Dr. Gonzo

Official trailer: it's coming out in February. Looks fucking hilarious tbh.

But what does Paul Merson think?

When? I'm not familiar with that happening at all. But if push came to shove, the US would absolutely fall on the side of Azerbaijan because: 1.) Turkey and NATO, 2.) oil and gas. Both Armenia and Azerbaijan also have precious metals... but I think that oil and gas would be more of a draw to the US.

Tbh I’m not even sure it was right to ban Russia from international tournaments for invading Ukraine. I obviously think their invasion was wrong - it’s clearly a crime against humanity. But it’s a bit fucking weird when countries have invaded other countries in our living memory… and they don’t get the same kind of treatment. I’m sure any Iraqis who saw Russia get banned for an illegal invasion probably thought “what the fuck?” At best, it comes off as just hugely hypocritical. At worst, it’s Europe & FIFA signaling to countries with brown people that their lives just aren’t worth as much as white peoples. And it’s a disgrace that the sale of weapons to Russia is what manages get the world pissed off about the Iranian government. Not like they hadn’t been slaughtering kids in the street for a month before this talk of kicking them out of the World Cup… and like you say, all the involvement in government & sport & women inclusion have been issues since this government came into power.

I think Israel also supporting Azerbaijan. When they celebrated their victory over Armenia 2 years ago they celebrated with many displays of the Azerbaijani flag between a Turkish flag & Israeli flag

Imo the biggest things changes to hope for are: 1.) Banning/ending Velayat-e Faqih (which means guardianship of the jurist - but this is basically the justification used for religious clerics having full control over the country) 2.) Removing the Supreme Leader & Guardians Council from the structure of Iranian government. Outside of these 2 things, Iran's got the framework for a robust democracy... so long as parties and candidates aren't barred from running (which getting rid of the guardians council would do) and as long as the president and majlis (their parliament) doesn't have to ultimately answer to a dictator. 3.) Banning IRI officials from holding elected office for at least 20 years (maybe for life). This one's maybe hypocritical because I've been an advocate for letting people make choices. The thing is, these people have demonstrated that if you let them they will take away all choice from people. 4.) Unbanning banned political parties (except MEK): Many of these political parties still exist, even though they are ultimately meaningless because they can never have power as things currently stand. Opposition groups are pointless unless they can back the opposition with representation. These would be massive changes that would fundamentally change life in Iran, political and otherwise, pretty drastically. Anything else, imo, should be addressed after Iran's figured out wtf it would be doing next if they are able to free themselves from the IRI.

I don't really think gun regulation is quite the same as a blanket ban on religious clothing, though. You can see on videos that basijis and police are getting beaten, stabbed, shot - this rebellion won't be successful without violence. They're up against people who are keen to gun them down to shut them up. This isn't a free country where the right to protest is respected. When protests are met with force, the only way for the people to really voice how they feel is to respond in kind. But I think history shows that if this government is to fall, it's better to not isolate large swaths of the population. And that's what a blanket ban over the hijab would do, for sure. The cities in Iran may be very non-religious (many people I'd even say are anti-religious) - but Islam is still by far and away the most practiced religion in the country. Even the IRI knew they couldn't start their version of the country up by isolating a large chunk of the population. It wasn't until about a year later that they started purging the secular and left-wing voices. For Iran not to go the way of Syria or Iraq post-Saddam, there's got to be a decent amount of unity if the IRI goes. Otherwise it's going to be an absolute shitshow. And inviting religious extremists to go mental on Iran is probably not the greatest way to start a potential life-after-the-IRI.

