviets.

I guess the Soviet backed Iraqis using it to attack Iran was part, but it is more the ideology of the Iranians Islamists who support Islamist terrorism and revolutions to topple the other governments that do not support the Iranians Islamist regime.
The problem is the ideology of the new Iranian Islamist regime.