Is Iran Prepared To Bomb Pakistan?

The Source for the picture above: Pakistani Army Welcomes Irans Mediatory Role – UrduPoint

I know the situation between India and Pakistan is very tense so let’s take a deep breath first if you are from either country.

This question is asking whether Iran is really prepared to bomb Pakistan based on the assumption that Iran has woke up one morning and said why aren’t we bombing our neighbouring country Pakistan with whom we indeed have a strategic relationship?! The last thing Iran would ever wanna do is bombing Pakistan out of imperial aggressiveness as we had no strategic disputes.

(The source for the picture above: Pakistan FURY: India warned of huge response if war is imposed – Iran is our ‘brother’)

Since I could remember, we heard of our border guards getting killed or brutally beheaded by the terrorist organisation operating in both Afghanistan and Pakistan, but more recently, it is entirely from Pakistan.

You see, when you’re in the governmental position especially, the intelligence minister and Armed Forces, one in many roles that you have are to respond to how the public is reacting particularly in the case of incidents. A few weeks back, when a suicide bomber targeted border units of Islamic Republic Guard Corps (IRGC) and murdered and injured dozens, Iranian people got generally emotional but communities that have some link to the military, security and intelligence agencies, which are actually the second or third largest community in Iran got furious ( ready to act). The state has to respond according to how society is feeling in order to maintain its sense of authority and legitimacy (especially when emotion is at an extreme level).

The highest ranking commanders of Iranian armed forces said if Pakistan is not going to secure that region that we know to accommodate terrorist camps then we are going to make the necessary measures on our own.

The source for the picture above: Tehran’s warning against spirit of Pak-Iran brotherly relations, FO tells envoy

Imagine, every month or 2, militants operating within the Iranian border were conducting ambush attacks operations on Pakistani border region with Iran, so, you are losing your troops in large numbers but are unable to respond because terrorists run back to Iran as soon as they conducted their attack. You ask Iranian government and they say sorry Pakistan, we don’t have 100% control over some areas in Iran but we will do our best! Often if there is an attack from one to its neighbour, the other side, considered that country responsible. You see, if there were 1 or 2 attacks then we could be more flexible but when there is a consistent pattern of attacks then something has to be done. If Pakistan is unable to do what’s necessary, then why not let Iran does it? You cannot say “Neither You nor I, are going to do something about it, because that’s B.S.

The Source for the picture above: Iran Says Welcomes Pakistan’s Bid to Fence Shared Border

Pakistani government knows what where Iranian commander is coming from by making those statements; they probably, have discussed these several months back when many official meetings took place between Iran and Pakistan. 

Written by By Iman Mohammadi On 4 March 2019

Copyright ©Imanpoli (ImanMætm) 2019. All rights reserved.

Zarif Resignation: Review

The source of most of the committed crimes, especially the most outrageous ones, is not created in one night or in the moment as many people think to be the case, but in fact, the actual cause is due to an immense amount of mental torture and unexpressed emotions/feelings that have been packing together for relatively a long-time (depending on every individual).

Zarif did not resign out of sudden, indeed, it is known to the public that he had to ask for resignation at least a couple of times before but Zarif did not publicise them like the last on 26th February 2019.
As it was disclosed one day after the resignation, this time what had made Zarif upset is when he found out Syrian President, Bashar Assad, had arrived in Tehran and right now is meeting with the supreme leader, in a meeting where Qassem Soleimani is sitting at the foreign minister seat instead of Zarif.

Screenshot 2019-02-28 at 21.50.35
The Photos above from the Assad meeting with the supreme leader; as it can be seen, the third person starting from the front is Qassem Soleimani instead of  Zarif. Additionally, it can be seen that even Rouhani is not present in this meeting (the president usually sits next to the quest).

Zarif thought this is a way, the system is trying to say to him that he has lost the supreme leader support, Zarif took this personally, and in return, declared his resignation on the same night.

Zarif resignation made lots of noise in Iran and the region probably more than the Principlists also knows as Hardliners imagined probably because of Zarif amazingly firing speech at the Munich security conference a few days back.


Screenshot 2019-02-28 at 21.49.58

Nonetheless, the following day, the resignation, faced a huge backlash. Iranian Twitter users made “Zarif stay” hashtag, Most MP made an official request of him not resigning but more importantly, Qassem Soleimani, personally, made a statement praising Zarif service and further explained, due to highly tight security reasons, very few people knew about this trip. It was revealed that not even president Rouhani knew about the meeting and that General Soleimani was personally in the plane with Bashar Assad. This claim does seem legitimate president Assad was travelling alone with no other Syrian government officials.