I think we're ultimately on the same page - especially if you say you don't care if they want to wear it or not & let them to. And I agree with you, the hijab is just a form of oppression and a means of exerting control over people. Honestly, I believe religion itself is just a tool to oppress and control the masses, imo. But at the end of the day, people in a free society have a choice as to whether they want to be religious or not. They have a choice to decide what they're going to wear or not. I think burkas and chadors are even more oppressive, but if a woman wants to wear one because of her beliefs... I don't think it's my place or anyone else's place to say "no, that's forbidden." It's different if they're being forced by their husbands, fathers, etc... but if it's their own belief and their own choice & it's not hurting anybody else there's no real legitimate reason to tell people they can't. But banning religious garb (or forcing religious garb) as a way to try to "force" secularism isn't a good move imo. Education is the way forward to free people from the shackles of oppression through religion. Banning it takes a way choice, so it's not really indicative of a free society... and it doesn't let people learn why or how religion is used to control people.

On paper Russia supports both Armenia and Azerbaijan. In actuality, that support is really just them selling weapons to both of them. When the two sides are in conflict, Russia (and it's peacekeeping forces) have proven to be generally useless.

Yeah, I think it worked better before there was another oil club in the league though. It's a bit harder when you've got the likes of City that have a similar nearly endless pit of money, the same desire to get results right away, but also have the stability that Chelsea don't have. It's not been unsuccessful since you've had another financial competitor... but it's been much less successful and I don't think it's coincidental. I think Chelsea would be an absolute force if they found that same balance City have. Granted, it's tough to say "just go get that balance" because you've got to get some sort of incredible manager like Pep and you have a shitload of money, but not the same unending pit of money that City have.

Tbf Chelsea haven't really operated the way most clubs do in a very long time - I think it's sort of become part of the club culture to not have much stability or long term planning. I think that's not going to change quickly.

Yeah that sounds like a pretty quality midfield.

I’m not even sure it’s really a western value. It’s just the idea of forced secularism tbh & in places like France, it’s also rooted in just not liking Muslim people. I think religion has no place in modern society - but obviously people are still religious and that’s got to change naturally with time & educating people more rather than by just trying to force it. Free societies value freedom and choice. I think the hijab is fucking stupid and oppressive but banning it takes freedom and choice away from religious people.

This government is the furthest thing from secular, so theoretically it shouldn’t have any of the same people in charge. Who knows what will happen. These protests have been happening every so often for as long as I’ve been alive basically. This is the longest they’ve gone on for though, by far.

The goal of the protests at first was for equal rights but now it seems to have shifted to wanting a secular government.

Nah the Shah wasn’t really even close to a socialist - he even banned a few big socialist/left wing parties in his time. And his relationship with the left always needs to be put back in the frame of reference of how his dynasty was restored to power in the first place. From a MI5 & CIA led coup that took out National Front’s democratically elected government - which was going to nationalise their oil industry so they could sell oil at the same price as their neighbors. So a lot of the country never really saw his rule as legitimate in the first place. There’s a lot of reasons why the Shah’s time fell apart. He did not have a particular free society - it had similarities to today’s Iran, but it wasn’t even close to as extreme. But there was lack of political freedom, heavy censorship, a secret police (SAVAK) that beat and tortured. He tried banning hijabs (which imo is just as bad as mandatory hijabs, I think religion is stupid but people should have a choice in a free society) & reducing the political influence of the clerics. That pissed off the religious right. Being a U.S. puppet and going hard after left wing parties and groups made him really unpopular with the left. The 70s were a time of really bad economic times and a lot of people that weren’t incredibly wealthy saw their lives get much harder. The Pahlavi wasn’t a particularly good or competent leader… and was pretty corrupt and didn’t really care too much about the optics of opulence while many of the country struggled. So regardless of political ideology, a lot of people just didn’t like him because they felt their lives get worse and things got harder. He ended up losing the support of most people other than the ultra wealthy & military officers (though he lost a lot of support in the enlisted). As a US puppet he made the mistake of cozying up to one party while ignoring the other for a number of years. So when Carter took power and Iran was a big part of the OPEC pricing that created petrol shortages in the US… he didn’t have the same loyalty to Pahlavi as Nixon did. They shared the same Sec of State I believe, Kissinger, who had a good relationship with the Shah. Carter opposed Kissinger’s suggestion that Pahlavi use the military on protestors - the Shah didn’t do that. Imo it was his incompetence and corruption that was his downfall. It’s one thing to be an unpopular puppet government, but if you alienate potential leaders of the puppet master… you only have yourself to blame when it comes crashing down. There’s also this to further complicate things: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Carter's_engagement_with_Ruhollah_Khomeini?wprov=sfti1 The first government after the Shah’s reign ended was different to what Iran has now… but the Iran-Iraq war and some pretty brutal purges that took out the left leaning opposition and the last remaining leaders of National Front & large chunks of the military. And led to the creation of the IRGC. But that’s why the diaspora is mostly made up of people who are super pro-monarchy or very left leaning, aside from the educated people post revolution that are just getting the fuck out because they’ve got highly sought after skills so they can. I don’t understand the people in the west who’s family left that are wanting the Pahlavi’s to be back in power. I don’t see what the point is, surely a democracy is more ideal than a monarch.

