The sooner they are gone, the better.

That being said, fuck Pahlavi unless he favors democracy in Iran and not restoring his family to power.

Case in point, Afghanistan. The last Shah had many problems, but at least he allowed women basic rights, something the Ayatollah does not.

He has spoken at length and depth about being a transitional figure. What other scenarios do you see for going from a Shia Mullacracy to something resembling a pluralistic representative form of government?

against the upcoming Iraq invasion by GWB …

We were called a fringe focus group

.............The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency says at least 7,005 people were killed in last month’s protests, including 214 government forces. It has been accurate in counting deaths during previous rounds of unrest in Iran and relies on a network of activists inside Iran to verify deaths.

Iran’s government offered its only death toll on Jan. 21, saying 3,117 people were killed. Iran’s theocracy in the past has undercounted or not reported fatalities from past unrest.

By SAVAK.

... and certainly not under the former rule of the Pahlavi monarchy.

I don't dispute the sincerity of Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi in the efforts to topple the current regime. However I do question his intention to replace it with some form of "democracy." The long-suffering people of Iran need to be wary.

Perhaps they'll even rename it Persia again. It sounds so much better than Iran.

Iran was chosen as the country name in 1935 as more inclusive of its inhabitants.

Hopefully, after all this time, they will realize the Ayatollah's Islamic Revolution was far less inclusive than going back to the name Persia. I think it's a good tradeoff, don't ya think? No more Ayatollah, go back to Persia. Ahh, it won't happen, but I can always dream...

Persia is what people outside the area called it. Both are historical names for the area.