Screenshot 2019-02-28 at 21.49.49
The photos above show the most recent Instagram post affiliated to the General Qassem Soleimani, in which he hugging foreign minister Javad Zarif.

The following day, president Assad invited Zarif to Syria and praised his amazing work against the common enemy.

Copyright © ImanPoli 2019. All rights reserved.

Why President Trump contradicts Chief of intelligence on Iran and North Korea?

Because CIA chief said Iran is not building or planning to build nukes, Trump never claimed otherwise, he only said Iranian have outsmarted our team etc. So If Trump had only pointed out to the reporter that there is no contradiction, Iran part was over, but instead, he got overly defensive too very quickly, and this way he attacked the CIA chief and acknowledged saying something that he never actually did! it’s crazy.

(Go back to school, Trump tells US spies)

But with respect to North Korea, I guess Trump meant the threat is not like how it was and that is true ( even though there was never any threat). but, I mean come on folks! Of course, North Korea is not going to entirely dismantle their nukes while the US shadowy intelligence services have put more sanctions on them. North Korea still has weapons because the US still has its sanctions on the country and since they have already built it all, there is no reason for them to back down now! It’s a tough spot for any diplomats to negotiate over this, especially when we have globalist-backed Bolton and Pompeo in the Whitehouse who have been openly defying president Trump when he introduces some policy in the morning and they say something else in a press confess on the same night!

Side Note>>> Links down R the answers of mine from last year on North Korea, in each answer, I said NK is not giving-up nukes.

Iman Mætm’s answer to Did the US succeed in their discussions with North Korea?

Iman Mætm’s answer to What is behind America cozying up to North Korea?

Iman Mætm’s answer to What is causing Kim Jong Un to suddenly give up on his plan to destroy America and want to meet with Trump and plan for denuclearization instead?

Is It All Because of Iran aggressiveness Or Our Arrogance?

Iran is not aggressive but being independent and free (in term of foreign policy making) is usually perceived by few who fear the rise of a competitor as being “aggressive”.

(Mohammad Javad Zarif, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran, responded to US warnings to sink Iranian speedboats)

Every action that various countries have taken in western Asia obviously has produced some reactions by the states located in that region.

>> The absurd approach of forcing the creation of the state of Israel literally changed the fate entire of the region and world. The 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran was massively influenced by the conflict between Palestine and Israel. IN my opinion, if it wasn’t for the issue of Palestine, Khomeini wouldn’t have had enough determination and enthusiasm to become the leader of the revolution.

>> All the blood and controversies of the 1979 revolution in Iran rooted in the US, the British and the Soviets rootless policies since the WWI with respect to Iran.

On Missile

But these days Iran is accused of being aggressive only because it has resisted foreign countries attacks. it is quite remarkable to my eyes when the US and its allies call Iran aggressive for developing missile technology as the only means of its defence while at the same time selling hundreds of billions worth of state of the art missile to Iran neighbours! This doesn’t make sense anywhere in the globe. India made nukes because China got nukes, and Pakistan got nukes because India got nukes. This is how it works. Everywhere. For example, NATO violated the treaty and installed many Air Defence System batteries surrounding Russia (taking away their strike capability) and Russia in return made Supersonic cruise missile that can bypass those air defences easily. Therefore, if the US help Israel by money and resources to build whatever kind of weapons (F35, iron dome, Tanks Nuclear Bombs Uranium etc) that they need or sells hundreds of billion dollars military equipment to Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states countries, then we all should expect the most influential country (arguably) in that region to get worried and feels the need to acquire some form of deterrence to avoid being inavded like in 1980 by US/Soviet/EU backed Saddam.

(Javad Zarif gave the most precise and concise answer with regards to the missile)

Afghanistan and Iraq

When the US decided to occupy two of Iran neighbouring countries, Iran offers help to avoid what everyone had in mind (US war with Iran). The US accepted Iran help in toppling Taliban in Afghanistan and that is why the primary operation went very smooth but when it came to Iraq, Bush rejected Iran offer and instead called Iran axis of evil. In other words, Iran thought they might be next soon or later if the US forces remain in Iraq in mass. Many in the US main think-tank like Hudson institute hate Iran for helping Iraqi militias push the US occupying forces out of their country, which means the some in the US are angry on why you fought back when we popped all over your country and dropped some more uranium depleted bombs on your children as a memorial! This is really unbelievable the level of arrogance!