I do but I had to wait most of my life to see it happen so I wouldn’t be surprised if we never win it again while I’m alive. So might as well go for 3 of the best midfielder I’ve ever seen and hope for the best.

I'd fire up the cloaning machine and get 3 prime Steven Gerrards.

Enough to sign at least 2 good midfielders, but maybe 3.

Whens this world cup starting? I think the break would do us some good. I also hope FSG are ready to spend money on reinforcements now... but I really doubt they are

They’re not

Id rather not get into Europe at all than be in the Europa League or the shit version of the Europa League. Either way I think not getting top 4 is a disaster

Honestly can’t wait for this fucking season to be over

There's so much to unpack in it. 1.) Calling for removal of "rinos" - even though he's in support of republicans that are really nothing like a traditional republicans... and are really just republican in name only (which is where the term "rino" fucking comes from) - he might be more right-wing than republicans traditionally were... but that doesn't make traditional republicans rinos; if anything it's absolutely the other way around. But honestly that's just a flaw in America's political system that doesn't really function properly if you've got more than 2 parties tbh. Same thing with the democrats in America. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Joe Biden wouldn't be in the same political party in most countries - but they are in America because the system doesn't really work properly with more than 2 parties. 2.) Being racist is "screaming" about other people being racist. Not... you know... saying or doing racist things. Honestly, this just comes off as being annoyed that people get called out for being openly racist in 2022. 3.) That Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who a lot of right-wing people are absolutely obsessed with for some reason (I think they want to fuck her but know she'd say no, tbh), is getting "dropkicked" in her district... is not what any of the polling indications seem to be predicting: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-election-forecast/house/new-york/14/ - also her opponent has NO ENDORSEMENTS, which in the US is the sign of a nothing candidate 4.) "83% of America disagrees with the democrat position on abortion" - first, the democratic position - as far as I can tell - has been to go back to the way federal abortion laws were before the Supreme Court changed things. Secondly... it's just not even close to an accurate statistic: https://apnorc.org/projects/public-holds-nuanced-views-about-access-to-legal-abortion/ - most Americans are in favour of abortion 5.) the "transgender fantasy" - as though gender issues are the driving political force of one side of US politics. Here's the democratic party platform: https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/ - surprise, surprise... not ONE SINGLE FUCKING MENTION of transgender stuff (other than wanting to make sure they're treated like humans, which is fair... because they're humans. And to prevent suicides amongst them) - it's a minor social issue, not a driving part of any party's platform. As someone living here yes, I think the US has a lot of problems... but it's bizarre and hilarious to see someone out of the country think they've got a good read on the political pulse of the US while being so far off from being accurate. And why the fuck is he so invested in the culture wars the US right-wing is so intent on using as distraction issues to get people to not think about the economic and political issues (that voters, regardless of political party, tend to find lots of unity in)? It's basically a case study on why people shouldn't get their news from anything affiliated with Rupert Murdoch's News Corp, or at least look at various other sources before trusting what any News Corp media outlet has to tell you.

I like how out of touch with reality the post genuinely is