> That next "civilian" was an Islamic extremist who took over because the other leaders of the revolution were too weak and foolish and were eliminated by the Islamic extremists.
Are you talking about 1979? I was talking about 1953.
> At that moment a military takeover would have resulted in a smooth transition of power to the next actual civilian government.
If you mean in 1979, that's quite a prediction when nobody knew what would happen, and nobody now can confidently predict paths untaken. it's hard to imagine how the military wouldn't have just furthered a civil war, being closely associated with the Shah. What was the military doing in 1979?
Also, why would the Iranian military make things any more 'smooth' than another power base?
> smooth transition of power to the next actual civilian government.
As of 1979, there hadn't been a democratic civilian government since ~1953; it was a foreign-backed, and IIRC military-backed dictatorship. Why would they install an actual civilian, democratic government if given the chance?