They themselves replaced the Suni Saddam who was a CIA stooge, with a new system that happened to be run by the Shia prime minister after the elections! Then under the US supervision, ISIS is created and kept growing but they somehow dare to accuse Iran once again for that!

Why Iran somehow was in Iraq?!

As ISIS, advanced 30 km to Iranians border and the US simply rejected an emergency call for help from the Iraqi government on ISIS offensives to Baghdad and Erbil, Iran received two calls one from Kurdish authorities and one from Baghdad, demanding immediate support and Iran without saying anything further deployed heavy military equipment plus several hundred special forces in one night which repelled the ISIS offensives. Is it Iran being aggressive here?!


The only reason why Iran has some presence in Syria is due to the fact that the US and its allies created a Jihadist production factory in that country.

>> US/ allies made a systematic effort to find every psychopath, criminal and terrorists from all over the globe (Chechnya, southern Russia, eastern Asia, Saudi Arabia etc) and deployed them to Syria from the northern border with Turkey where Erdogan-ISIS dirty oil trade was going on and from southern Syria, through Jordan and also from the Israel occupying Golan Heights. Iran with so much suffering managed to keep them in line until Russia provided airpower to stop that cancer before it was too late! They did everyone a favour, especially the European!

Iran is not aggressive, in fact, Iran has been entirely pretty defensive but effective and firm on its moves (because it’s defensive simply wanting to survive) whereas other parties just made reckless policies as if its a game, because it is a game for them when you’re defending your existence, your entire being, you’re more likely to be effective and determined, whereas imperial kind of policies are superfluous and lack determination.

Ebrahim Raisi As The Future Supreme Leader Of Iran

There are three possible candidates, Ebrahim Raisi (kind of close to IRGC and the House of leadership, Hassan Rouhani (affiliated with Hashemi’s family and reformist party) and Sadegh Larijani (the head of the Larijani’s family).

Ebrahim Raisi

(The image shows Ebrahim Raisi, the head of Astan Quds Razavi and a member of Assembly of Experts)

Ebrahim Raisi seems to be the candidate of choice ( presidency and leadership) for both IRGC and The House of leadership. In 2017 presidential election in Iran he lost to Rouhani but managed to get more than 900k votes in Tehran (!) and more than 15 million votes in total, which is not bad at all considering Iran had no president that runs only one term.

Here is why I think Raisi is the one even though he has not been involved in any significant political position, like Khamenei….

(The Image Above shows Ebrahim Raisi in Lebanese border with Israel)

One event made many really convinced, that Ebrahim Raisi would be the future supreme leader and that event is when Ebrahim Raisi visited Syria and Lebanon (at the end of January 2018) and met with many very high ranking Hezbollah commanders and religious figures (Sunni and Shia) near the Israeli -Lebonan border… in the politics of Shia Islam, this is called Oath of allegiance or [بیعت] in Farsi. He was sent there (probably by the supreme leader request) to ensure Iranian allies that he will be the real commander in chief in the future in Iran so to avoid any confusion.

(The image above is Ebrahim Raisi either in Lebonan or Syria but most likely Lebonan)

I think this event alone, proves that Ebrahim Raisi, in fact, will be the future leader in Iran. There might be a joined- attempts by others to grab this position but it is very unlikely that they can handle IRGC in any sustainable approach.

2) Hassan Rouhani

(The image above shows president Hassan Rouhani)

What they (IRGC + Leadership) are now having in mind is how to prevent the political party that is connected to Hashemi family to have any say in the future, because, this party has time and time again sent signals that pointed their rejection to some of the main ideas of the 1979 revolution ( Hashemi family means the entire of Rouhanis’s cabinet, all the reformists and some portion of the ministry of intelligence). This party and candidate has some advantages to all the other candidates and that is his popularity amongst the younger generation.

3) Sadegh Larijani

(The image above shows Sadegh Larijani)

Both IRGC and house of leadership but more IRGC don’t trust the Larijani’s family, who are in charge of parliament, the head of the judiciary, Chairman of Expediency Discernment Council and a member of the assembly of experts. But he (Sadegh Larijani) is a tough one to cross-over since he has all the requirements on paper to become the supreme leader. However, he is extremely unpopular amongst the people and IRGC in particular!

I’m kinda sure they don’t allow Larijani or Rouhani to become the future supreme leader because the pro-Islamic revolutionaries (by that I mean the ordinary people who strongly support the current supreme leader) will not be loyal to either of them. larijani is deeply hated by Ahmadinejad followers (who are also loyal to the supreme leader) and Rouhani is known as in the most critical terms you could find amongst the pro-revolutionaries.

I think Raisi’s last year visit to Syria and Lebonan proves that he, in fact, will be the future leader in Iran. There might be a joined- attempts by others to grab this position but it is very unlikely that they can handle IRGC in any sustainable way.

*Please have in mind, these are all just opinions and interpretations based on my grasp of news and events, certainly, I do not claim to know the absolute truth. These may very well be all untrue and inaccurate!*

Why reconciliation between states like Iran and Israel is unlikely to take place?

One side has to retreat much more than other the side for reconciliation in such a level to take place.

Usually, countries make such reconciliation if one side is clearly on the back foot. Either in a post-war time when one side has already been defeated (e.g., Nazis after WWII, Japanese after WWII or Germany after WWI) or it is in an even a worse situation than post-war as the result of other means of warlike sanctions thus have no choice but to reconcile (reconciliation from the point of weakness) with their enemy.

Human beings have shown to do not reconcile in such matters. Well, they do reconcile but mostly when they are kids in their play; it is very uncommon at international relation level for hostile countries to make any reconciliation. Once a nation perused a long-term fundamental policy, it becomes really challenging and even impossible to make any reconciliation. For example, Russia and the US were, are and will be forever enemies; the US wants to control Russia and Russia wants to bring the US down and climb up itself. Unfortunately, these policies are natural because they are rooted from the nature of human beings and how they view power and its relation to survival, which, counts as the most important thing in the human mind.

Series of historical events prior to 1979 had made the Iranian nation very sceptical and deceitful to the west (at that time), which lead to the 1979 Islamic revolution. Khomeini was a leader. He got millions of supporters by acknowledging everything that Iranian hated about Shah and also introduced his view of political Shi’ism to the revolution (Shi’ism is one of two branches of Islam practised mainly in Iran)The issue of Palestine was the most important aspect of his political ideology, in term of the foreign policy.

(Iranian policy toward Israel has also to do with the fact that Iranian are the minority in the Islamic world and their region)

Ever since then, Iran has made the decision to oppose Israel. And they have invested and sacrificed to the extent that they cannot really go back. As long as nothing fundamentally changes, Iran will oppose Israel. Israel will also oppose all countries that are as large as Iraq.

Iran and its regional allies along with Russia have just passed through the hardest period of wars in Syria (Jihadists, the emerge of ISIS and regime change) and Iraq (ISIS) successfully, despite all odds. There is no reason for Iran to make any meaningful reconciliation with Israel. And like always. Israel is not considering such matters.

In Iranian perspective, in the best-case scenario, just like the post-Afghanistan invasion when Iran and west held serious talks about nuclear and other issues, I assume Iran would be willing to fully seize its nuclear enrichment (perhaps for 10 years) and make Hezbollah less militaristic In return for giving Palestinian the rights to VOTE and have their own state (two-state solution) and the ease of sanction. But Israel (the US) rejected the best scenario at that time and I think they will do the same now even though Iran is very unlikely to make that much of reconciliation that it did when it had US troops on its borders occupying one country after another.

Lesson From History: What Caused The 1979 Islamic Revolution In Iran?

Often series of events that involves major injustices lead to things like revolution or a rise of a man like Hitler.

It is important to know what events caused the Iranian society to rise up against Shah and his western supporters.

In WW1 Iran was occupied in an aggressive move by the British and the soviet, which lead to the genocide or ”Persian famine of 1917–1919” instated by the British which resulted in the death of several million Iranians! Have in mind, this famine could have been easily avoided if it was not systematically planned.

In WW2, Iran was again occupied for nothing more than pure aggression and its leader at the time Reza shah was removed by force and his son who was loyal to the west was installed. 10 years after that, CIA again largely intervened in Iranian domestic affairs and thus their natural sociable evolution to nationalize their oil industry by organizing a coup to topple the leader of that movement. After that coup, people had become very frustrated and painfully helpless. They were quite ready for an uprising as they still had a fresh memory of western interference and Shah loyalty to them.

One of other reason why people wanted an anti-west leader was the fact that west had betrayed Reza Shah during the WW1 in the most despicable manner, which showed to people even if you be friend with the west, they are still going to stab you, not in the back but right on your stomach as you are watching.

All this bad consciousness in the society resulted in the Islamic revolution in which a man like Khomeini said all the things that were in people’s hearts and more important than anything promised to bring self-determination.